Disruption | Disruption

[cjackdc]

NAME: Disruption ELEMENT: Gravity COST: 3 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: TEXT: Both you and your opponents shields effects are ignored.	NAME: Disruption ELEMENT: Gravity COST: 2 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: TEXT: Both you and your opponents shields effects are ignored.

ART: Wallpaper Abyss IDEA: cjackdc NOTES: Since our complex societies are highly susceptible to interferences and accidents, they certainly offer ideal opportunities for a prompt disruption of normal activities. -Jurgen Habermas Okay, so basically it's kind of an opposite to dim shield, it stops all shield effects INCLUDING dim shield. I'm not sure whether it should be gravity or entropy mark, I decided on gravity because it's only shield is grav shield which isn't that good. SERIES:

[tintinwong]

so this card is a pseudo-mass momentum card. It does fit into gravity I guess.
Having a word art for a card is very unusual and I doubt "Google images" is a valid source.
I am not sure this card is situational or not as it requires the opponent to play shield to be useful, and other PC like deflag and steal exist.
Useful for immaterial shields I guess?

[AnonymousRevival]

Since this applies to both you and your opponent, I think this permanent can be permanent (aka everlasting and not three turns).

[Joseph7]

I agree that this card should last as a permanent for as long as it is in play. It's a great counter to aether or any shield-dependent deck.

[ItzSean]

I agree that this card should last as a permanent for as long as it is in play. It's a great counter to aether or any shield-dependent deck.

So basically all most mono aether and stall decks.

[furballdn]

Costs a lot compared to what it does. Compare to deflag.

Deflag 2
Destroys opponent shield
Can destroy other permanents

Disruption 5
Stuns opponent's shield, and only shield
Affects you as well

Disruption should cost no more than 3|2 , and I'd even hazard a guess to 2|1.

[cjackdc]

Card updated.

Having a word art for a card is very unusual and....

The art is just because I didn't know what art to put, if this card is ever put into the game (Which is Unlikely) I'm sure Zanzarino would change the card image.
If anyone  has some time to make art for this card that would be GREAT!!! (You will be credited) Send a link to me or something if not I'm keeping it with this art.

[furballdn]

Much worse than this:


Although I assume it affects enchanted shields, the cons outweigh the pros.

[OdinVanguard]

Ideally, this would be used in decks that don't need shields or that have shields that wear off.

Much worse than this:


Although I assume it affects enchanted shields, the cons outweigh the pros.

Not necessarily. Consider using it to thwart Dim. Shield or Wings.
Deflag gives 1 turn to deal damage for 1 card and 3  .
This spell gives 3 turns of damage for the same cost.

Similarly, this will counter bone-shield. Deflag is pretty useless there.

Then there are immaterial shields (which you already noted)

Its basically a counter vs decks that rely on spamming shields, or using shields resistant to destruction.

As a side note, you should probably put the 3 round duration should be put into the card text since there is enough space to do so.

[Jocko]

If you're keeping the 3 turn mechanic, add that in the card's wording. I think its too strong for a shieldless speedbow, since 3-9 turns are more than what you need to kill your opponent, and he can't just play another shield like with deflag or steal.

[OdinVanguard]

If you're keeping the 3 turn mechanic, add that in the card's wording. I think its too strong for a shieldless speedbow, since 3-9 turns are more than what you need to kill your opponent, and he can't just play another shield like with deflag or steal.

I was actually thinking the same when I first saw this. Balancing properly may be tricky since this seems to be occupying a rather particular niche...

It will be a rather severe nerf to both wings and dim shield... For dim. shield, that may not be such a bad thing, but wings will start seeing even less use.
I don't really like dim shield spammers... but then mindless speedbows that they keep in check are just as bad.

[cjackdc]

If you're keeping the 3 turn mechanic, add that in the card's wording. I think its too strong for a shieldless speedbow, since 3-9 turns are more than what you need to kill your opponent, and he can't just play another shield like with deflag or steal.

Woops, I meant to take out of notes that this lasts three turns when I updated the card; users said it should be a permanent instead of three turn duration, but now again I'm wandering if it should be three turn duration, I took it out of the notes (Card updated.) that it lasts three turns but tell me if you think it should last three turns.

Also:

If you're keeping the 3 turn mechanic, add that in the card's wording. I think its too strong for a shieldless speedbow, since 3-9 turns are more than what you need to kill your opponent, and he can't just play another shield like with deflag or steal.

I was actually thinking the same when I first saw this. Balancing properly may be tricky since this seems to be occupying a rather particular niche...

It will be a rather severe nerf to both wings and dim shield... For dim. shield, that may not be such a bad thing, but wings will start seeing even less use.
I don't really like dim shield spammers... but then mindless speedbows that they keep in check are just as bad.

Well I didn't really think about the less use of Wings, maybe a better idea would be that instead of it stoping shields from working, it would stop weapons, like a permanent phase shield that only effects weapons... Tell me if you think this is better?!

Thanks for the feedback guys!