Mortal Avenger | Death Avenger

[jawdirk]

@jawdirk
Assuming creatures only survive 1 turn is a bad habit. You post seemed to me to exhibit this habit.

I'm not saying they only survive 1 turn, I'm saying people forget that they always survive for at least one attack.

[blahs15]

It takes 1 CC to kill. Its ability punishes CC. The ideal setup would be to have the opponent not know which tactic (CC or no CC) is better.
So 0 damage and 7|8 poison are eliminated extremes. Currently I see ambivalence only if there about 2 turns left. This is too little. When would you be ambivalent if it was 4 poison?

Once you hit ambivalence the cost would be 1-2|0-1 quanta higher than the attack.

I think that maybe the damage should be slightly less from killing than from the amount of dmg it does per turn.  I think the ambivalent part is the fact that it is a card.  already has many other +'s from things dying.  So that's where the owner's bonus from it comes from. 

Well, for the card personally, it could be around GotP (aka 6-7 ).

I also think that 9 is probably too much.  It does ~ the same dmg as gotp... but it's effect is probably more useful than gotp's effect. So maybe +1 quanta in comparison to GotPs?

[jawdirk]

I don't think 9  is too much. I would put these in a deck with momentum. I can add otyughs against antimatter and faster rushes. Not many efficient counters remain. You can use lightning + heal. You might be able to win with phase shield + rewind/eternity + SoG. Maybe arctic squid?

Suppose you don't target it. Then you have to compare it to Phase Dragon. Worse in some ways, but better in others (don't RoF or plague when this card is in play). Phase Dragon is 13  .

So you're going to target it then, and you are going to have to eat the 7|8 damage. That is powerful. How much quanta is 7|8 damage worth? Now it is looking like a pretty cheap 7|8 ATK creature.

[Vangelios]

This is a deceptively powerful card. The reason why cards like Crimson Dragon are so powerful is that they deal damage on the turn they are played. Even if you kill the dragon, you've still taken 12 damage (for 10  )

This card is 14 | 16 damage for 9 .

There are counters (shields mostly) but it might need to be toned down a little. I like OldTrees' poison suggestion.

Greetings jawdirk

very cool your comparisons, but have decks that this card will make no effect as the light for example, and I also already won numerous games without need target on creatures of the opponent, (sundial, shields, deck-speed)

comparison crimison  dragon: if avenger, is as fire, I  continue use crimison,  are 12 damage only in once.
Deck of fire are fast with great  damage, if it avenger is as fire, until seraphim would be more feasible.

 card price:  well, 9 , is almost the price of a dragon, and I don't meeting many dragons lately (except black), players are preferring fast cards, another fact
 is that many use devourers, earthquake, discord and S-Focus, preventing speed to put a letter of 9.quanta.

had a tournament three weeks ago that I could not put a mere bone-shield (3 devourers) and oponete was just a classic monodark, if I put shield, would have won.

[Vangelios]

Sorry for double post, everyone knows that I do not usually do this, but I made a change this card that I found very interesting and makes sense with its element.
also fix some things in the text.

[OdinVanguard]

Interesting card. I like the changes that were made and I love the art. Make sure to include a printout or screenshot of the permission email when it gets submitted to crucible.

Its a nice counter to CC tactics, although the effect may be a little bit weak.