(http://i.imgur.com/tWRIi.png) | (http://i.imgur.com/2Jrra.png) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
I like how you fitted the art to the theme. Though I somewhat question if it really deserves a -3 cost for the upgrade, though it seems that it's to make it more alike to Minor Phoenix.If the unupped is balanced, the upped is also balanced due to the upgrade bonus. (+2)
also factor in the mono vs duo for the horned frog portion, which is not to be tossed out. monos are notably easier to pull off than duos. and the percents are a bit off because each proc is independent, so it isnt simply additive, there will be a 27/64 chance that at least one thunderstorm will be cast when using adrenaline, and a 37/64 chance that none of the attacks will proc a thunderstorm. It's a little less than a 50% chance when fleshed out, but there are also chances for 2 or 3 strikes that turn as well, albeit much lower percents. (link for probability related math: http://www.edcollins.com/backgammon/diceprob.htm )I did the duo -> mono conversion (the +1 cost from 5 :air 4 :life to 10 :air)
as far as the mummy goes, that's a more straightforward comparison, but you may have made a typo with
"So +1 cost, - Mummy, 3->2hp = 0.75 Thunderstorms per turn?" -> "So +1 cost, - Mummy, 3->2hp = 0.25 Thunderstorms per turn?"?
and yeah, i think 1 cost for a 25% chance to proc a single 1 aoe damage is worth about right. keeping in mind something such as a plague would proc 1 damage aoe to all creatures each turn for 2 (be it from the retrovirus or the spell itself)
ah, i see what you meant, average procs per turn rather than chance that at least one will proc on a given turn. my math came up with ~.7 using your formula, but may have miscounted at some point in the binary tree.1 way out of 8 to get 0 + 3 ways out of 8 to get 1 + 3 ways out of 8 to get 2 + 1 way out of 8 to get 3