Fluid Barrier | Fluid Wall

[Rutarete]

NAME: Fluid Barrier ELEMENT: Water COST: 6 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: TEXT: Shield: The higher a creature's attack, the less damage it will do to you and it may also get hurt.	NAME: Fluid Wall ELEMENT: Water COST: 5 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: TEXT: Shield: The higher a creature's attack, the less damage it will do to you and it may also get hurt.

ART: EmeraldTiger IDEA: Rutarete NOTES: So, After having this and many, many more ideas sit and collect 'internet dust' for a few months, I'm finally posting one! This card is based off of Surface Tension - the harder you hit it, the more it hurts. However, the softer you hit, the more of the total force goes through. Now, for the Attack/Damage/Prevention ratio: At 0,     0 dealt,     0 prevented At 1,     0 dealt,     0 prevented At 2,     0 dealt,     0 prevented At 3,     0 dealt,     1 prevented At 4,     0 dealt,     1 prevented  At 5,     1 dealt,     1 prevented At 6,     1 dealt,     2 prevented At 7,     1 dealt,     2 prevented At 8,     1 dealt,     2 prevented  At 9,     1 dealt,     2 prevented At 10,   2 dealt,     2 prevented At 11,   2 dealt,     2 prevented  At 12,   2 dealt,     2 prevented At 13,   2 dealt,     3 prevented At 14,   2 dealt,     3 prevented At 15,   3 dealt,     3 prevented  At 16+, 3 dealt,     3 prevented Spoiler for Old Table: At 0,     0 dealt,     0 prevented At 1,     0 dealt,     0 prevented At 2,     0 dealt,     0 prevented At 3,     0 dealt,     1 prevented At 4,     1 dealt,     1 prevented  At 5,     1 dealt,     1 prevented At 6,     1 dealt,     2 prevented At 7,     2 dealt,     2 prevented At 8,     2 dealt,     2 prevented  At 9,     2 dealt,     2 prevented At 10,   3 dealt,     2 prevented At 11,   3 dealt,     3 prevented  At 12,   3 dealt,     3 prevented At 13,   4 dealt,     3 prevented At 14,   4 dealt,     3 prevented At 15,   4 dealt,     4 prevented  At 16+, 5 dealt,     4 prevented *Note that this scale is likely to be changed based on feedback. SERIES:

[OdinVanguard]

The prevented column in your table is wrong at the start i think
eg it says: At 1, 0 dealt, 0 prevented
but should say: At 1, 0 dealt, 1 prevented ... OR: At 1, 1 dealt, 0 prevented
The "At" - "prevented" should add to "dealt"

Looking at the table, I'd think a simple % based absorb (rounding down) would be equivalent.
Something around 29% to 32% gives pretty similar results

you can play around with it at Wolfram Alpha by entering: Table[Floor[.29*i],{i,0,20}]
(change the .29 to whatever percent you want)

[Drake_XIV]

I'll just restate everything I said in chat:

Raise cost
Drop DR
Drop Kickback

[Rutarete]

The prevented column in your table is wrong at the start i think
eg it says: At 1, 0 dealt, 0 prevented
but should say: At 1, 0 dealt, 1 prevented ... OR: At 1, 1 dealt, 0 prevented
The "At" - "prevented" should add to "dealt"

Fixed that as you were posting.

[EmeraldTiger]

watching thread

[cjackdc]

This card would be very useful against  monsters, seeing as they ussually have high attack and low health, such as crimson dragon has 12|3 so it would only do 9 damage and get killed, same with pheonix and seraph etc....
I don't know if it's OP but it would change the game somewhat...

[AnonymousRevival]

I'm not sure if it should be permanent or temporary. Perhaps, last 5 turns maybe?

[DaHumanitarian]

This card is in my opinion, OP. Either raise the quanta cost or put a turn limit like Dim Shields. This would be very useful against Fire cards as already mentioned, and it could change Elements forever, since there has never been a shield that deals damage and reduces. If you think about it, Fire Shield, at 6 does only 1 damage to attacking creatures, whereas this shield, at 5 does about an average of 2 damage. Not to mention it also decreases attack. Putting a turn limit on it though would be sort of "new" in the sense that most shields with the turn limit make you take 0 damage from some attacking creatures. But anyways, this is a very good card idea. 

[Rutarete]

I'm not the biggest fan of making this into a duration-limited shield, but if enough people want it, then I'll change it.

How does a cost of 6 | 5 or 7 | 6 sound? Which cost would be better? I'd prefer to not let this be too expensive. Personally, I like 6 | 5 better.

That said, I'll work on the scale.

[justaburd]

I'm feeling a cost increase over a DR reduction or return damage decrease.
That said, it feels like this card would be stronger than permafrost. (except against creature spam)

[ZephyrPhantom]

This shield is essentially a fusion of Titanium and Fire Shield, except much more effective than both since 6-7 is the idea 'midhitter' threshold for many cards (it also happens to be when the shield starts seriously outpacing Titanium and Fire Shield.)
A timer seems impractical in terms of balancing the shield's defense/retaliation effect. (When did Dim Shield ever kill creatures? A timed shield is much more likely to focus on absolute defense than lots of retaliation. If it goes for retaliation the effect would not mix itself with defense in order to maximize the retaliation effect.)
I would follow Drake's suggestions here:

Raise cost Probably to 6 | 5
Drop DR DR should not be more than 3
Drop Kickback Kickback should not be more than 2, and 2 Kickback should be reserved for very strong creatures.

[Rutarete]

New scaling is up.
Cost will be officially raised to 6 | 5 when I redo the card image.