Card Idea Competition: Opposites attract! Voting starts tomorrow

[Essence]

(http://imageplay.net/) (http://imageplay.net/)

(http://imageplay.net/) (http://imageplay.net/)

Acceleration | Dire Acceleration (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,8511.0.html)
Mind Over Body | Psychometabolism (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,8511.0.html)


A lot of these entries seem to be missing the definition of "synergistic but balanced on their own."  A lot of these are mutually reliant, but that's not the same thing as synergistic, and it's certianly not balanced on their own.  A lot more of these have effects that are related to each other, but not synergistic in terms of 'creating an effect greater than the sum of it's parts'.

I tried to make my cards a perfect example of "synergistic but balanced on their own" -- cards that don't name each other, don't have effects so extreme that the opposing card is necessary to have the first card in play, and that you could totally build decks around without each other...but make an obvious and fairly strong combination if you're willing to build a deck around them.

I hope I succeeded.
(http://) (http://imageplay.net/)

[Zac33333]

(http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,8235.0.html)

(http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,8236.0.html)

Pyrosaur|Elite Pyrosaur (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,8235.0.html)
Hydra|Elite Hydra (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,8236.0.html)


A lot of these entries seem to be missing the definition of "synergistic but balanced on their own."  A lot of these are mutually reliant, but that's not the same thing as synergistic, and it's certianly not balanced on their own.  A lot more of these have effects that are related to each other, but not synergistic in terms of 'creating an effect greater than the sum of it's parts'.

I tried to make my cards a perfect example of "synergistic but balanced on their own" -- cards that don't name each other, don't have effects so extreme that the opposing card is necessary to have the first card in play, and that you could totally build decks around without each other...but make an obvious and fairly strong combination if you're willing to build a deck around them.

I hope I succeeded.

I like it. It makes perfect sense, but seems a bit OP when played with each other. Elite Pyrosaur and Elite hydra together would be annoying together. in 4 turns together they would be 7|3 (Pyrosaur) and 12|15 (Hydra). But its still a great card and great card idea.

So then it becomes

7+6 turn 1
7+8 turn 2
7+10 turn 3
7+12 turn 4
-------
28+36=64 damage in 4 turns
Ouch. That with 2 hydras is K0
:p

[wizelsnarf]

@Kamietsu

When I see your card ideas I always think meh.
But when I look at your Art I'm envious of what you have created.

Keep up the great Art.

lol thanks  , i guess i really need to think up of different card ideas then, i`ll keep at it 

I think the @ Kamietsu was the important part of that post Flayne...

Your art is good too though Flayne! Maybe your ideas are good too if Kael Hate didn't say anything?

Kind of a backhanded compliment anyway if you ask me.

[Purity_Riot]

@Kamietsu

When I see your card ideas I always think meh.
But when I look at your Art I'm envious of what you have created.

Keep up the great Art.

lol thanks  , i guess i really need to think up of different card ideas then, i`ll keep at it 

I think the @ Kamietsu was the important part of that post Flayne...

Your art is good too though Flayne! Maybe your ideas are good too if Kael Hate didn't say anything?

Kind of a backhanded compliment anyway if you ask me.

thanks  but i actually still don't get that @ kamietsu thing

He means the compliment was for the forum member named Kamietsu

[Kael Hate]

@Kamietsu

When I see your card ideas I always think meh.
But when I look at your Art I'm envious of what you have created.

Keep up the great Art.

lol thanks  , i guess i really need to think up of different card ideas then, i`ll keep at it 

The comment was directed at Kamietsu.
 '@' means 'at reference to the following value'  commonly used on receipts and in accounting for multiple dealings. Ie 4 bananas costing $3 each for could be written as 'Banana 4 @ $3'. In this case it was the comment to follow was directed at Kamietsu. Its a common chat/forum shorthand.

Your ideas are slightly better than Kamietsu but your art seems less than his. This is not saying that in anyway the any of the ideas are bad or your art is bad, just that Kamietsu's art is what draws me to look at his cards because I enjoy the quality and thematics it purveys.

[Flayne]

@Kamietsu

When I see your card ideas I always think meh.
But when I look at your Art I'm envious of what you have created.

Keep up the great Art.

lol thanks  , i guess i really need to think up of different card ideas then, i`ll keep at it 

The comment was directed at Kamietsu.
 '@' means 'at reference to the following value'  commonly used on receipts and in accounting for multiple dealings. Ie 4 bananas costing $3 each for could be written as 'Banana 4 @ $3'. In this case it was the comment to follow was directed at Kamietsu. Its a common chat/forum shorthand.

Your ideas are slightly better than Kamietsu but your art seems less than his. This is not saying that in anyway the any of the ideas are bad or your art is bad, just that Kamietsu's art is what draws me to look at his cards because I enjoy the quality and thematics it purveys.

ohh, LOL  ,  whoops sorry about that then  , i guess i should have thought harder about the @ thing, thanks for the honesty though.
not trying to brag or anything but the art in my card ideas are really lazy 10-20 minute pieces that i always create with 'Pixlr'
since i personally don't like to use other images from the web, i don't know about kamietsu, but i believe he takes his time more than i do to create his art which is why the effort in his work is more notable than in mine, probably uses different methods too, his art is really good 

[BurnOne]

elite hydra (6/7) -> rage elixir (+6/-6) -> elite hydra (14/3)

or was it meant "instead of taking damage..."
This creature on a fire buckler would be damn deadly...

btw: Pyrosaur would be too damn op. Just imagine a bonewall/boneyard-combo with one of them two phoenixes inbetween...

[Kael Hate]

Full list.
http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,7668.msg94092.html#msg94092



Is SunnyGreens entry valid? Its not a Pair of cards

[Purity_Riot]

Yes it is valid. The third card is just to demonstrate the effect.

[Essence]

 Pyrosaur would be too damn op. Just imagine a bonewall/boneyard-combo with one of them two phoenixes inbetween...[/quote]


Oh, crap...you're right!  I didn't ever think of Pyrosaur+Phoenix, that makes it's ability actually kind of easy to deal with in a mono-fire deck.   Not cool.

I'll have to come up with a new pair of cards to enter. 

[Purity_Riot]

On  further consideration, the token monster should be removed. Just like how Icy's third card had to be removed, this one should to. It can be found in the thread about the Hydra.

[Kael Hate]

On  further consideration, the token monster should be removed. Just like how Icy's third card had to be removed, this one should to. It can be found in the thread about the Hydra.

That being said is Icy's entry supposed to be Ka & Ba because the Spirit Warrior is a Token Creature?