Cascade | Waterfall

[OldTrees]

Why would it be overpowered to allow it to target non water creatures?

Are non water monsters better than water monsters? No.
Are Water Trios less deserving of Waterfall than Duos? Yes, but not by a large enough margin.
Are Rainbows a problem? Yes.
Is this card cheap for non Gravitybows? No.
Do gravitybows deserve Waterfall as much as Water/Gravity Duos? Yes, but not by a large enough margin.

Why do you think that it can be balanced if water creatures only and not balanced if it was any creature? It is momentum on a stick either way.

Maybe make it any non fire creature if you fear momentumed lava golems in rainbows so much.

[karis]

make sense about non fire creature,  oldtrees   

btw..  moomoose.   if you wanna change it to kill target creature in the end of turn.   i'm must ask you 'can this thing target your opponent creature?' 

[moomoose]

my response is simple: this card is for gravity water synergy, not for unlimited momentums for any element's creatures.  the limiting of applications of the card lowers its value, reducing its overall power.

[OldTrees]

my response is simple: this card is for gravity water synergy, not for unlimited momentums for any element's creatures.  the limiting of applications of the card lowers its value, reducing its overall power.

No it reduces its versatility which reduces its value. Its power stays the same.
Power x Versatility = Value
I understand that you want this to be a gravity water synergy. The point is that it will still be a gravity water synergy even if it can target gravity creatures.

Also it is bad design to create a card that only works in 1 deck. Even Hope works fine in multiple deck types.


This is my last response on the subject. I do not want to badger you into changing your mind. I do hope my reasoning seems logical to you though. I see great potential for this card promoting gravity water ?? trio decks if the restriction is removed. Or even gravity water duo decks. As it stands only mono water decks that splash a gravity mark will be promoted with this card.

[moomoose]

wont be widening the reach of the card (if you were to only argue to expand it to gravity, that would be one thing, but to everything is a really boring/bad idea), too many potential applications which would be beyond the scope of the card.

not to mention there was already a momentom on a stick card without elemental restrictions that failed to progress through voting.

the limitation is what makes the card interesting, without it i may as well just call it "shields why bother?"

and i disagree with the "only water with a splash of gravity will be effective with this card" remark.  a duo deck using flood (top/bottom control), otys (middle control), gravity shield (that which cannot be eaten), puffer fish(or)crawlers(or) dragons (offense to be momentum'd) and this card would be an even split between the two.

[AnonymousRevival]

Okay, I'm confused, since when are we talking about shields?

[moomoose]

think about it for a day or two and get back to me.  if you still dont understand i will spell it out for you.

[willng3]

I like this card just the way it is.  Making it so that the Momentum effect could be used on a much larger group of creatures would be the same as allowing Steam Machine to run off of all quanta sources except ; not only would it ruin the creative synergy built into the card, the card itself also becomes much too powerful.  Playing so much as 2 of these and allowing them to affect any creature you wish would cause the purpose of shields to be much less useful than they currently are.  I see no modifications that need to be made.

[xBerzerk]

Okay, I'm confused, since when are we talking about shields?

Momentum's effect is to bash through shields. Hence, the mentioning of shields in his post. He means to say, if this card applies to all elements, and not just water, shields would be next to useless.

[AnonymousRevival]

Yeah, I got it already, thanks anyways. I was just wondering why there were mentioning of TYPES of shields, not in the general context.

[SnoWeb]

my response is simple: this card is for gravity water synergy, not for unlimited momentums for any element's creatures.  the limiting of applications of the card lowers its value, reducing its overall power.

I agree. Its for duo not for rainbows. Let it be for all creatures and you'll see rainbow fractal scorpion decks for example.
We should have more cards that only apply to a limited number of creatures (like eclipse and flood).

[OldTrees]

my response is simple: this card is for gravity water synergy, not for unlimited momentums for any element's creatures.  the limiting of applications of the card lowers its value, reducing its overall power.

I agree. Its for duo not for rainbows. Let it be for all creatures and you'll see rainbow fractal scorpion decks for example.
We should have more cards that only apply to a limited number of creatures (like eclipse and flood).

This has a good point. I did not consider is as scorpion enabler. (So with the reasonable exclusion of lava golem and the scorions, fire, death, life and time should be unable to use it)

I think now you are right to leave it as just water although I still do not like how the card is limited to 2 types of decks (Water with Gravity dip, Water Gravity) If it could be made trio friendly I would be more happy.


Sorry I said my last response would be my final comment however I felt it only fair to the card to voice that even I had changed my mind.