"Crogenic" monsters (PLZ comment and answer the poll)

[ABC Gun]

Check out these cards and tell me what you think of them.

 

(ALL PICUTRES BY Kaizy at www.deviantart.com)

 

[align=center]

During the Standby Phase, you can change this card to face-down Defense Position. You can activate this effect during either player's turn. During the turn you change this card to face-down Defense Position by its effect, if it is flipped face-up, it gets this effect:

● When this card is selected as an attack target by an opponent's WATER monster, destroy that monster at the end of the Battle Phase.[/align]

 

[align=center]

1 Tuner + 1 "Cryogenic Hydrago" and 1 or more other non-Tuner monsters

A Synchro Summon of this monster can only be conducted with the above Synchro Material Monsters. During the Standby Phase, if you control 2 or more other face-down Defense Position monsters, you can change this card to face-down Defense Position. You can activate this effect during either player's turn. During the turn you change this card to face-down Defense Position by its effect, if it is flipped face-up, it gets these effects:

● When an opponent's WATER monster declares an attack, remove it from play at the end of the Damage Step.

● If this card is attacked by an opponent's WATER monster, your opponent cannot activate the effect(s) of that monster this turn.[/align]

[Lil Jevans]

Nice pics! Just my opinion, shouldn't they be WATER type, not WIND? 8/10

[legendhiro]

I like them. Card effect types in the current gaming world are pretty well established. Its pretty hard anymore to come up with a unique effect category, which is what you did. If you get a chance, would you mind posting why you chose to make them WIND?

[ABC Gun]

Nice pics! Just my opinion' date=' shouldn't they be WATER type, not WIND? 8/10

[/quote']

 

Well that's the thing about Archetypes, they don't have to be specifically anything, but tell me do you think I shoud make these cards into an Archetype (To answer this question, just reply to the poll I posted)

---

I like them. Card effect types in the current gaming world are pretty well established. Its pretty hard anymore to come up with a unique effect category' date=' which is what you did. If you get a chance, would you mind posting why you chose to make them WIND?

[/quote']

 

I made them WIND monsters because I figured since cryogenetic means frozen, and cold air plus water makes ice, i'd make them Aqua-Type / WIND monsters, but do you think this is good enough for an Archetype? (To answer this question, just reply to the poll I posted)

[legendhiro]

Nice pics! Just my opinion' date=' shouldn't they be WATER type, not WIND? 8/10

[/quote']

 

Well that's the thing about Archetypes, they don't have to be specifically anything, but tell me do you think I shoud make these cards into an Archetype (To answer this question, just reply to the poll I posted)

 

good point (looks at the ceiling in deep thought).

[Liger Zero]

These are great 8.7/10

[ABC Gun]

Hey, thanks for the comments, but If anyone can tell me (witout being negative) what I can do to make these cards better than please do so.

[legendhiro]

i personally would make a continuous Spell/Trap or maybe a field to go with them tat does something along the lines of "when opponent's monster attacks a Cryogenic monster that was flipped face down this turn by its own effect you may discard a card to make the attacking monster WATER attribute until the end of the Battle Phase". maximize the usefulness of these cards on the field, but in exchange you have to sacrifice some of your hand advantage.

[ABC Gun]

i personally would make a continuous Spell/Trap or maybe a field to go with them tat does something along the lines of "when opponent's monster attacks a Cryogenic monster that was flipped face down this turn by its own effect you may discard a card to make the attacking monster WATER attribute until the end of the Battle Phase". maximize the usefulness of these cards on the field' date=' but in exchange you have to sacrifice some of your hand advantage.

[/quote']

 

But should I make the opponent's monster for the effect a WATER monster or some other monster that isn't defined by a Type or Attribute?

[Lenaick Puiseaux]

I like them I'd say make them into an archetype. All I have to say is these cards + DNA transplant = fun :3

[legendhiro]

i personally would make a continuous Spell/Trap or maybe a field to go with them tat does something along the lines of "when opponent's monster attacks a Cryogenic monster that was flipped face down this turn by its own effect you may discard a card to make the attacking monster WATER attribute until the end of the Battle Phase". maximize the usefulness of these cards on the field' date=' but in exchange you have to sacrifice some of your hand advantage.

[/quote']

 

But should I make the opponent's monster for the effect a WATER monster or some other monster that isn't defined by a Type or Attribute?

 

I would stick with just the norm WATER attribute, since some people would then set off these guys' effects even if you didn't have your support card activated at the time. it would increase the overall likelihood of pulling off the effects and would make the cards a bit more playable (though they are already pretty playable).

[ABC Gun]

i personally would make a continuous Spell/Trap or maybe a field to go with them tat does something along the lines of "when opponent's monster attacks a Cryogenic monster that was flipped face down this turn by its own effect you may discard a card to make the attacking monster WATER attribute until the end of the Battle Phase". maximize the usefulness of these cards on the field' date=' but in exchange you have to sacrifice some of your hand advantage.

[/quote']

 

But should I make the opponent's monster for the effect a WATER monster or some other monster that isn't defined by a Type or Attribute?

 

I would stick with just the norm WATER attribute, since some people would then set off these guys' effects even if you didn't have your support card activated at the time. it would increase the overall likelihood of pulling off the effects and would make the cards a bit more playable (though they are already pretty playable).

 

What I meant was should I base the second effect of these cards ( the effect with the ● ) on an Attribute, monster Type, or something else?

[legendhiro]

i personally would make a continuous Spell/Trap or maybe a field to go with them tat does something along the lines of "when opponent's monster attacks a Cryogenic monster that was flipped face down this turn by its own effect you may discard a card to make the attacking monster WATER attribute until the end of the Battle Phase". maximize the usefulness of these cards on the field' date=' but in exchange you have to sacrifice some of your hand advantage.

[/quote']

 

But should I make the opponent's monster for the effect a WATER monster or some other monster that isn't defined by a Type or Attribute?

 

I would stick with just the norm WATER attribute, since some people would then set off these guys' effects even if you didn't have your support card activated at the time. it would increase the overall likelihood of pulling off the effects and would make the cards a bit more playable (though they are already pretty playable).

 

What I meant was should I base the second effect of these cards ( the effect with the ● ) on an Attribute, monster Type, or something else?

 

Attribute. Nobody really bases decks on monster type as much as they do on attribute anymore. Sorry if i was unclear. i tend to NOT make sense sometimes.

[ABC Gun]

A note to everyone, these 2 cards are just prototypes for the real thing that I am considering making, but thanks for the input

---

i personally would make a continuous Spell/Trap or maybe a field to go with them tat does something along the lines of "when opponent's monster attacks a Cryogenic monster that was flipped face down this turn by its own effect you may discard a card to make the attacking monster WATER attribute until the end of the Battle Phase". maximize the usefulness of these cards on the field' date=' but in exchange you have to sacrifice some of your hand advantage.

[/quote']

 

But should I make the opponent's monster for the effect a WATER monster or some other monster that isn't defined by a Type or Attribute?

 

I would stick with just the norm WATER attribute, since some people would then set off these guys' effects even if you didn't have your support card activated at the time. it would increase the overall likelihood of pulling off the effects and would make the cards a bit more playable (though they are already pretty playable).

 

What I meant was should I base the second effect of these cards ( the effect with the ● ) on an Attribute, monster Type, or something else?

 

Attribute. Nobody really bases decks on monster type as much as they do on attribute anymore. Sorry if i was unclear. i tend to NOT make sense sometimes.

 

Thanks for clearing that up for me

[legendhiro]

any time XD.