Forced Penetration

[Naruto 6574]

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

Keep in mind that depending on the circumstances, you give your opponent the opportunity to SS a powerful monster in Defense Position.

That being said though, it deals heavy damage if your monsters are successful in dealing piercing damage, even if only a small amount.

 

Remember, 4000 LP from burn, coupled with any residual piercing damage [no matter how small, even 100 points will trigger this] is NOT balanced in any shape or form.

 

Either you get rid of the burn, or lower it significantly.

[Slinky]

Other than the bad PSCT, there really isn't a problem with this. You are literally going -2 for the chance to get some free damage in. Damage doesn't really add up until you get 4 or 5 monsters on the board, and that isn't easy to do while utilizing a -2 with this.

 

Other than that, 10/10 name.

[Judαs]

o.O

This is potentially a massive OTK enabler. Many decks don't main deck monsters with high DEF, and if you have a full field, it becomes easy to inflict massive burn.

To balance it, you should probably remove the extra 800 burn, and perhaps do something like halve the piercing, although I think removing the 800 is enough.

 

overall the design seems pretty winmoar.

 

Also it's dangerous to have such suggestive names. lol

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

I think Aix was making a reference to these two threads in that recent status of his.

But yeah, considering the word "penetration" is now commonly associated with sexual activity, you should find another word that doesn't give off this sort of connotation on first look.

 

 

Outside of Superheavy Samurais, a lot of monsters generally have modest defenses (or average stuff for their equivalent Level/Rank), so yeah that could be problematic for them. 

As noted, just strip the burn damage or tone it down.

[Trebuchet MS]

I'll just clear this up while I'm at it.

 

Your opponent must Special Summons 1 monster from their Deck in Defense Position. This turn, that monster cannot be destroyed by battle, and all monsters Mode from his deck, then you control must attack it that monster this turn (if able, and if they do, possible). That monster cannot be destroyed by battle this turn. All your monsters can inflict piercing battle damage to your opponent that monster. If your opponent takes piercing battle damage from a battle involving inflict Piercing Damage to that monster this turn, your opponent takes 800 damage.

 

Barring certain archetypes with a strict dedication to DEF values (e.g. Flamvells) there's bound to be a well-played member of an archetype that possesses a decent amount of DEF without being weighed down by any Summoning restrictions. Said monster is what the opponent will most likely go for and utterly thwart your attempts to do anything to it.

 

Would recommend you remove the bonus damage and instead reduce the DEF of the monster that they choose to Summon.

[epicmemesbro]

It would be balanced if it was limited. Since one alone won't be too devastating, of course this can be worked around. As for the innuendo it may be a coincidental archetype but if his next card is "Double penetration" then there might be an issue.

[Marco Polo]

It would be balanced if it was limited. Since one alone won't be too devastating, of course this can be worked around. As for the innuendo it may be a coincidental archetype but if his next card is "Double penetration" then there might be an issue.

Troll is obvious, see how he never replies to any of the threads and ignores all we said about the naming, insisting on more penetration spells to fill the forums up with his twisted preteen humour; he probably still giggles to the thought of how clever he is.