Elements the Game Forum - Free Online Fantasy Card Game
Elements the Game => Card Ideas and Art => Topic started by: TruePurple on September 22, 2010, 11:50:46 pm
-
Slay/Death
Element: :death of course.
Cost: Not sure of exact cost, maybe 6-7?
Effect: Kills target creature. Can target immortals/immaterial, in which case they lose their immortal/immaterial status instead of dying.
Upgraded card can cost less, or perhaps only the upgraded card has the ability to strip immortal/immaterial status? I think letting both have that ability and making it slightly cheaper would be better.
-
:o I'd say OP
-
We're sorry, but this card is instantly disapproved for crubicale. Zanz said no insta-kill cards, so that means NO INSTA-KILL CARDS!!! >:D
-
Who is zanz and where does she say no insta-kill?
If Antimatter and Purple Nymph aren't considered OP, and they're in the game, then this definitely can't be called overpowered. Reversing damage into healing is more effective in many cases then simply killing a single creature. Its even more powerful when on a vamperic creature,(damaging the creatures owner AND healing you) forcing the other player to kill their own critter sometimes.
Or stealing, or other powerful cards, and you would give this joke that this idea is in any way OP.
It's hardly a game winner to kill one creature and there are plenty of ways of killing weak creatures in one strike for cheap. Not only not overpowered, but more specialized in use.
-
Zanz, The Creator. That's who Zanz is. He says no insta-kill cards. If you look on the forums or go on chat and talk to him, he'll say no insta-kill cards. Besides, Have you ever tried to Antimatter an Antimattered card? But he won't make a card that will kill any creature unless it takes the creature's hp into account.
-
Yeah, you can reverse antimatter with a second one, so what? That just makes it more powerful, not less.
I suppose the elemental chat, rather then the kongregate one. Is zanz on there much?
Anyway, this idea is in no way shape or form OP compared to many other cards currently in the game that are much more effective then this one would be. If Zanz wishes to turn down this basic good idea on the irrational bases (and without reason) you gave, that's his business, he doesn't need you speaking to that. If HP really needs to be taken into account, maybe 20 HP lost, or immortal status, upgraded doing 30. (or insert what ever numbers, without making the card suck too much)
-
insta kill will NEVER BE ALLOWED IN GAME. PERIOD.
http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,5508.0.html
-
Yeah, you can reverse antimatter with a second one, so what? That just makes it more powerful, not less.
I suppose the elemental chat, rather then the kongregate one. Is zanz on there much?
Anyway, this idea is in no way shape or form OP compared to many other cards currently in the game that are much more effective then this one would be. If Zanz wishes to turn down this basic good idea on the irrational bases (and without reason) you gave, that's his business, he doesn't need you speaking to that. If HP really needs to be taken into account, maybe 20 HP lost, or immortal status, upgraded doing 30. (or insert what ever numbers, without making the card suck too much)
Nope, giving antimatter a weakness to himself is not making it more powerful in any way. Weakness doesn't add power. Also antimatter doesn't prevents the creatures from using its ability like insta-kill does.
How can you not know about zans???? zans is the GOD of elements.
Your basic idea have been done many many times before, so what makes you think this card is gonna succeed?
Besides that, instant kills adds too much to death synergy (and more if its mono death) also makes hp of creatures use less making only valuable creatures with high attack. You are the one being irrational for not thinking of the consequences insta-kill has in this game.
Of course Slay/death is OP. This card can make UP decks that win by consistency and not by power and/or vice versa, thus making only successful control decks with Slay/death. This has been proofed in games like magic, yugioh, and many other non famous card games.
-
this is the worst card idea of all time. it should be stickied, locked and renamed "do not make a card like this, under any circumstances, ever."
-
Zanz, The Creator. That's who Zanz is. He says no insta-kill cards. If you look on the forums or go on chat and talk to him, he'll say no insta-kill cards. Besides, Have you ever tried to Antimatter an Antimattered card? But he won't make a card that will kill any creature unless it takes the creature's hp into account.
