Chigsweef's Second Synchro Card !

[Skirts]

This is my second ever Synchro monster. The idea behind this card was it would be used in a deck that focuses on removing cards from play. Constructive criticism please !

 

[align=center]

 

Lore: 1 Tuner + 1 or more non-Tuner Dragon-Type monsters

This card's ATK becomes equal to the number of removed from play cards x 1000 (max 3000). If this card is in Defense Position during your opponent's Battle Phase, it gains 300 DEF until the end of the Battle Phase. When this card is destroyed by your opponent's card effect, you can remove from play this card to draw 1 card.[/align]

[Queen-Dragoon]

You need to specify how much attack each monster removed from play raises your creature's attack if you don't want people breathing down your neck. For now I'll say it's draw effect is potentially ludicrously overpowered. Removing more than 6 cards from play in a duel is relatively easy.

[Skirts]

You need to specify how much attack each monster removed from play raises your creature's attack if you don't want people breathing down your neck. For now I'll say it's draw effect is potentially ludicrously overpowered. Removing more than 6 cards from play in a duel is relatively easy.

 

"This cards attack is equal to the amount of cards that are removed from play." The card's attack is X000, the X variable being the number that is changed accordingly to the amount of cards removed from play. The draw was meant to be a set back because of the amount of cards that you can hold in your hand and having to discard cards. Also running out of cards to draw in your deck. I don't know. I am bad with creating effects. Any ideas ? Help would be appreciated ! (:

[Phantom M.C.]

i think slifer is the only monster with X000 atk, but it isn't a legal card, so it doesn't say anything about the x variable

[Skirts]

i think slifer is the only monster with X000 atk' date=' but it isn't a legal card, so it doesn't say anything about the x variable

[/quote']

 

oO. Good point ! Any ideas to fix ?

[Phantom M.C.]

most of the time people just put ?

[Skirts]

most of the time people just put ?

 

Card has been updated courtesy of Galadrien.

[angel killer315]

2 tuners... thats a no no

[Phantom M.C.]

most of the time people just put ?

 

Card has been updated courtesy of Galadrien.

 

you still have to add the x 1000 right?

[-Athena-]

Some OCG errors. Overall 8.5/10 :) Good job.

 

This card's ATK is equal to the amount of cards that are removed from play. If this card is in defense position during your opponent's Battle Phase, increase this card's DEF by 300. When this card is destroyed by your opponent's card effect.......

 

The last part, I'm not sure. But I think these the the little mistakes you made :P (but I could be wrong).

[Skirts]

Card has been updated courtesy of -Athena-, Galadrien, and angel killer315.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Here's my opinion. =]

 

[spoiler=Blast Front Armoured Assault Dragon]

[spoiler=Name and Picture]

The TCG uses American spellings (take "Judgment Dragon" and "7 Colored Fish" for example), so "Armoured" should be "Armored". Not quite sure what you mean by "Blast Front" and might recommend sticking an adjective in front of "Blast" instead of using "Blast Front", ie: "Heavy Blast Armored Assault Dragon", but it's up to you.

 

Name and picture go together nicely.

 

 

 

[spoiler=Official Card Grammar]

"2 Tuner + 2 or more non-Tuner Dragon-Type monsters" = "2 Tuners + 2 or more Dragon-Type non-Tuner monsters" (order of "Dragon-Type" and "non-Tuner monsters is as per "Trident Dragion" from RGBT.)

 

"This cards attack is equal to the amount of cards that are removed from play." and "X000 ATK" doesn't follow existing in-game examples of what you're trying to say when examples do indeed exist. Take "Gren Maju Da Eiza" for example, a fairly recent edition of it from Structure Deck: The Dark Emperor shows "This card's ATK and DEF are each equal to the number of your removed from play cards x 400." with "? ATK". Accordingly, your card should also have "? ATK" and should be worded "This card's ATK is equal to the number of your removed from play cards x 1000."

 

"If this card is in defense position during your opponents battle phase, increase this card's defense by 300." = "This face-up Defense Position card gains 300 DEF during your opponent's Battle Phase".

 

"When this card is destroyed by an opponents card effect, draw cards equal to the amount of cards removed from play." = "When this card is destroyed by your opponent's card effect, draw cards equal to the number of removed from play cards". ("removed from play cards" is as per the CRMS version of Necroface).

 

 

 

[spoiler=Balance]

The part that really tips the scales of this card's balance here is in the last sentence. You'll be drawing an upwards of over 10 cards, that kind of advantage is basically an automatic win. Now granted, it is quite difficult to Summon, but I'd still water it down to a burn effect based on the number of removed from play cards, maybe 300-400 or so per card.

