L0SS Posted August 25, 2016 Report Share Posted August 25, 2016 3 Red-Eyes monstersMust first be Special Summoned (from your Extra Deck) by banishing the above cards you control. (You do not use "Polymerisation".) If this card is targeted by an effect: increase it's ATK by 1000, the negate the effect. A powerful, aggressive boss monster for the dragon that I've always favoured. Simple effect, you can target it yourself if you need to boost it's ATK to run over those pesky Blue-Eyes 4Ks. the fairly lax summoning also gives it the actual ability to be playable. Red-Eyes still needs far more support but it's something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abdelrahman Posted August 25, 2016 Report Share Posted August 25, 2016 Not sure how this fits the Red-Eyes Archetype considering that the Deck relies more on burn rather than aggressive attacking. Otherwise it isn't extremly hard to summon, but it still requires alot of setup. Its effect is okay I guess. Nothing game-breaking but it isn't that good imo. It's a 4K beater that can be Solemned, Raigekied, or even Mirror Forced, so it's pretty vulnerable. I guess it can avoid BEAWD's destruction effect and it gains an extra 1000 ATK with it, but that's about it. I mean, considering the effort and setup required to summon this card, and the fact that Red-Eyes monsters don't like getting banished, it isn't worth it so maybe you should take another look at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L0SS Posted August 26, 2016 Author Report Share Posted August 26, 2016 Not sure how this fits the Red-Eyes Archetype considering that the Deck relies more on burn rather than aggressive attacking. Otherwise it isn't extremly hard to summon, but it still requires alot of setup. Its effect is okay I guess. Nothing game-breaking but it isn't that good imo. It's a 4K beater that can be Solemned, Raigekied, or even Mirror Forced, so it's pretty vulnerable. I guess it can avoid BEAWD's destruction effect and it gains an extra 1000 ATK with it, but that's about it. I mean, considering the effort and setup required to summon this card, and the fact that Red-Eyes monsters don't like getting banished, it isn't worth it so maybe you should take another look at it. Fair points. The thing with burn is, I find it's a really unreliable mechanic to implement fairly. It's either too weak or OTT. I could change the ATK increase to burn but then you lose the attack bonus which I feel is pretty useful. I might change the conditions to the Graveyard instead of Banish; and hand or field instead of just field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abdelrahman Posted August 26, 2016 Report Share Posted August 26, 2016 I might change the conditions to the Graveyard instead of Banish; and hand or field instead of just field.Just inform through PM when you do, and i'll take a second look at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Nyx Avatar Posted August 26, 2016 Report Share Posted August 26, 2016 It seems okay. A lot of times, you'd be lucky to even get two on the field. It has nice ATK and DEF stats. And effect seems okay; an attack increase as well as a negation to targeting effects. It doesn't even destroy the negated cards. And while it boasts high ATK, that doesn't necessarily mean it's hard to get rid of. You could use non-targeting effects like Raigeki, Dark Hole, Bottomless Trap Hole, Solemn Notice, and Trishula, Dragon of the Ice Barrier. And by means of attack, Number S39: Utopia the Lightning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leafbladie Posted August 29, 2016 Report Share Posted August 29, 2016 I feel like this shows a misunderstanding of what the Red-Eyes archetype should be. Red-Eyes fusions are about potential, that's why they require another monster different from the original Red-Eyes, while Blue-Eyes are about power, that's why they fuse with themselves. The idea of a Red-Eyes Ultimate Dragon has always been something at the back of my mind, but the idea of making it goes against this concept too much for me. Anyway, that's enough about that I guess, the card itself is fine I guess. Red-Eyes could possibly use a stronger beater. However, that restriction effect on its summon is dumb. I understand Red-Eyes Fusion is a card, but honestly, even if they summoned this first turn it would probably be a worse choice than Falling Meteor Black Dragon. If this card is improved, it might be a different story though. The targeting protection is fine, but that ATK gain is a bit dumb, as you're opponent is never going to target this card then. I'd just make it untargetable, especially since it's begging for effects to be activated in response to it, like Solemn Strike, and maybe make it indestructible too. As the others said, it'd probably be better to focus on Burn. Falling Meteor Black Dragon has burn on summon, Red-Eyes Flare Metal Dragon has burn for your opponent activating effects, and Archfiend Black Skull Dragon and Red-Eyes Black Flare Dragon have burn on attack. It might seem like a weird idea, but what if you make it so in exchange for this card not being able to attack this turn, a Red-Eyes monster you control can attack you opponent directly this turn. If it's Black Flare Dragon, that's 4800 damage, if it's Archfiend Black Skull Dragon, that's 5600. If you're not a big fan of that, you could give it a revival effect similar to Darkness Metal Dragon, or maybe an effect similar to that of Lord of the Red. The only two Red-Eyes cards that have been about numbers in my mind are Red-Eyes Darkness Dragon and Red-Eyes Black Dragon Sword, so I think it'd be better to stay away from stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yuuji Kazami Posted August 29, 2016 Report Share Posted August 29, 2016 3/10. The name is terrible, since it just makes the Red-Eyes card look more like it was a part of Blue-Eyes with the word Ultimate. ATK should've been 3600 to match flavour better. Summon requirement is very hard with having 3 Red-Eyes monsters on the field at once. Effect kills the "potential of victory" from Red-Eyes by giving it an effect that doesn't even match the archetype. I suggest a complete re-work with the name and effect. ATK should be changed to 3600. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leafbladie Posted August 29, 2016 Report Share Posted August 29, 2016 3/10. The name is terrible, since it just makes the Red-Eyes card look more like it was a part of Blue-Eyes with the word Ultimate. ATK should've been 3600 to match flavour better. Summon requirement is very hard with having 3 Red-Eyes monsters on the field at once. Effect kills the "potential of victory" from Red-Eyes by giving it an effect that doesn't even match the archetype. I suggest a complete re-work with the name and effect. ATK should be changed to 3600.The 1.5 rule should also be applied to DEF too, as 1.5*2500=3750, rounded up to 3800. So defense for this would be 3000. So that part is correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yuuji Kazami Posted August 29, 2016 Report Share Posted August 29, 2016 The 1.5 rule should also be applied to DEF too, as 1.5*2500=3750, rounded up to 3800. So defense for this would be 3000. So that part is correct. I never said anything about the DEF, because 3000 was the correct number. 2500/2 = 1250. 1250 x 3 = 3750, rounded up to 3800. 2000/2 = 1000. 1000 x 3 = 3000. I only mentioned that the correct ATK should be 3600, and required changing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.