Or other special reasons like Shockwave which requires a creature to be frozen to insta-kill.
-
Nope, giving antimatter a weakness to himself is not making it more powerful in any way. Weakness doesn't add power. Also antimatter doesn't prevents the creatures from using its ability like insta-kill does.
The antidote for a card, being the card itself makes the card more valuable, thus more powerful. The more important and useful a card is for winning, whether to use on a opponent, or counter something a opponent does, or even more- both, the more POWERFUL it is. Useful and effective for winning = Powerful
Creatures usually have a good ability, or lots of attack, not both.
On a creature with no ability Antimatter basically kills the creature for the opponent, and gives it to you. Its damage is subtracted from them, and given to you.(ok, healing, not damage, but it amounts to the same) Antimatter on a card with no ability is TWICE as effective as simply killing the creature would be. And on a purple nymph can be used over and over for a affordable price.
On a creature with no attack, or very little attack, but a good ability, antimatter wouldn't be very effective, but that is what lobotomizing is for. Lobotomize on these creatures effectively kills it, and there is no way to fix it, other then to sabotage your drawing by putting in back on your deck and respending all that energy again. Lobotomize is more effective then slay would be because lobotomize is cheaper, and a ability on a number of cards that can be used multiple times. Another solution to such cards is direct damage spells to simply kill them because such cards do not usually have much HP.
So that leaves voodoo dolls and perhaps 1 or 2 other cards I am not thinking of right now.
There is already-
Explosion: Destroy any permanent (this Slay card, except for the non creatures) for extremely cheap (1),
Steal: Which is an explosion that also boosts you- the antimatter of explosion.
Earthquake: that will destroy up to three pillers/pendulums (card kill that hits 3),
Poseidon: Earth quake that can be used over and over for cheap.
Many direct damage spells that can be used for the low HP stuff. (and with time, high HP ones)
The stuff that can Lobotomize & Antimatter: which I already covered.
Face it, many shades of this idea are already in the game!(but more powerful then this idea)
For that matter, most dragons cost alot of energy, yet have very little HP in comparison to keep them alive, not unreasonable targets for any cheap direct damage spell, especially fire's.
Anyway, put in X damage then like I said earlier.
How about this then- does 4-5 damage for every 10 death quantum you have but only on creatures, a fire Lance that doesn't work on players. I still see no reason it can't potentially strip immortality too. Maybe if you have say 60 or more death quantum when casting it can do that instead of damage.
-
that aint a bad idea actually...a death lance that does 4 damage/10 quanta but can target only creatures. not exactly death's element though...
-
It causes death- thus the death theme. I would say 5 damage a quanta though, since life drain gives a effective bonus of 4 hp on both sides per 10 quanta and this would be more limited then life drain.
Don't forget the idea of possibly stripping of immortality with enough death quanta, lets say 60.
-
damage only to creatures - at first i thought this may be interesting, but death already has poisons that can be applied to creatures.
you cannot target an immaterial creature to remove immaterial from it. that is how it is coded in the game itself
-
Surely when the spell is triggered it would make a point to check for immaterial and negotiate with that code. Or whatever, I'm no coder, are you? I doubt its deeply implemented in core code where a total remake would be required, or something, though.
You guys have all made very good cases in how there are so many OP cards in this game though. Maybe that should be fixed. Or at least not have people make capital cases out of someone suggesting something much weaker.
Death has poison which can be applied to creatures
So what? Poison is slower. Death can't have a option to kill faster then say fire or dark or multitudes of other spells in other elements? I find that death having poison means it shouldn't have something quicker, to be silly.
