~ P O L A R I S ~ Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 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). I'm Canadian too, but the TCG isn't. You either learn it or you're wrong. =/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirts Posted July 22, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 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). I'm Canadian too, but the TCG isn't. You either learn it or you're wrong. =/ Of course I am gunna learn it. (: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.