[Official] Flooding | Inundation

[rosutosefi]

2 floodings for a 3 upkeep flooding with the same power as now? I don't like it.

Problem with "stackable" flooding is reducing the field to 0 is just way too strong in my opinion.


Maybe something else (each "flood" increases maintenance by 1):
1 flood - 5 tiles left
2 flood - 4 tiles left
3 flood - 4 tiles left
4, 5, 6, 7 flood - 3 tiles left
8 flood 2 tiles left

(well just showing 8 to show the calculation: to remove an extra tile, you would need to double the cost).

Well, that's better. or something like that.

[pulli23]

Well I just tested it, but before flooding is updated: the ai has to be updated..


It's quite "easy" to abuse flooding together with vultures, bonewall & boneyards. The AI keeps building monsters even if they die in flooded regions.

[ThePolaris]

I don't want to open a new thread for this, so I post here although this is about 2 months old. Sorry.

So I was thinking: the new Flooding is better, but what about a little change? It floods the entire area, only water, neutral and FLYING creatures survive. Flying means nothing at the moment, save for Wings. It fits thematically, why would a flying thing drown? Also, if we add, that fire creatures die even if they can fly, we have a decent counter for those nasty fire decks. And people may start to use the Web ability.
Feedback?

[BluePriest]

I don't want to open a new thread for this, so I post here although this is about 2 months old. Sorry.

So I was thinking: the new Flooding is better, but what about a little change? It floods the entire area, only water, neutral and FLYING creatures survive. Flying means nothing at the moment, save for Wings. It fits thematically, why would a flying thing drown? Also, if we add, that fire creatures die even if they can fly, we have a decent counter for those nasty fire decks. And people may start to use the Web ability.
Feedback?

Flying creatures being affected has been mentioned several times, however, for reasons i cant comprehend, people dont like it even if flooding was buffed accordingly with this nerf.

[mesaprotector]

I don't want to open a new thread for this, so I post here although this is about 2 months old. Sorry.

So I was thinking: the new Flooding is better, but what about a little change? It floods the entire area, only water, neutral and FLYING creatures survive. Flying means nothing at the moment, save for Wings. It fits thematically, why would a flying thing drown? Also, if we add, that fire creatures die even if they can fly, we have a decent counter for those nasty fire decks. And people may start to use the Web ability.
Feedback?

Flying creatures being affected has been mentioned several times, however, for reasons i cant comprehend, people dont like it even if flooding was buffed accordingly with this nerf.

Sort of fits thematically, but it makes Flooding even weaker. Also, Wings isn't the only use of airborne; Sky Blitz and Iridium Warden are both based on the passive skill.

[bigreen69]

I actually like this card a lot.  I use it in one of my false god grinders.  I find this card very useful against these foes because it eliminates all but 5 creatures.  It really cuts down on the spam.  Add in a few Malignant Cells and one Parasite and you can lock down almost any deck.  However this is a stall deck that is completely bulit around Flooding. 

I believe that as other cards are added it will recieve more buffs. 

[Hisar]

Here's something that might be interesting:

Flooding: 4 : Floods 4 squares of the field, generates 1  per round.
Monsoon (upgraded): 8 : Floods 8 squares of the field, generates 3  per round.

[omegareaper7]

Here's something that might be interesting:

Flooding: 4 : Floods 4 squares of the field, generates 1  per round.
Monsoon (upgraded): 8 : Floods 8 squares of the field, generates 3  per round.

Either i'm missing something, or this is just making it weaker.... again.

[Hisar]

They stack, sorry.  So unupped 6 of them would flood the field, and generate 6 per turn.  Upped, 3 flood the field and generate 9 per turn.  Making them generate instead of cost  is a pretty big buff I think.

[omegareaper7]

They stack, sorry.  So unupped 6 of them would flood the field, and generate 6 per turn.  Upped, 3 flood the field and generate 9 per turn.  Making them generate instead of cost  is a pretty big buff I think.

The upkeep isn't the problem with the card. The problem is the first 5 creature slots are easily enough to be a threat. I'm against the stacking a bit seeing as 3 makes creature based decks null and void.

[Hisar]

Hmm, yeah, that was probably a bad idea.  I guess the problem with flooding is that its so binary - either it controls enough that you're causing your opponent problems (and leaving 4 squares makes squid/flooding way too strong) or it does nothing but cost you quanta.

What if flooding didn't kill things at all, but instead acted as a buff card?  All water creatures get +1/+4, all non-flying creatures get -1/-0 and have a 50% chance to take 1 damage a turn, and keep the upkeep cost?

[waterzx]

This card is now overpowered with the SoP buff. (SoP becomes a permanent, flooded water creatures gain +4|+4 every turn)

No any more buff is needed

http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,35190.216.html