Timeball | Rewindball

[zamboza]

NAME: Timeball ELEMENT: COST: 5 TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: TEXT: Target creature and creatures around it are put in random order on top of their owner deck.	NAME: Rewindball ELEMENT: COST: 4 TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: TEXT: Target creature and creatures around it are put in random order on top of their owner deck.

ART: zamboza IDEA: zamboza NOTES: SERIES: Area Effect series (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,17635.0.html)

[EvaRia]

This needs to cost WAY more, up to 7 Reverse Times in one is extremely powerful and can mess with someone's strategy immensely.

[zamboza]

This needs to cost WAY more, up to 7 Reverse Times in one is extremely powerful and can mess with someone's strategy immensely.

Remember it's situational. 7 creatures can only be in fractals (and aflatoxin decks), e.g. RoL/Hope, which is not so popular and even if you reverse time Drags your opponent would have quanta to summon them, and RoL's are free.

[ArtCrusade]

One card with the ability to rewind 7 creatures equals

14 (7 Reverse Times) + 8 (card advantage) = 22

We can decrease the cost a little, because it is situational, to something like 18 (unupgraded) and 16 (upgraded). 5 is so cheap it's almost ridiculous..

[zamboza]

Wow, it's REALLY OP. So what would fit in area effect from  ?

[joebob777]

change it to
Target creature and creatures around it have a 25% chance of being put in a random order on the owners deck.
only way i can think of saving it

[XYTWO]

I think it would be better as an area stun instead of multiple RTs in one. By the way, nice art, but it doesn't look like a ball. I would call it Reverse Blast and keep the art.

[AnonymousRevival]

Rewindball seems a little weird for a name. How about Chronoball?

[Ekki]

huh, don't like the idea of getting rid of up to 7 cards on the opponent's side and blocking 7 draws at all (even if they're only 3 cards).
Maybe splash isn't a good idea to fit time, just that 

Anyways, I personally don't like the idea of "splashing" spells, IDK why...

[Memorystick]

I must agree that, as-is, this is rather overpowered. If you really want a splash-type spell, I would go with rewinding target and up to two adjacent creatures, delaying target creature for X turns and up to Y adjacent creatures for (X-1) turns, or delaying target and up to Y adjacent creatures for X turns (please note that X and Y are stand-ins for a determined number, not part of a formula) Alternatively, you could also have it rewind 3 random creatures, or delay several random creatures for X turns. (The reason I chose 3 for rewinding is that's approximately the quanta cost you'd pay for 3 rewinds, being a little cheaper for the unupped but more expensive for the upped)

Rewind 3 (targeted): 3 reverse times = 6 + 1 or 2 for card advantage = 7-8 unupped, 5-6 upped (-2 upped bonus)Delay Y (splash less effective, targeted): Y Basilisk Blood= 2Y for +0|+20 and 6 delay for Y creatures, since this would be less effective and less versatile (can't buff creatures like armagio or voodoo) I'd place it at around 2Y-2 unupped and 2Y-4 upped*Delay Y (splash same effect, targeted): same thought process as above, except 2Y -1 unupped and 2Y-3 upped (due to being slightly more effective*)Rewind 3 (random): 3 reverse time = 6 + 1 or 2 for card advantage - 1 for randomness = 6-7 unupped, 4-5 uppedDelay Y (random): Y Basilisk Blood =2Y for +0|+20 and 6 delay for Y creatures, 2Y - 2 (see delay Y (splash less effective, targeted) - 1 (for randomness), giving 2Y-3 unupped and 2Y-5 upped*

*Assuming Y is at least 3 and delay is less than 6