[Official] Colossal Dragon | Massive Dragon

[Daytripper]

Ah well, you have totally lost me. Your reasoning (all of you ) is really invalid. First off, a charger doesn't have 30 HP.

Otherwise.

1) All the things that Massive can do get outdone by every other dragon and many other creatures/spells.

No. Show me a dragon that can go on for 30 turns while poisoned, for example.

2)Dragons are meant to be beatsticks, not creatures spawners.  Besides, girlsgeneration already has an idea for that in the card ideas section. Check more throughly please.

You have to admit it was a funny idea! And, momentum is a popular buff candidate. Isn't that an ability? Besides you are not making sense. You can't post if someone else already has an idea? In that case I will post a card idea that says only I can make forum posts.

3) As a beatstick, it is probably the least prefered dragon over any other dragon due to the fact it has lower attack yet same quanta cost.

I think I already solved that... If people dont appreciate the HP, take it away, and give it another buff. That and almost every dragon is the least preferred..

4) Unupped is in an even worse state than the upped.

Well yes, that's why it is unupped.

I wonder if you really understood what I was saying, but oh wel. We'll see what becomes of the dragon.

[ZephyrPhantom]

1) All the things that Massive can do get outdone by every other dragon and many other creatures/spells.

No. Show me a dragon that can go on for 30 turns while poisoned, for example.

Um yeah, I think there is a thing called multiple Parasites.

2)Dragons are meant to be beatsticks, not creatures spawners.  Besides, girlsgeneration already has an idea for that in the card ideas section. Check more throughly please.

You have to admit it was a funny idea! And, momentum is a popular buff candidate. Isn't that an ability? Besides you are not making sense. You can't post if someone else already has an idea? In that case I will post a card idea that says only I can make forum posts.

Hey, chill. I am just saying it was already done.  Also, a beatstick can have an effect. It just has more focus on pure attacking.  Momentum is an attack ability right?

3) As a beatstick, it is probably the least prefered dragon over any other dragon due to the fact it has lower attack yet same quanta cost.

I think I already solved that... If people dont appreciate the HP, take it away, and give it another buff. That and almost every dragon is the least preferred..

Ruby Dragon?

4) Unupped is in an even worse state than the upped.

Well yes, that's why it is unupped.

I wonder if you really understood what I was saying, but oh wel. We'll see what becomes of the dragon.

An unupped dies quite easily compared to upped.

[BluePriest]

People need to remember how to debate.. platforms. Right now there doesnt seem to be one clear reason for the dragon being buffed. Im seeing half attempts at reasons for the dragon being buffed, and half attempts at why it doesnt need buffed.

My platform:

Everything good about the dragon is outdone by other creatures in gravity. 

[Daytripper]

Right. I think people agree the dragon is redundant. That doesn't make it underpowered. I agree changing it could be good, but that doesn't mean it would be buffed. In other words, it needs it's own niche. A few dragons are in use, such as the Ruby Dragon (attack) and the light Dragon. (Getting light quanta is easy.) Bone dragon may also profit from the soul catcher. Other dragons are just really expensive. Not counting the Phase dragon now, as it has an ability.

Everything good about the dragon is outdone by other creatures in gravity.

Good practical thinking, but it is again, about redundance. I can also say the basalt dragon is airborne, but that the pulvy is much moar bettah at negating Wings. If you only want to look at the damage, consider a dragon is 8  quanta more than a Graboid with the same attack. So, who puts a fair amount of these dragons in a deck? Not many, so we can say the use is limited. I think then, we are not discussing the same thing. Another creature of the same element that does the same thing does not make one of the creatures underpowered.

No, most dragons look pale in comparison to the midrange attackers. (No, time has no midrange attacker so does not count) This platform opens up all kinds of reasons to change every dragon. That's a change, it doesn't have to be a buff.

Maybe you are right, but it seems to me a re appraisal of all dragons might be in order.

[ArtCrusade]

Same discussion as for Dagger. It's redundant and thus needs to be changed. This is no game like Magic where you have thousands of different cards. To keep diversity and uniqueness of Elements Massive Dragon needs to be changed just as Dagger needs to be changed. Many other elements have ways to make playing dragons easier than ( ). Others can easily stall until they can play the dragons easily ( ) and one even has an ability. In any other case playing a dragon is better than playing 2 smaller creatures, because they take less space in the deck and on the field - and that is why I prefer Light Dragons over Archangels for example.

