Elements the Game Forum - Free Online Fantasy Card Game
Elements the Game => Game Suggestions and Feedback => Buff This Card! => Topic started by: kintar on July 28, 2010, 08:06:57 am
-
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.
-
*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.
-
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
-
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? ::)
-
*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...
-
Personally I see dragons as more cards for the newer players, and Im fine with that.
-
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.
-
Dragons are bad only in the elements that have a glut of good creatures. Mono :time loves Silurian Dragons, even mono :water loves Arctic Dragons to go with its Abyss Crawlers. I typically like using Obsidian Dragons in my :earth-:darkness denial deck, and Crimson/Ruby Dragon has a place in some mono :fire 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.
-
Dragons are bad only in the elements that have a glut of good creatures. Mono :time loves Silurian Dragons, even mono :water loves Arctic Dragons to go with its Abyss Crawlers. I typically like using Obsidian Dragons in my :earth-:darkness denial deck, and Crimson/Ruby Dragon has a place in some mono :fire 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)
-
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.
-
OTOH, jmdt, Ivory Dragons are the cheapest upgraded Dragons, and they can benefit from Eclipse as well.
-
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.
-
Personally I see dragons as more cards for the newer players, and Im fine with that.
Newer player lack the money to buy several dragons. The people who would use these cannot afford them and the people who can generally don't want to. Dragons cover a very small share of the elements market, which is a shame, because theyre, you know, big flamey scary things. Rawr!
-
Newer player lack the money to buy several dragons. The people who would use these cannot afford them and the people who can generally don't want to. Dragons cover a very small share of the elements market, which is a shame, because theyre, you know, big flamey scary things. Rawr!
There's quite a few decks that use dragons in an upped arena. :water, :time, :entropy, :darkness, :light, :aether and :fire all use dragons in some of their staple decks.
-
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.
the benefit is +1 damage! i personally really, really like the ivory dragon as it is, cheap and passable damage (compare that to earth or gravity version, but - exspecially earth - is ok, against damage-cc very nice), i also like mono death decks, and often use ivory dragon in there.
and, hell, who said dragons are for newbies? => major mistake, if you really think this, maybe you are new to this game or you should re-think your strategies.
:fire: 1-4 in many mono-decks, as only creatures of finishers, also nice decks like fahrenheit-dragons here (6 dragons, 4 fhs, 2 deflags, 18 pillars)
:life: nice synergies with rustlers, often only life mark and light pillars for fast dragons, always 6
:entropy: mono-entropy with discords, antimatters, shield(s) and often 4-6 dragons as only creatures (along with maxwells, sometimes)
:aether: shieldlock-dragon already mentioned
:darkness: with earth mark or just mono black, always dragons as damage dealers in there
:death: poisons-bws-arsenics-dragons ... need more?
:air: often used in mono-air (with eagle eyes+fog/wings for control), or 2-3 iin unstable gas decks)
:earth: i like in earth decks with gravity mark, with pulverizers+gravity pulls, exspecially good against fire+aether (their cc based on damage)
:gravity: needs a buff or another use, but mono-gravity often goes with chargers or control with otys, armagios for their life, so no room for dragons.
:light: rol-hope as dmg-dealer, also nice in mono-light decks
:time: look at team times last matches at war, main dmg-dealer there
:water: essence used it quite often in his decks for different events in the past, mono-decks, as usual.
-
The majority of those were mono-decks. What I believe most of the rest of us are saying is that we want to be able to use dragons in a more versatile setting, like a lot of the other cards in the game. Kind of like how you can use a Pharoah either in a deck where the creatures he makes eat others, or in a deck where his creatures are just like fireflies and Armagios mixed together. (bad description I know, but I couldn't put it any other way in my head)
-
The majority of those were mono-decks. What I believe most of the rest of us are saying is that we want to be able to use dragons in a more versatile setting, like a lot of the other cards in the game. Kind of like how you can use a Pharoah either in a deck where the creatures he makes eat others, or in a deck where his creatures are just like fireflies and Armagios mixed together. (bad description I know, but I couldn't put it any other way in my head)
Dragons are the very representation of mono-decks, lol...the high cost doesn't mean anything, huh?