 

 

 

[spoiler=Design]

What stands out as a possible design flaw here is the fact that Dragon-Types don't have much synergy whatsoever with "remove from play" cards, and this card needs 2 non-Tuner Dragon-Type monsters to Summon it. You may want to make more cards to support the "remove from play Dragon-Type monsters" theme, or you could just have it require "2 non-Tuner monsters" or something along those lines instead.

 

Keep in mind that if you do take the easier route and simply go for the easier Summoning condition, you may have to tweak the balance a bit too.

 

 

 

 

[Skirts]

Here's my opinion. =]

 

[spoiler=Blast Front Armoured Assault Dragon]

[spoiler=Name and Picture]

The TCG uses American spellings (take "Judgment Dragon" and "7 Colored Fish" for example)' date=' so "Armoured" should be "Armored". Not quite sure what you mean by "Blast Front" and might recommend sticking an adjective in front of "Blast" instead of using "Blast Front", ie: "Heavy Blast Armored Assault Dragon", but it's up to you.

 

Name and picture go together nicely.

 

 

 

[spoiler=Official Card Grammar']

"2 Tuner + 2 or more non-Tuner Dragon-Type monsters" = "2 Tuners + 2 or more Dragon-Type non-Tuner monsters" (order of "Dragon-Type" and "non-Tuner monsters is as per "Trident Dragion" from RGBT.)

 

"This cards attack is equal to the amount of cards that are removed from play." and "X000 ATK" doesn't follow existing in-game examples of what you're trying to say when examples do indeed exist. Take "Gren Maju Da Eiza" for example, a fairly recent edition of it from Structure Deck: The Dark Emperor shows "This card's ATK and DEF are each equal to the number of your removed from play cards x 400." with "? ATK". Accordingly, your card should also have "? ATK" and should be worded "This card's ATK is equal to the number of your removed from play cards x 1000."

 

"If this card is in defense position during your opponents battle phase, increase this card's defense by 300." = "This face-up Defense Position card gains 300 DEF during your opponent's Battle Phase".

 

"When this card is destroyed by an opponents card effect, draw cards equal to the amount of cards removed from play." = "When this card is destroyed by your opponent's card effect, draw cards equal to the number of removed from play cards". ("removed from play cards" is as per the CRMS version of Necroface).

 

 

 

[spoiler=Balance]

The part that really tips the scales of this card's balance here is in the last sentence. You'll be drawing an upwards of over 10 cards, that kind of advantage is basically an automatic win. Now granted, it is quite difficult to Summon, but I'd still water it down to a burn effect based on the number of removed from play cards, maybe 300-400 or so per card.

 

 

 

[spoiler=Design]

What stands out as a possible design flaw here is the fact that Dragon-Types don't have much synergy whatsoever with "remove from play" cards, and this card needs 2 non-Tuner Dragon-Type monsters to Summon it. You may want to make more cards to support the "remove from play Dragon-Type monsters" theme, or you could just have it require "2 non-Tuner monsters" or something along those lines instead.

 

Keep in mind that if you do take the easier route and simply go for the easier Summoning condition, you may have to tweak the balance a bit too.

 

 

 

 

 

I appreciate the help ~ P O L A R I S ~ ! I am Canadian (Canadian grammar freak), so spelling is a bit tricky for me on American things like these ! xD That's besides the point though. I am happy that you gave me helpful advice and you were nice about it at that. Thank you again. (Atleast I think you were being nice and not sarcastic oO).

[RickiMinaj]

This card is extremely broken. First off, no-one would really bring this guy out unless your rfp had a good 5 cards. If it's got 5000 atk, no monster can really can kill it, therefor it has to be destroyed by card effects. In that case, drawing 5 cards can help turn your game around. So this card would most likely be banned, or maybe limited to 1. Good try though. plus, the image is a tad bit overused. :3

[Phantom M.C.]

This card is extremely broken. First off' date=' no-one would really bring this guy out unless your rfp had a good 5 cards. If it's got 5000 atk, no monster can really can kill it, therefor it has to be destroyed by card effects. In that case, drawing 5 cards can help turn your game around. So this card would most likely be banned, or maybe limited to 1. Good try though. plus, the image is a tad bit overused. :3

[/quote']

 

you always have the spell and trap cards right?

[RickiMinaj]

you always have the spell and trap cards right?

 

Spell and traps are still counted as card effects. :3

[Skirts]

you always have the spell and trap cards right?

 

Spell and traps are still counted as card effects. :3

 

This.

 

BTW, thanks for the card rating Essence ! (:

[Phantom M.C.]

you always have the spell and trap cards right?

 

Spell and traps are still counted as card effects. :3

 

lol' date=' i just glanced at it and assumed it was a monster effect.

 

I appreciate the help ~ P O L A R I S ~ ! I am Canadian (Canadian grammar freak), so spelling is a bit tricky for me on American things like these ! xD That's besides the point though. I am happy that you gave me helpful advice and you were nice about it at that. Thank you again. (Atleast I think you were being nice and not sarcastic oO).