-
i actually do write code for a living, in a different language than is what is used here, tho. the point remains something that is untargetable is untargetable. you cannot target that which you cannot target. being able to target something which cannot be targeted defeats the purpose of that thing being untargetable. if you were to have a passive effect on a shield, such as frost shield, which would remove immortal status from attackers, that would be more in line. but that would be such a powerful effect (especially in an element which contains creature control/killing abilities) that it wouldnt be reasonable for it to do much other than that effect.
there are OP cards in the game, there are people making cases against them. cards have been nerfed in the past. this does not give reason to let future bad card concepts into the game
-
I would say that the immortal/immaterial status itself is OP,(and especially the ability to put it on any unit, over and over for a affordable price) there is only one way to kill em, the life poison shield (which takes time) and no way to deal with their immortal status. Plus to counter that, one can destroy or steal the shield without much effort/cost. Yet the owner can target their own immortal creatures to trigger their abilities. Its even worse that immortal even protects the creature from field effects that don't specifically target them.
So if this spell had the ability to remove immortal status with enough saved death energy, I would say it would be just the minor nerf immaterial/immortal status needs, rather then being overpowered itself. (I would say it needs other nerfs too, like no card should be able to grant it as a ability, or at least not for anything less then a large amount of quantum[10? 20?])
Actually, the whole slay idea here was in part a inspiration along the way of thinking up ways of nerfing other OP stuff like immortal status a bit.
Remember, its either remove immortal status (if enough death saved up), OR do damage if no immortal status, and it being a single target spell and not a repeatable ability, this would be limited. (plus one can make a creature immortal again if striped of it but not killed)
-
you seem to have alot of problems with the game of elements. perhaps you should stop playing.
also, you are forgetting a few things, 1) fire shield and 2) damage from immaterial creatures can be blocked 3) using an ability is not the same as targeting, targeting occurs after an effect has been triggered (using an ability or casting a spell), not before.
-
Isn't Parasite/Virus/Aflotoxin enough CC?
-
Damage from immaterial creatures can be blocked in a limited way, like any other creature. But they can still use what ever ability without constraint. Also if a unit has no attack, then even those two shields won't matter.
Hell, one could use antimatter on a enemy vampiric creature without growth ability (or give it vamperic if its HP is high enough) then make immaterial and there isn't anything at all your foe could do about it (aside from chimera, which not everyone has in their deck, and the negative attack carries over and abilities are lost, and this spell, slay)
You could basically own the enemies creature, it could be doing boatloads of healing for you and damage to your enemy, and it would be untouchable aside from one spell and totally unblockable. And it would be even more effective with more HP on the enemy creature because liquid shadows would allow it to last longer. One caveat would be if you can sacrifice immaterial units, which would make it slightly more touchable.(can you?)
You are targeting your creature to use its ability, aside from the semantics of that, a untouchable by enemy, creature (lets say opponent doesn't have the fire or poison shield) with a great repeatably usable ability contributes to the OP of immaterial. Especially as immaterial is trait grantable by ability an unlimited number of times for affordable quantum.
@Napalm What is CC short for?
-
Isn't Parasite/Virus/Aflotoxin enough CC?
Let us not forget Plague while we're at it ;).
CC= Creature Control
-
Are you forgetting those are all slow ways of killing creatures? Plus none of which can target immaterial. It doesn't matter how many ways death has to poison, its death, it should specialize in in causing death- "CC".
As long as this spell is useful enough to be used, its alright if there are other options too, as long as their isn't a direct overlap, and there isn't. Those other spells have other stuff with them, reasons to use them instead depending on what your trying to do, and whether you specialize in death, or are rainbow.
-
The antidote for a card, being the card itself makes the card more valuable, thus more powerful. The more important and useful a card is for winning, whether to use on a opponent, or counter something a opponent does, or even more- both, the more POWERFUL it is. Useful and effective for winning = Powerful
WROOOOOONG. Valuable has never been synonym for powerful, and never will. Just because I can undo what the opponent has done with the same card doesn't mean it is more powerful. It is indeed more valuable than if negative attack couldn't be reversed, but only for counter reasons not for strategic reasons.
Creatures usually have a good ability, or lots of attack, not both.