Saying it doesn't need to be changed, because it's the only airborne creature has is not valid. Charger deals almost the same damage for half the prize and has Momentum. And noone would waste Gravity Force on the dragon, because it's easier to play an Armagio for half the prize.
 

[Daytripper]

To keep diversity and uniqueness of Elements Massive Dragon needs to be changed just as Dagger needs to be changed. Many other elements have ways to make playing dragons easier than  (       ). Others can easily stall until they can play the dragons easily (    ) and one even has an ability. In any other case playing a dragon is better than playing 2 smaller creatures, because they take less space in the deck and on the field - and that is why I prefer Light Dragons over Archangels for example.

Saying it doesn't need to be changed, because it's the only airborne creature  has is not valid. Charger deals almost the same damage for half the prize and has Momentum. And noone would waste Gravity Force on the dragon, because it's easier to play an Armagio for half the prize. 

I like your line of thinking. It is coherent and well supported. One thing though. I did not say the dragon has a reasonable price because it is airborne. I said it has a reasonable price because it is airborne AND has 30 HP. Besides, momentum can be lobotomized. Airborne cannot. You need 2 specific creatures with web for it.

Let's say the dragons are there to blow away the excess quanta, and that it is fair enough to look at the elements quanta. It is a different issue, but it has something to do with it.

  I don't see a way to make entropy quanta.
  Dont see. Gnome finder is the same as a pillar.
  Don't see it. Damselfly is the same as a pillar.
  I don't see it. Fire and light yes. (FFQ/rustler)
  Agreed. Immo/FFQ
  ?
  Of course
  Now has soul catcher
  ?
  of course.
  No, but the dragons are good.

In the end, you can only say gravity has no way to make more quanta. But, many elements don't. Other factors have no bearing on the dragon. You can say you can't make it to the end of the game because the shielding is inadaquate, so you can't save quanta. Or you can say that the other units are too expensive. I'll happily grant you the graviton guard is useless, for example. But the dragon isn't to blame for the other cards. In the end, it is the same thing. the critics don't think 30 HP has any value. If they can make a good case, I guess we'll see a new dragon soon. In which case, I hope it won't stll have 30 HP, because I think it is ridiculously cheap.

[ArtCrusade]

I didn't say can generate the required quanta to play its dragon easier, but that it can stall (--> shield + CC).  Gnome Gemfinder pays for itself in just one turn. It is like a pillar, thus generating more quanta which is needed to play the dragon, so has a way to make playing dragons easier. Additionaly there is BB for stalling. Same for , just that has Wings for stalling. got into that list by accident. Water has a lot of CC as well, and can - in combination with - deny quanta to its opponent by destroying pillars. Time can stall using Rewind, Eternity and delaying shields. Last but not least, has Dimensional Shield to stall until the end.

Now let us take a look at . Gravity has a shield which blocks creatures with more than 5 health. That means most creatures will just hit like normal, and creatures with Momentum ignore shields anyway. Gravity Force can be used on creatures to gain time or kill creatures, and Armagion can help with stalling as well. Though Armagio will be overrun fast if you don't use other cards to make it live longer. Gravity has BH, which can heal the user for up to 36 health, but depends too much on the enemy to be a card that you can rely on, and is almost useless against mono decks. So it comes down do having a shield which blocks a few bigger creatures, creatures which block a few creatures, and a spell which cannot be relyed on. Not the best base to wait for a big creature with so many disadvantages like the Massive Dragon. By the time you summon one Massive Dragon, 2 Chargers can be summoned, which deal more damage and completly ignore shields. Why is it that a simple beast is better than a big strong dragon? Sure, the Chargers will be more likely to be killed than the dragon, but your whole concept can be destroyed by one Rewind if you rely on dragons.

The fact that there are so many cons and just one pro, namely the dragon's health, makes me wonder why you don't agree that the dragon needs a buff.

[OldTrees]

People need to remember how to debate.. platforms. Right now there doesnt seem to be one clear reason for the dragon being buffed. Im seeing half attempts at reasons for the dragon being buffed, and half attempts at why it doesnt need buffed.

My platform:

My reasons for the need for a buff for Massive Dragon:
Based upon my design theory formed from dissection of the creatures in the game, I found that there is no additional cost for HP after that HP exceeds 10. I explain this coincidence with the following reason: "After 10 HP CC is nearly impossible or doesn't care about the HP due to overwhelming damage (Gravity Pull) or non HP based CC (antimatter)."  As such, once the number crunching has settled, Massive Dragon ends up being overpriced by 1 . In conclusion Massive Dragon needs a buff on the magnitude of 1 .