-
The majority of those were mono-decks. What I believe most of the rest of us are saying is that we want to be able to use dragons in a more versatile setting, like a lot of the other cards in the game. Kind of like how you can use a Pharoah either in a deck where the creatures he makes eat others, or in a deck where his creatures are just like fireflies and Armagios mixed together. (bad description I know, but I couldn't put it any other way in my head)
Dragons are the very representation of mono-decks, lol...the high cost doesn't mean anything, huh?
Are they now? Huh, I guess I never got the memo that we should only ever have dragons in our mono decks.
And no, all the high cost means is that the dragons have a high attack/hp, nothing more, nothing less.
-
The majority of those were mono-decks. What I believe most of the rest of us are saying is that we want to be able to use dragons in a more versatile setting, like a lot of the other cards in the game. Kind of like how you can use a Pharoah either in a deck where the creatures he makes eat others, or in a deck where his creatures are just like fireflies and Armagios mixed together. (bad description I know, but I couldn't put it any other way in my head)
Dragons are the very representation of mono-decks, lol...the high cost doesn't mean anything, huh?
Are they now? Huh, I guess I never got the memo that we should only ever have dragons in our mono decks.
And no, all the high cost means is that the dragons have a high attack/hp, nothing more, nothing less.
I meant that they are the most effective in monos, so the fact that they are not as versatile comes at no surprise. Yes, I know that there are duos and even rainbows that utilize dragons. That's enough versatility in my opinion, though.
-
Dragons are big damage and very important to mono decks. Changing them drastically would be a travesty.
-
We don't necessarily (man i hate that word!) need a drastic chage, just one that will make dragons a tad more available to more decks and more deck types. That's not such a horrible thing to ask, is it?
-
We don't necessarily (man i hate that word!) need a drastic chage, just one that will make dragons a tad more available to more decks and more deck types. That's not such a horrible thing to ask, is it?
Dragons are the big attackers of an element; this makes them expensive. Since they're expensive only mono and sometimes duo decks can pull them off. Rainbow decks have everything else, giving them access to dragons is :o :'( :o :'( :o
-
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.
I use Ivory Dragon in my Mono Death deck and a -1 cost would be nice.
-
We don't necessarily (man i hate that word!) need a drastic chage, just one that will make dragons a tad more available to more decks and more deck types. That's not such a horrible thing to ask, is it?
Dragons are the big attackers of an element; this makes them expensive. Since they're expensive only mono and sometimes duo decks can pull them off. Rainbow decks have everything else, giving them access to dragons is :o :'( :o :'( :o
WHOAH WHOAH WHOAH. Whoah. I totally agree on that. I'm SO not even talking about Rainbows though. I'm just saying that there should be more than one-ish good deck that these guys can be put into. I mean, they're Dragons! Ultimate beasts! Just because we CAN make 0-2 decks with them doesn't mean that any/most of us actually DO, or even give it a thought. (Don't lie to yourself, you know that it is true)
Right now Dragons are more of an afterthought, a buffer if you will. People look at their decks and say, "Hey, I need more power in this deck, and it makes a lot of quanta. What should I put in? More of X or Y? Nah, that would throw my perfect balance off. I guess that I'll have to put a dragon in, there's nothing else left!"
-
Right now Dragons are more of an afterthought, a buffer if you will.
I use dragons in a lot of decks; I also play a lot of mono and duo decks. I get alot of mileage from the jade and crimson dragons. Light, Ivory, Arctic, and devonian dragons see a good bt of use too. Dragons are very good cards when used correctly.
I agree its sad they are ignored most of the time.
-
Also, keep in mind jmdt likes fast decks. The fact that he uses quite a few decks that use dragons...well, figure it out yourself.
-
Also, keep in mind jmdt likes fast decks. The fact that he uses quite a few decks that use dragons...well, figure it out yourself.