On a creature with no ability Antimatter basically kills the creature for the opponent, and gives it to you. Its damage is subtracted from them, and given to you.(ok, healing, not damage, but it amounts to the same) Antimatter on a card with no ability is TWICE as effective as simply killing the creature would be. And on a purple nymph can be used over and over for a affordable price.
On a creature with no attack, or very little attack, but a good ability, antimatter wouldn't be very effective, but that is what lobotomizing is for. Lobotomize on these creatures effectively kills it, and there is no way to fix it, other then to sabotage your drawing by putting in back on your deck and respending all that energy again. Lobotomize is more effective then slay would be because lobotomize is cheaper, and a ability on a number of cards that can be used multiple times. Another solution to such cards is direct damage spells to simply kill them because such cards do not usually have much HP.
You are making my point just more clear. Slay/death would be a mix of antimatter + lobotomize, isn't that OP? If there is a card like Slay/death then why am I in other symbol than that of Slay/death? Useless creatures such as antimattered creatures, lobotomized creatures, or both could even be used for cremation, gravity pull, otyugh, scarab, mutation, butterfly effect, aflatoxin, reverse time, nightmare, fractal, and maybe for new developed cards. Also it would make chimera the worst card ever.
There is already-
Explosion: Destroy any permanent (this Slay card, except for the non creatures) for extremely cheap (1),
Steal: Which is an explosion that also boosts you- the antimatter of explosion.
Earthquake: that will destroy up to three pillers/pendulums (card kill that hits 3),
Poseidon: Earth quake that can be used over and over for cheap.
Dude this is totally acceptable. This has nothing to do with creatures. Almost every time creatures win games, not spells and permanent. You cannot win a game without damage or deck out. Sure this could prevent creatures, but so what? They don't take out creatures as easily as slay/death. Doesn't this makes the game more interesting?
@moomoose there is only 1 worst idea http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,12697.0.html (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,12697.0.html)
Edit: added more comment
-
:death feeds and grows with each death. It should not get strong & fast creature control. That is why poison is the perfect creature control for :death.
-
:death feeds and grows with each death. It should not get strong & fast creature control. That is why poison is the perfect creature control for :death.
OMG so very true.Also most of this talk about Slay/Death is moot any way. So let him post this in a link for Crucible.
As he is not going to listen to anyone that Zans had vetoed any insta-kill cards that does not take into account the creatures status or HP. It's not up to any of us weather or not we think a insta-kill card is good or bad, balanced or unbalanceing, or anything else about it. If it does not take anything on a creature card into account then even if this wins all the way to the armory it'll still never become a card. I for one would rather talk about cards that have some hope of making it into the game.
-
Just because I can undo what the opponent has done with the same card doesn't mean it is more powerful.
Lets say there was a card that poisoned your foe and all his/her critters for 30 for 1 death quanta, that would be pretty powerful/valuable, right?
Now lets say that same card could also be used to remove 30 poison from you and all your creatures. Would the fact that the card can reverse the effects of itself make itself more or less powerful/valuable? I don't expect a answer, since the answer is obvious.
Valuable has never been synonym for powerful, and never will.
Of course their synonyms, for you to claim otherwise is asinine.
Powerful means it contributes to your chances of winning.
Valuable means it contributes to your chances of winning. (unless your speaking in the rarity context, and I am not)
They both mean the same thing!
FYI :
Reverse Time and eternity both effectively kill creatures AND slow down a opponents deck, more powerful then this card could ever hope to be. And they very effectively destroy a chimera, yet haven't made chimera useless.
Slay/death would be a mix of antimatter + lobotomize
First I would note that I revised it.
Second, even with the original version, its a weaker then both antimatter and lobotomize. While it might do the job of both, it wouldn't do them nearly as well (antimatter effectively doubly kills units without abilities plus some, and lobotomize is a affordable repeatable)
Now I could edit my original post with the revisions, but it would make the replies confusing, and some may reply based on replies, so I will make a new thread with the revisions and start fresh.
-
Just because I can undo what the opponent has done with the same card doesn't mean it is more powerful.