My preliminary response to criticism:
Cards in need of buffs are harder to find intuitivly than those needing nerfs. Furthermore cards needing minor buffs (1 ) tend to slip below the intuition radar.

My attempt at finding the ideal simple buff:
With a vanilla creature there are 4 points of balance that can be modified
1) Casting Cost
2) Attack
3) HP
4) Add a skill if no other option works

Option 1: Casting Cost
If we lower casting cost to 10 [10 : 8|30] then it gets close to the unupped Stone Dragon [10 : 8|10].
This may be an acceptable result because Earth is weird in its HP value brackets (aka it gets 1 free HP). However lets review other options

Option 2: Attack
If we increase attack to 9 [11 : 9|30]
It gets acceptably close to unupped Azure Dragon [10 : 9|6] or unupped Ice Dragon [10 : 9|6]
This would work as a sufficient buff in my opinion.
Just for completeness we will look at why not option 3

Option 3: HP
More HP would have to render Armagio unnecessary to even have an effect (not a desired result)
Less HP would be silly because we are looking to buff not nerf

[ArtCrusade]

I agree that the health shouldn't be increased, but not the attack. As you stated it'd get too close to other dragons. I suggest to buff Armagio a bit by dropping the upped dragon's health to 20 and applying the ability Massive to the dragon. The fact that gravity is about how much things weight is quite clear, but where can we see this in Elements? It's only reasonable that a big dragon like the Massive Dragon cannot be harmed that easily, and cannot be stopped just like that either, though it gets "slower" in case something gets into its way. The ability is not too strong, but fits perfectly and will balance the dragon. 

[BluePriest]

Sorry Daytripper, but I dont think comparing it to ther dragons is good. I think it needs to be compared to other cards. Especially within its own element. Why should I choose the massive dragon in a  deck instead of any other card? Honestly, I cant think of a single good reason.

Good things about Massive Dragon
1)The health | Armagio is cheaper, better for catapult, doesnt need an additional card to be GP'd
2)The Damage | 1 Less damage the the Charger, and that has momentum.


you may say that it has the best of both worlds with this card, however, once a card has over 10 hp, as oldtrees has pointed out, the extra health is next to worthless. I would even go a step further and say that Chargers beat it in every way. They can survive 2 of almost any CC, and bypass shields automatically. The only real benifit the high health has is against Otys, which is in the same element. Meanwhile congeal and rewind are effective agaisnt both the dragon and the charger, however, chargers are cheaper, so its actually BETTER for them to be rewound instead of dragons, and and CC shield like dusk, procrastination, or perma will destroy the coloosal dragon, meanwhile your charger is looking better and better.

[Daytripper]

Alright lol, not going to reply again after this,  so don't think I'm ignoring you.

Artcrusade, you are still blaming the dragon for everything else you think is wrong with gravity. That is not valid reasoning. And then you say a gnomefinder is like a pillar, and then that is helps paying for a dragon. That doesn't follow. A gravity pillar is also like a pillar. So it helps paying for the dragon. A pillar is still better. It has no cost and a tower produces instantly.

I like your idea, by the way. But you acknowledge it deserves a HP decrease for the ability! How is that any different from what I said?

This is a much better line of reasoning, using objective numbers.

My reasons for the need for a buff for Massive Dragon:
Based upon my design theory formed from dissection of the creatures in the game, I found that there is no additional cost for HP after that HP exceeds 10. I explain this coincidence with the following reason: "After 10 HP CC is nearly impossible or doesn't care about the HP due to overwhelming damage (Gravity Pull) or non HP based CC (antimatter)." 

It does have an obvious problem. If we decrease the casting cost or up the attack, you shouldn't mind it too much if we cut the HP to 10. After all, it doesn't matter. That seems very odd to me, but it is a fair enough trade off to me.

And to BP I would say the same thing.. Fine, buff it and cut the HP to 10 then.

[OldTrees]

@Daytripper (in case you are still lurking even if not responding)

Changing it to 9|10 for 11 would work balancewise
There is the thematic concern that Gravity should have more HP than other dragons so:
11 : 9|15 would be balanced and fit thematically in my mind.