Critical Mass | Critical Mass

[RagingAlien]

Well, this seems the perfect card to counter Fire. rather Interesting, but at first confusing. i was thinking of a 25 damage armagio. since i can't see the image (DAMN YOU IMAGESHACK!) i don't know if there's any way to fix the text and make it fit.

[johannhowitzer]

Except that Fire gets Deflagration, the perfect shield killer. 

The keyword in the card text is "limited."  An Armagio whose attack is limited to its 25 health wouldn't rise to the occasion... but the attack would never go over 25.

[RagingAlien]

hmmm... i do like it. Kinda OP though... but it's made to be a rare, the way i see it.

[OldTrees]

hmmm... i do like it. Kinda OP though... but it's made to be a rare, the way i see it.

1) Why do you think it is OP? Please refer to my dissection earlier for stats.

Average DR across all creature (unupped and upgraded) = 1.28 DR.
Across a selection that I thought were used as common attackers the DR increased to 2.10 DR. (this was a diverse sampling not just the best creatures used in rush decks)
The expected result matches the cost (as seen by Titanium Shield)

2) Rarity is not an excuse ever for anything(except marketing). Please remember this.

[cometbah]

I would vote for this should it moves up =)

The statistics are sound and imply balance. Gravity also needs the extra in its selection of shields =9 (or shield at the moment)

[Essence]

This is good.  I support this card.  Not only is it a clever idea for a shield, but Critical Mass is also the name of one of Sir Mix-A-Lot's backup rappers, and thus I have to support anything with his name on it.  If someone makes a card called Attitude Adjuster, I'll throw in for that one, too.

[Anarook]

Honestly, I love the idea of this card, but
Frankly, this is highly partial to fire in which the majority of its creatures have attacks considerably higher than their HP.
I also understand that fire and gravity are near opposites stat wise, fire is high attack low HP while gravity is the opposite.
And I understand the deflag arguement, but would it honestly be that hard to sneak a Protect Artificat?
Love the idea, but personally can't support it.

[OldTrees]

Honestly, I love the idea of this card, but
Frankly, this is highly partial to fire in which the majority of its creatures have attacks considerably higher than their HP.
I also understand that fire and gravity are near opposites stat wise, fire is high attack low HP while gravity is the opposite.
And I understand the deflag arguement, but would it honestly be that hard to sneak a Protect Artificat?
Love the idea, but personally can't support it.

You do not like it because it has a much large impact on Fire than on any other element?
Critical Mass hurts most offensive creatures. However Fire has one of the 3 creatures that can gain attack and HP in equal measure.
Sneaking in a Protect Artifact would require changing the mark or worse thus having a higher cost.
In conclusion: You are right that Deflag can be countered by Protect Artifact for a slightly greater cost however, Fire is not crippled by critical mass it is just weakened similar to the effects of Skull Shield or fire Shield has on Fire creatures.

Did I cover why you couldn't support it? If so, what is your response. If not, what did I miss?

[Anarook]

Honestly, I love the idea of this card, but
Frankly, this is highly partial to fire in which the majority of its creatures have attacks considerably higher than their HP.I also understand that fire and gravity are near opposites stat wise, fire is high attack low HP while gravity is the opposite.
And I understand the deflag arguement, but would it honestly be that hard to sneak a Protect Artificat?
Love the idea, but personally can't support it.

It's not that I "don't like the idea"
It's that I don't think it should lean so far against fire(and any offensive creature).
Would you think it right if this card worked the other way? Limiting HP to be no higher than attack?  Then it would be partial against gravity.

[OldTrees]

Honestly, I love the idea of this card, but
Frankly, this is highly partial to fire in which the majority of its creatures have attacks considerably higher than their HP.I also understand that fire and gravity are near opposites stat wise, fire is high attack low HP while gravity is the opposite.
And I understand the deflag arguement, but would it honestly be that hard to sneak a Protect Artificat?
Love the idea, but personally can't support it.

It's not that I "don't like the idea"
It's that I don't think it should lean so far against fire(and any offensive creature).
Would you think it right if this card worked the other way? Limiting HP to be no higher than attack?  Then it would be partial against gravity.

I think you are remembering Gravity Shield. (ok not exactly)
Critical Mass affects High Attack/Low Hp creatures
Gravity Shield affects High HP creatures
CC shields affect Low HP creatures
DR shields affect Low Attack creatures
Are we missing any?

[astraldragoon]

This is good.  I support this card.  Not only is it a clever idea for a shield, but Critical Mass is also the name of one of Sir Mix-A-Lot's backup rappers, and thus I have to support anything with his name on it.  If someone makes a card called Attitude Adjuster, I'll throw in for that one, too.

not a bad idea

[unknown89089]

If you destroy the Permanent, would Ruby Dragons continue pummeling you with 2's or will it smash you with 12's?