Trebuchet MS Posted September 10, 2015 Report Share Posted September 10, 2015 [spoiler Card Text]2 Thunder-Type monsters with the same LevelYou can also Special Summon this card by banishing the above Fusion Material Monsters you control. (You do not use "Polymerization".) Once per turn: You can discard 1 card; destroy all face-up monsters your opponent controls. Thunder-Type monsters you control, except "Surge Dragon", cannot be destroyed by card effects. Bold text is not present on the original version of the card. I looked at the image of this card and thought of an alt-boss monster for Thunder-based archetypes. Named it "Surge Dragon", and then my thought pattern went as follows:"What would be a good effect to give it?""It's a power surge, maybe make it like Short Circuit?""You mad? That's too powerful. At least dial it down to something that looks like Lightning Vortex.""Still kinda lame. How about striking a medium between that and Raigeki?""Seems dece." There was a miscalculation. This ended up converting anything into Raigeki, as I've overlooked that Lightning Vortex has to also count itself when calculating net advantage swings. It appears despite the resistance or benefit off destruction in recent cards, being able to fry everything without restriction is still pretty damned good. So I watered down the destruction effect a little. Raigeki is too strong, but jumping down to a Lightning Vortex feels like too much of a dilution. What if it only destroys face-ups? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timeskipper Posted September 10, 2015 Report Share Posted September 10, 2015 It's basically a beefier and easier to summon version of Thunder Spark Dragon. Nice... I guess? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(GigaDrillBreaker) Posted September 11, 2015 Report Share Posted September 11, 2015 Dayum, this is good in hunders. Or batterymen. And using polymerization allows use of Thunder Dragon. I like it. I like it a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trebuchet MS Posted September 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 11, 2015 So I take it that toning this card back to only nuke face-ups rather than turn anything into a Raigeki is sufficient in pulling it out of broken territory? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(GigaDrillBreaker) Posted September 11, 2015 Report Share Posted September 11, 2015 So I take it that toning this card back to only nuke face-ups rather than turn anything into a Raigeki is sufficient in pulling it out of broken territory?Making it rely on one of the weakest types in the game did just fine, I would say. Since it requires 2 of them, a simple denko tech isn't enough to do it. Card is still extremely powerful, and I would say it makes 9vunders really good rogue tier, possibly even pushing into tier 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darj Posted September 11, 2015 Report Share Posted September 11, 2015 So I take it that toning this card back to only nuke face-ups rather than turn anything into a Raigeki is sufficient in pulling it out of broken territory? Well... the thing is that from a metagame or competitive perspective you could even get away with the former effect, if only because Thunders are not doing anything to the top tiers and thus the latter could more or less handle this kind of card. But from a balance standpoint, it doesn't feel as right. This last change makes the card more fair by not picking on the opponent's Set monsters, but I still have my doubts. As I said, or implied, on the review: a deck, type, archetype, etc. being underused, rogue or non-top tier shouldn't justify giving them an overly strong card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timeskipper Posted September 11, 2015 Report Share Posted September 11, 2015 As I said, or implied, on the review: a deck, type, archetype, etc. being underused, rogue or non-top tier shouldn't justify giving them an overly strong card.*coughCyDraInfinitycough* Yes, I know the main issue with Infinity is that it's splashable, but still. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trebuchet MS Posted September 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 12, 2015 *coughCyDraInfinitycough* Yes, I know the main issue with Infinity is that it's splashable, but still.I blame Ptolemaeus for making Infinity splashable. What if this card still wiped out all the opponent's monsters, face-up or face-down, but at the cost of 2 cards discarded instead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darj Posted September 12, 2015 Report Share Posted September 12, 2015 Hmm, thinking about it, you can get away with the current effect; discarding 2 cards feels like a drastic nerf. However, you could add a hot red archfiend clause instead: only this card can attack when using the effect. That should make this card less aggressive when it comes to otks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timeskipper Posted September 13, 2015 Report Share Posted September 13, 2015 I blame Ptolemaeus for making Infinity splashable. Well, I thought that was obvious.As for this guy, you could try giving him a watered-down Exciton clause: all battle damage for the rest of the turn is halved. Not sure what is better, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.