[Official] Turquoise Nymph | Aether Nymph

[EvaRia]

True.

That's why I'm saying, it's not that the card itself is bad, it's just that it fits a very unique niche and could be increasingly more useful as the card pool increases.

Also,

Considering also has Quintessence, the nymph entering the field immortal is unnecessary.

Turquoise Nymph is really a mono-Anubis, keep that in mind.  It has better attack, same summoning cost, ability works in mono decks.  Only real downside is the health, which given the easy Quintessence combo, should only be a problem when facing harmful shields.

I think it's fine the way it is.  In fact, I wish I had one, I'd put it to good use.  Yes, by the time you can play this you'd have been able to play 2-3 Quints, but you have to DRAW 2-3 Quints before you can play them.  Once one of these is on the field, you can just keep on using it.  Otherwise, what would be the point of people using Anubis to begin with?

[johannhowitzer]

Woops.  Well, I knew what I meant in my head.  If you, reading from somewhere else in the internet, cannot tell what is in my head, then... poo on you!

Turquoise Nymph's "niche" is only as small as Quintessence's.  They serve the same purpose and require exactly the same type(s) of quanta.  Nymph goes in a deck where you think you might want more than a couple Quints.

[EvaRia]

Woops.  Well, I knew what I meant in my head.  If you, reading from somewhere else in the internet, cannot tell what is in my head, then... poo on you!

Turquoise Nymph's "niche" is only as small as Quintessence's.  They serve the same purpose and require exactly the same type(s) of quanta.  Nymph goes in a deck where you think you might want more than a couple Quints.

It's a little slimmer than Quints, for a similar reason as Poseidon vs. EQ.

Nymphs require a large amount of quanta, as such, you need to generate a fairly large amount of quanta in order to fuel it, compared to quints. Also, most people have at most 1 or 2, and if your strategy requires you to quint a creature no matter what, it's safer to go with a large amount of quints rather than 1 or 2 nymphs.

This means that the nymph's current use is like Poseidon: Great to have just in case you might need it in like a rainbow deck, because it's better to have one than not, but hard to build a strategy around it specifically.

[The D0m1nat0r]

Would it be overpowered if it had lightning as its ability? Maybe a 2/4 with lightning for 3 Aether would be good (as it is similar to the red nymph-creature control)? Only problems here are the non-alchemy aspect and the fact that it can target players (although this might not be such a bad idea).

[ZephyrPhantom]

Would it be overpowered if it had lightning as its ability? Maybe a 2/4 with lightning for 3 Aether would be good (as it is similar to the red nymph-creature control)? Only problems here are the non-alchemy aspect and the fact that it can target players (although this might not be such a bad idea).

The nymphs should stay in-theme, and therefore quinting is best. I think both Upped and unupped should receive a lower ability cost  of -1  .

[The D0m1nat0r]

If only lightning was an alchemy card... Mind you, how would you get lightning in a bottle (aside from with great difficulty)?
I agree with the lower ability cost-it would be able to 'compete' better with anubis.

[Ekki]

This thread needs a bump. (and also correcting the upped nymph's hp in the OP, it's 8/2 not 7/3)

Turquoise nymph is clearly overshadowed by anubis, thus it needs something to be different, because all the cards should be equal a.k.a. in balance, no matter rarity. Or maybe anubis needs an effect change.

I still believe that the nymph needs to come into play immortal (and a little nerf in attack, or Phase Dragon... you know).

[SnoWeb]

As I said here (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,20891.0.html), Turquoise nymph is useless. Anubis is a lot better for the same purpose. You could say that you might want to use it in mono-aether. Yes but in aether most creatures are already immortal ... so what ... I don't want it to become better than Anubis, it would be to dangerous combined with nymph tears.

I personally would change it's ability to something you can not have with a common card. None of the other nymphs have a normal card that has the same ability (rage, nymph tears, black hole, BB, precog, adrenaline, luciferin, antimatter, aflatoxin, UG and liquid shadow). As it is, Anubis is better so what is the interest of having a turquoise nymph? I'm sure we can have a balanced turquoise nymph that is an interesting card on its own.

I know (because he said it during his interview with vrt - here (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,20705.msg280987#msg280987)) that Zanzarino does not pay attention to the polls. I just hope he'll here (our) my call: please Zanz, do something with the turquoise nymph that is different from "a less good but more rare than Anubis" card ...

[BluePriest]

Fixed OP (sorta)... was nymph changed... If so I missed it. I coulda sworn it use to be 7/3... ANYWAYS...  This isnt just a poll, this is a logical, non ranting reason for why the card needs changed, so hopefully it will be considered more than just a poll 

[johannhowitzer]

A deck I whipped up for a tournament not too long ago:

Code: [Select]

5i4 5i4 5i4 5i4 5i4 5i4 5i4 5i4 5i4 5i4 5i4 5i4 5ib 5ib 5ib 5id 5id 5if 5if 5if 5if 5ig 5ig 5ig 61o 61o 61o 61o 621 621

[Krahhl]

He uses aether nymphs. What

But I think it'd be more efficient to just take out the nymph's tears and a few water pillars, replacing them with more quints. That way you can simply play a creature and quint it, rather than wait for a nymph, then quint it, then use it to quint other creatures.

[SnoWeb]

Yeah, johannhowitzer. You just show how awesome nymph tears (NT) is. You also demonstrate why we should be careful with the "coming to play immortal". Through NT you could do spam immortal creature that can render other creature immortal and that's not good ...