 

hey, i'm a canadian too. but i use both when i write, weird huh?

[Skirts]

hey' date=' i'm a canadian too. but i use both when i write, weird huh?

[/quote']

 

That's odd. oO

[OmegaWave]

[align=center]Omega's Famous Rants

 

(OCG Fix)

"1 Tuner + 2 or more non-Tuner Dragon-Type monsters

This card's ATK is equal to the amount of cards that are removed from play x 1000. If this card is in Defense Position during your opponent's Battle Phase, it gains 300 DEF until the end of the Battle Phase. When this card is destroyed by your opponent's card effect, draw cards equal to the amount of cards that are removed from play."

 

(Ratings)

Picture: 2/2

OCG: 1.5/2

Balance: .5/2

Uniqueness: 2/2

 

Total: 6/8 = B+

 

(Rantings)

FINALLY! A DECENT CARD!....ALMOST!

 

The picture made me orgasm. Not because it's awsome, but because it's unique....I think. I haven't checked the Card Images threads here recently.

 

Your OCG was the best i've seen recently. Your only mistakes really were capitalizations.

 

This card isn't really balanced. Soul Release alone gives this card 5000 ATK. And when this card is destroyed in that way, you could draw your entire deck in most situations.

 

As far as Uniqueness is concerned, I love the name. The DEF choice is nice. You don't see many Synchros with ? ATKs and seeing a Dragon Synchro in general is rare. To me atleast.

 

(Suggestions)

I suggest lowering the ATK gain OR putting a limit to the ATK increase. Maybe 3000? I also suggest heavily lowering the card drawing deal. Or better yet, take my example.

 

"1 Tuner + 1 or more non-Tuner Dragon-Type monsters

This card's ATK becomes equal to the number of removed from play cards x 1000 (max 3000). If this card is in Defense Position during your opponent's Battle Phase, it gains 300 DEF until the end of the Battle Phase. When this card is destroyed by your opponent's card effect, you can remove from play this card to draw 1 card."

 

Feel free to PM me for any help.[/align]

[Skirts]

[align=center]Omega's Famous Rants

 

(OCG Fix)

"1 Tuner + 2 or more non-Tuner Dragon-Type monsters

This card's ATK is equal to the amount of cards that are removed from play x 1000. If this card is in Defense Position during your opponent's Battle Phase' date=' it gains 300 DEF until the end of the Battle Phase. When this card is destroyed by your opponent's card effect, draw cards equal to the amount of cards that are removed from play."

 

(Ratings)

Picture: 2/2

OCG: 1.5/2

Balance: .5/2

Uniqueness: 2/2

 

Total: 6/8 = B+

 

(Rantings)

FINALLY! A DECENT CARD!....ALMOST!

 

The picture made me orgasm. Not because it's awsome, but because it's unique....I think. I haven't checked the Card Images threads here recently.

 

Your OCG was the best i've seen recently. Your only mistakes really were capitalizations.

 

This card isn't really balanced. Soul Release alone gives this card 5000 ATK. And when this card is destroyed in that way, you could draw your entire deck in most situations.

 

As far as Uniqueness is concerned, I love the name. The DEF choice is nice. You don't see many Synchros with ? ATKs and seeing a Dragon Synchro in general is rare. To me atleast.

 

(Suggestions)

I suggest lowering the ATK gain OR putting a limit to the ATK increase. Maybe 3000? I also suggest heavily lowering the card drawing deal. Or better yet, take my example.

 

"1 Tuner + 1 or more non-Tuner Dragon-Type monsters

This card's ATK becomes equal to the number of removed from play cards x 1000 (max 3000). If this card is in Defense Position during your opponent's Battle Phase, it gains 300 DEF until the end of the Battle Phase. When this card is destroyed by your opponent's card effect, you can remove from play this card to draw 1 card."

 

Feel free to PM me for any help.[/align']

 

Thank you OmegaWave. I appreciate it. (: I will take up your suggestion.

---

Card has been updated courtesy of OmegaWave. ^_^

[Mew 2.0]

Its good. It cant go insane. it can go wimp. Its pretty much normal, except under specific conditions. 8/10

[Zextra]

I like it! Good OCG, balanced effect (if not UP'ed), good pic, and decent stats.

Nice job: 9.5/10 :D

[OmegaWave]

I like it! Good OCG' date=' balanced effect (if not UP'ed), good pic, and decent stats.

Nice job: 9.5/10 :D

[/quote']

 

Thank you. lol

 

I think you should note that the revision was mine in the first post, dude.

[Skirts]

I like it! Good OCG' date=' balanced effect (if not UP'ed), good pic, and decent stats.

Nice job: 9.5/10 :D

[/quote']

 

Thanks for the rating Zextra ! ^_^ I appreciate the positive feedback !