To take this a little further
the fastest :darkness deck uses dragons
the fastest :death deck uses dragons
the fastest :entropy deck uses dragons
the fastest :fire deck uses dragons
the fastest :time deck uses dragons
the fastest :water deck uses dragons
That's half the elements. :life, :light, and :aether dragons see some use.
-
Also, keep in mind jmdt likes fast decks. The fact that he uses quite a few decks that use dragons...well, figure it out yourself.
To take this a little further
the fastest :darkness deck uses dragons
the fastest :death deck uses dragons
the fastest :entropy deck uses dragons
the fastest :fire deck uses dragons
the fastest :time deck uses dragons
the fastest :water deck uses dragons
That's half the elements. :life, :light, and :aether dragons see some use.
Ya but some of the fastest :life decks use dragons like your :life rush with dragons deck.
-
I think most of them are fine as is, but some of them is not balance and need buff, mainly Massive Dragon and Ivory Dragon
Massive Dragon should have momentum
Ivory Dragon should raise its states or give a death trigger effect
Silurian Dragons should raise its states or give a reverse time trigger effect
-
I think most of them are fine as is, but some of them is not balance and need buff, mainly Massive Dragon and Ivory Dragon
Massive Dragon should have momentum
Ivory Dragon should raise its states or give a death trigger effect
Silurian Dragons should raise its states or give a reverse time trigger effect
Death triger affect? as in what?
-
I think most of them are fine as is, but some of them is not balance and need buff, mainly Massive Dragon and Ivory Dragon
Massive Dragon should have momentum
Ivory Dragon should raise its states or give a death trigger effect
Silurian Dragons should raise its states or give a reverse time trigger effect
Death triger affect? as in what?
Bone Walls +2.
Boneyard/Graveyard +Skeleton.
Vulture/Condor +1|1
-
I think only the Massive Dragon should get a buff.
I mean you upgrade it and get 30hp... who needs 30hp? And noo.. you don't you use gravity pull on them, armagios are for that; they cost less, have less attack to lose, and you don't waste a spell card to use it on them.
Anyways Massive Dragons hp should be lowered down, attack should be pulled up or just make it come in play with momentum.
-
I think only the Massive Dragon should get a buff.
I mean you upgrade it and get 30hp... who needs 30hp? And noo.. you don't you use gravity pull on them, armagios are for that; they cost less, have less attack to lose, and you don't waste a spell card to use it on them.
Anyways Massive Dragons hp should be lowered down, attack should be pulled up or just make it come in play with momentum.
I've been playing a Gravity/Earth "fun" deck against the FGs, and all the health is useful sometimes to absorb all of the CC. If it's changed I hope the HP is not lowered.
-
Personally, I LOVE the combination of almost any dragon and liquuid shadow. Using it near the end of the game guarantees a ton of HP and will usually last a while.
-
The Ivory Dragon needs and attack buff. +1 damage isn't worth 1,500 :electrum
-
The Ivory Dragon needs and attack buff. +1 damage isn't worth 1,500 :electrum
+1 damage is often worth 1 quanta. -1 cost is worth 1,500 :electrum. Therefore ...
-
Oh, right. So +1 Quanta=+2 Attack? That's how it goes on Phase Dragon-Elite Phase Dragon.
-
Personnally i would add an ability "breath" to dragons.
There would be differents breaths with a small cost : blazing (lightly harms creature), freezing (freeze 1 turn), petrifying (tiny basilisk blood), slowing (delay 1 turn), stealing (lightly harms creature+heals dragon), venimous (infect)... every element could be done.
your opinion?
-
Personnally i would add an ability "breath" to dragons.
There would be differents breaths with a small cost : blazing (lightly harms creature), freezing (freeze 1 turn), petrifying (tiny basilisk blood), slowing (delay 1 turn), stealing (lightly harms creature+heals dragon), venimous (infect)... every element could be done.
your opinion?
No, as jmdt pointed out, most dragons are fine as is, massive aside.
blarg: