Velociraptor | Velociraptor

[russianspy1234]

NAME: Velociraptor ELEMENT: Time COST: 4 TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 1 | 3 TEXT: Velociraptor gets +1 | +0 for each other Velociraptor in the same rank.	NAME: Velociraptor ELEMENT: Time COST: 4 TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 2 | 4 TEXT: Velociraptor gets +1 | +0 for each other Velociraptor in the same rank.

ART: http://www.sxc.hu/photo/442605 IDEA: russianspy1234 NOTES: hopefully the same rank limitation is enough to counteract the fractal problem, though I'm afraid I might have taken it into forced combo territory (with either fractal or mitosis) SERIES:

[EmeraldTiger]

If it were me doing a card with this name, I would work a Pun into it. Velociraptor and Velocity = a / duo

[OldTrees]

How to balance this card:

A non fractal/mitosis player would likely have an average of X of these in play
A mitosis player would likely have an average of Y of these in play
A fractal player would likely have an average of Z of these in play

(Attack)(Quantity)/(Cost)
(X+1)(X)/(4X)
(Y+1)(Y)/(4Y+Mitosis)
(Z+1)(Z)/(4Z+Fractals)

[russianspy1234]

If it were me doing a card with this name, I would work a Pun into it. Velociraptor and Velocity = a / duo

heh yeah that might have been good, but time already has a creature that uses

How to balance this card:

A non fractal/mitosis player would likely have an average of X of these in play
A mitosis player would likely have an average of Y of these in play
A fractal player would likely have an average of Z of these in play

(Attack)(Quantity)/(Cost)
(X+1)(X)/(4X)
(Y+1)(Y)/(4Y+Mitosis)
(Z+1)(Z)/(4Z+Fractals)

not quite sure what i'm supposed to do with these formulas...

[OldTrees]

How to balance this card:

A non fractal/mitosis player would likely have an average of X of these in play
A mitosis player would likely have an average of Y of these in play
A fractal player would likely have an average of Z of these in play

(Attack)(Quantity)/(Cost)
(X+1)(X)/(4X)
(Y+1)(Y)/(4Y+Mitosis)
(Z+1)(Z)/(4Z+Fractals)

not quite sure what i'm supposed to do with these formulas...

Different casting costs result in different values for X, Y and Z (the average number of copies of the creature in play under different support)
Then you can check to see if that casting cost results in balance with Total Attack / Total Cost.

[russianspy1234]

How to balance this card:

A non fractal/mitosis player would likely have an average of X of these in play
A mitosis player would likely have an average of Y of these in play
A fractal player would likely have an average of Z of these in play

(Attack)(Quantity)/(Cost)
(X+1)(X)/(4X)
(Y+1)(Y)/(4Y+Mitosis)
(Z+1)(Z)/(4Z+Fractals)

not quite sure what i'm supposed to do with these formulas...

Different casting costs result in different values for X, Y and Z (the average number of copies of the creature in play under different support)
Then you can check to see if that casting cost results in balance with Total Attack / Total Cost.

so for the first one, id guess an average of 3, and have 4*3/12=1?
still wouldnt know how to do the other two but.. well its same rank, and should easily hit the max amount in most cases so 7*6 / 4*6+ (cost of mitosis? so 5?) so its 42/28=1.5  but i've seen you factor in (1 card) or such in the cost on other threads...

[OldTrees]

How to balance this card:

A non fractal/mitosis player would likely have an average of X of these in play
A mitosis player would likely have an average of Y of these in play
A fractal player would likely have an average of Z of these in play

(Attack)(Quantity)/(Cost)
(X+1)(X)/(4X)
(Y+1)(Y)/(4Y+Mitosis)
(Z+1)(Z)/(4Z+Fractals)

not quite sure what i'm supposed to do with these formulas...

Different casting costs result in different values for X, Y and Z (the average number of copies of the creature in play under different support)
Then you can check to see if that casting cost results in balance with Total Attack / Total Cost.

so for the first one, id guess an average of 3, and have 4*3/12=1?
still wouldnt know how to do the other two but.. well its same rank, and should easily hit the max amount in most cases so 7*6 / 4*6+ (cost of mitosis? so 5?) so its 42/28=1.5  but i've seen you factor in (1 card) or such in the cost on other threads...

It looks like I misread the card. Since it doesn't count itself it would be (X)(X)/(4X).
Mitosis would cost 5+1(duo)+2(extra card)
So with your estimates it would be:
No support: 3*3/4*3=3/4=0.75
Mitosis: 6*6/(4*6+8)=36/40=0.90
These are fairly close.

[OdinVanguard]

It looks like I misread the card. Since it doesn't count itself it would be (X)(X)/(4X).
Mitosis would cost 5+1(duo)+2(extra card)
So with your estimates it would be:
No support: 3*3/4*3=3/4=0.75
Mitosis: 6*6/(4*6+8)=36/40=0.90
These are fairly close.

Just thought I should point out that the top and bottom row hold 8 creatures unlike the middle which holds 7.
So for those we get
Mitosis: 7*6/(4*7+8) = 1.16
... Not a huge difference, but it does extend past the 1 to 1 threshold. Of course, that requires extending your creatures to the top and bottom rows which is a tricky feat in and of itself.

Still, the rank limitation and cost should be sufficient to limit abuse with fractal and mitosis...

It occurs to me that flooding is a potent counter... On the other hand, if this card could survive flooding, the combo would be very vicious. Just thought I'd throw that out there for anyone looking for a card idea.