Dragons

[kintar]

I think most dragons could use a buff, especially upgraded versions. I hardly see them in serious decks nowadays, and it's understandable: their atk:cost ratio is horrible, so there are few cases where you would use them instead of mid-range attackers which tend to have far better atk:cost ratio.

[Thelonesun]

*ahem*
http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,10223.0.html

And I don't think dragons need a buff, they're fine in mono decks and some rainbows.

[dragonhuman]

the main problem with dragons is that they are big creatures, most decks involve stalls or rushes to be effective and big creatures are really only used as finishing touches

[xuru]

the main problem with dragons is that they are big creatures, most decks involve stalls or rushes to be effective and big creatures are really only used as finishing touches

i thought they were created to be big, expensive, finishing card

so why should we add abilities to them? 

[kintar]

*ahem*
http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,10223.0.html

And I don't think dragons need a buff, they're fine in mono decks and some rainbows.

I don't really see the point of flooding the forum with a bunch of topics all saying the same thing.
And dragons are "fine in mono decks and some rainbows" you say? Well I would like to see such decks, because other than Aether-mono and RoL-fractal-Hope, I rarely see dragons being used competitively.

the main problem with dragons is that they are big creatures, most decks involve stalls or rushes to be effective and big creatures are really only used as finishing touches

i thought they were created to be big, expensive, finishing card

so why should we add abilities to them? 

I don't care what you think dragons are intended to be used for. If they suck, they still suck, regardless of what it's intended to be.
And I never said they should have abilities. Though that sounds like a good idea...

[JJ 52]

Personally I see dragons as more cards for the newer players, and Im fine with that.

[kintar]

Personally I see dragons as more cards for the newer players, and Im fine with that.

When I first started playing this game, I liked using dragons as well. They hit hard, they're hard to take down, and they're dragons. Who doesn't like big bad dragons?
Now that I understand the game a lot better, I haven't used a dragon for months, because in most situations, there's just much better cards to use.
Why should a card be for newer players and not for pros? Probably because the pros don't want to use them. Why not? Because there's much better cards to use! And that's a good reason they should get buffed.

[jmizzle7]

Dragons are bad only in the elements that have a glut of good creatures. Mono loves Silurian Dragons, even mono loves Arctic Dragons to go with its Abyss Crawlers. I typically like using Obsidian Dragons in my -:darkness denial deck, and Crimson/Ruby Dragon has a place in some mono decks. And of course there are the Phase and Golden Dragons that are staples in their respective decks. I wouldn't say that dragons are underpowered. If anything, only a couple of them are underpowered, and most are just fine.

*ahem*
http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,10223.0.html

And I don't think dragons need a buff, they're fine in mono decks and some rainbows.

I don't really see the point of flooding the forum with a bunch of topics all saying the same thing.
And dragons are "fine in mono decks and some rainbows" you say? Well I would like to see such decks, because other than Aether-mono and RoL-fractal-Hope, I rarely see dragons being used competitively.

Thelonesun posted a link explaining the requirements for posting in the "Buff this card" subforum. I suggest you follow them if you want this thread to stay in it.

[Terroking]

Dragons are bad only in the elements that have a glut of good creatures. Mono loves Silurian Dragons, even mono loves Arctic Dragons to go with its Abyss Crawlers. I typically like using Obsidian Dragons in my -:darkness denial deck, and Crimson/Ruby Dragon has a place in some mono decks. And of course there are the Phase and Golden Dragons that are staples in their respective decks. I wouldn't say that dragons are underpowered. If anything, only a couple of them are underpowered, and most are just fine.

*ahem*
http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,10223.0.html

And I don't think dragons need a buff, they're fine in mono decks and some rainbows.

I don't really see the point of flooding the forum with a bunch of topics all saying the same thing.
And dragons are "fine in mono decks and some rainbows" you say? Well I would like to see such decks, because other than Aether-mono and RoL-fractal-Hope, I rarely see dragons being used competitively.

Thelonesun posted a link explaining the requirements for posting in the "Buff this card" subforum. I suggest you follow them if you want this thread to stay in it.

Although this is perhaps not the topic to talk about it, Silurian needs a buff (In my opinion).

If you would compare it to Arctic and Sky Dragons, the latter has the same attack, same cost, but 7 hp, making it much more durable than a measly 4 (The only plus to Silurian is that it gets around Grav Shield, but it's also an easy target for a much more used Gravity card; Otyugh). And Arctic has less cost, more hp, and the same damage.

You can't say that's balanced. (I will admit that Time's Dragons are much more treasured and used in decks simply because it has no alternative attacker, but I'm comparing one Dragon, to another, nothing else)

[jmdt]

Ivory dragon is probably the worst upgrade in the game for a large card.  +1 attack for an upgrade, seriously?

Ivory dragon, Colossal dragon, Basalt dragon all could probably use a buff as none are really ever used.

The rest are decent/useful along with the rest of the card in their element.

[Essence]

OTOH, jmdt, Ivory Dragons are the cheapest upgraded Dragons, and they can benefit from Eclipse as well.

[jmdt]

OTOH, jmdt, Ivory Dragons are the cheapest upgraded Dragons, and they can benefit from Eclipse as well.

Both points noted.  I've never actually seen eclipse and ivory dragon in the same deck.  From a logistical perspective only a fg could really pull that combination off well.

It is the cheapest dragon, but the cost and hp stay the same while the attack goes up 1 point.  going from 10 to 11 attack is almost a waste of 1500 electrum in this case as you really are not getting any benifit from the expendiature.  This card should either drop to 9 cost when upped, or go to 12 attack, even if it means 11 cost.