Phalanx | Phalanx

[Chapuz]

The shield part is... why would anyone use this card instead of another copy of your shield?

D'oh, that's actually a really good question. I haven't thought of it like that.

However, I guess using its secondary effect and deck thinning has its benefits over some dead draws, so...

I mean, it's the same. Instead of having N shields I will have N-M shields and M Phalanx. If you draw the Phalanx, you still have to pay the shield you draw with it.
A possible change would be playing the shield automatically, and still has to be a little bit cheaper immo. This way people can play a shield cheaper if they draw Phalanx.

[Pineapple]

The shield part is... why would anyone use this card instead of another copy of your shield?

D'oh, that's actually a really good question. I haven't thought of it like that.

However, I guess using its secondary effect and deck thinning has its benefits over some dead draws, so...

I mean, it's the same. Instead of having N shields I will have N-M shields and M Phalanx. If you draw the Phalanx, you still have to pay the shield you draw with it.
A possible change would be playing the shield automatically, and still has to be a little bit cheaper immo. This way people can play a shield cheaper if they draw Phalanx.

Yeah, if the effect was only drawing a shield. However, you forgot that the effect also doubles the HP of all creatures and thins the deck by drawing a card. Stop thinking about the shield effect as a primary effect and instead think of it as a bonus for doubling everything's HP.

Also, in the case where you would want to draw two specific shields. For example, if you want a Permafrost and an Emerald, and are playing a rainbow or something, then it may be more wise to run 1 Permafrost, 1 Emerald, and 2 Phalanx instead of 2 Permafrost and 2 Emerald.

Needless to say, I'll drop the cost to 3/2 anyways.

[skyironsword]

... I can't believe you considered dropping the cost.

The card is basically a shield, except you get to double everything, like you said.

Doubling everything alone would be strong, not to mention it doesn't really take up a card slot.

[Pineapple]

... I can't believe you considered dropping the cost.

The card is basically a shield, except you get to double everything, like you said.

Doubling everything alone would be strong, not to mention it doesn't really take up a card slot.

The HP boost can be halved if enough people are freaked out about it. You seem to be the only one with me in that respect, though.

On a side note, exactly how much should a card that makes enemy creatures immune to CC while also increasing your creatures' HP cost?

[skyironsword]

Generally, you wouldn't pack CC in combination with this card, nor does gravity have any outstanding CC. Gravity pull halves its effectiveness on enemies, while doubling it on yours.

To be honest, the doubling effect alone would be something like 3|4.

I'm not a very good judge of that though, since of course this would be more effective if the opponent has no creatures.

You should probably ask someone with more experience creating cards.

[OdinVanguard]

Generally, you wouldn't pack CC in combination with this card, nor does gravity have any outstanding CC. Gravity pull halves its effectiveness on enemies, while doubling it on yours.

To be honest, the doubling effect alone would be something like 3|4.

I'm not a very good judge of that though, since of course this would be more effective if the opponent has no creatures.

You should probably ask someone with more experience creating cards.

I'm somewhat inclined to agree here that a small cost bump may be in order. The doubling effect would be very very potent in a railgun deck.
The extra shield part also is quite powerful considering the strong synnergy you would get with Dim. Shield.
So maybe a 1 quanta bump would help a little, but honestly not much more or it will quickly lose its utility.

I would really like to try this card out in an aether-gravity trebu-scav-tal deck. It would get the scavengers up to 10 hp each which is almost exactly where diminishing returns starts for catapult damage scaling. Being able to have it help power the dim-shields makes it just that much more potent. Best of all, the scavies provide quite strong protection against PC decks while becoming highly resistant to CC themselves.
Its a very solid combo... Maybe a little slow, but I'ld love to give it a spin.

[iskelion]

nasty with "Devour" decks

also, phalanx should have an effect like scarab making hp depend on amount of creatures

[Chapuz]

This secondary ability can make catapult otks with very few cards, right? 2 of them are equivalent to 4 PUs. Omg

[Pineapple]

This secondary ability can make catapult otks with very few cards, right? 2 of them are equivalent to 4 PUs. Omg

Catapult's damage doesn't scale linearly; for an OTK deck you need two 100+ HP creatures, three 50+ HP creatures, four 32+ HP creatures, or five 24+ HP creatures. I would use this in a Cata-Titan deck.

also, phalanx should have an effect like scarab making hp depend on amount of creatures

Um. Why?


What if I keep the cost, but decrease the effect to +25% HP, rounded up?

[iskelion]

This secondary ability can make catapult otks with very few cards, right? 2 of them are equivalent to 4 PUs. Omg

Catapult's damage doesn't scale linearly; for an OTK deck you need two 100+ HP creatures, three 50+ HP creatures, four 32+ HP creatures, or five 24+ HP creatures. I would use this in a Cata-Titan deck.

also, phalanx should have an effect like scarab making hp depend on amount of creatures

Um. Why?

do you know what a phalanx is?

What if I keep the cost, but decrease the effect to +25% HP, rounded up?

you could set a number, like, all creatures gain +0/+2 or so, otherwise it would break devour and catapult decks

[Rutarete]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx

[iskelion]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx

exactly, to save people some read [...] any massed infantry formation, regardless of its equipment [...]
in other words, numbers