Lets say there was a card that poisoned your foe and all his/her critters for 30 for 1 death quanta, that would be pretty powerful/valuable, right?
Now lets say that same card could also be used to remove 30 poison from you and all your creatures. Would the fact that the card can reverse the effects of itself make itself more or less powerful/valuable? I don't expect a answer, since the answer is obvious.
The answer is obvious. You are mixing 2 concepts, similar but different. Powerful and valuable, and they are not the same. Powerful is for an exaggerated effect or attributes. Valuable is for flexibility. Antimatter may be powerful but not as powerful as yours is. Giving antimatter a weakness makes it less powerful, but being weak to itself makes it more flexible. Flexibility gives power to a card but in other aspects of the game, not pumping its effect.
Valuable has never been synonym for powerful, and never will.
Of course their synonyms, for you to claim otherwise is asinine.
Powerful means it contributes to your chances of winning.
Valuable means it contributes to your chances of winning. (unless your speaking in the rarity context, and I am not)
They both mean the same thing!
Obviously powerful and flexible contribute to winning but that doesn't make them the same. Just because an apple is red does not makes it a cherry. Your comparison is asinine.
FYI :
Reverse Time and eternity both effectively kill creatures AND slow down a opponents deck, more powerful then this card could ever hope to be. And they very effectively destroy a chimera, yet haven't made chimera useless.
Reverse time only effectively kills pumped creatures such as chimera, pumped lava golem, pumped otyugh, etc. It slows down the opponent but doesn't takes out a creature he/she can use, unless reverse time effect is exploited which doesn't happens all the time. That doesn't make it more powerful than yours. And yes, reverse time is the specific reason I don't like chimera, unless it is immaterial.
Slay/death would be a mix of antimatter + lobotomize
First I would note that I revised it.
Second, even with the original version, its a weaker then both antimatter and lobotomize. While it might do the job of both, it wouldn't do them nearly as well (antimatter effectively doubly kills units without abilities plus some, and lobotomize is a affordable repeatable)
Antimatter only kills effectively high attack creatures without immaterial, lobotomize only kills effectively creature abilities without immaterial, yours effectively kills ANY creature without immaterial. Yup, yours still more powerful+flexible.
I'm very happy you made a new version. It has my approval (even if it doesn't means anything).
-
Powerful is for an exaggerated effect or attributes.
Causing something that is damaging you and healing a foe, to damage the foe and heal you, is a very large effect, literally at least twice that of killing it. Its steal for creatures, destroying the creature on the opponents side, and putting it on your side, except it doesn't do that, so is immune to shields too. Something with 13 damage, would have the effective of 26 HP difference each turn when using antimatter on it.
Using antimatter, on a antimattered creature, has that same large effect, its still the difference of 26 HP each turn. Using antimatter to reverse antimatter is a exaggerated effect as well.
Reverse time only effectively kills pumped creatures such as chimera, pumped lava golem, pumped otyugh, etc. It slows down the opponent but doesn't takes out a creature he/she can use,
If someone kills a creature, it costs a opponent the mana cost of the creature, it costs a card, and any effects on the creature. One can place down a new creature to replace it, even a identical one, but those costs are not directly recoverable.
Reverse time has exactly the same costs on the player it's used against. Except it means that the next card drawn is the creature killed, rather then another random card you might need. (like a piller for energy needed to place a creature again, or a shield to save you from a row of attacking creatures)
So the difference between killing a creature, and rewinding it, is minor at best.
Antimatter only kills effectively high attack creatures without immaterial, lobotomize only kills effectively creature abilities without immaterial, yours effectively kills ANY creature without immaterial. Yup, yours still more powerful+flexible.
A card to kill any creature is more flexible, but notably less powerful then antimatter and lobotomy. Yes it can do both, but does so much less. Antimatter has twice the effect, and lobotomize has affordable repeatability. Antimatter even has affordable repeatability on a nymph.
I'm very happy you made a new version. It has my approval (even if it doesn't means anything).
You might consider putting your approval there, it would be more likely to mean something there.