Scorpion Alliance | Scorpion Alliance

[EmeraldTiger]

please put the art i gave you in it

[Rutarete]

please put the art i gave you in it

there we go! thanks very much

[EmeraldTiger]

Now i think it is ready.

Except I don't think the word Other is needed in the cost.

[Rutarete]

Now i think it is ready.

Except I don't think the word Other is needed in the cost.

i changed it

[xBerzerk]

*Art by EmeraldTiger. (Add "Art by")
*Instead of saying "none" in any of the forms, simply leave them blank.
*Under IDEA: put "smuglapse". Remove "original idea by".
*Under ART: put "EmeraldTiger". Remove "new awesome art by".
Also, card art isn't absolutely necessary for Crucible submission.

I'm not a Card Curator, nor am I even staff on these forums, but from what I've seen, the above corrections should at least get you into the Crucible.

Also, this is just my two cents on the card: It's too costly. I think the costs should be 4(un) and 5(up), but that's just me. Simply because Scorpion decks are generally low-cost and it's a very conditional card. Also, I suggest you state whether the effect stacks or not in the NOTES section of the tables. Otherwise, great card.

[OldTrees]

Remember that  is 3x easier to aquire than non quanta. This card costs the equivalent of 2.33 Elemental quanta.

[Rutarete]

*Art by EmeraldTiger. (Add "Art by")
*Instead of saying "none" in any of the forms, simply leave them blank.
*Under IDEA: put "smuglapse". Remove "original idea by".
*Under ART: put "EmeraldTiger". Remove "new awesome art by".
Also, card art isn't absolutely necessary for Crucible submission.

I'm not a Card Curator, nor am I even staff on these forums, but from what I've seen, the above corrections should at least get you into the Crucible.

Also, this is just my two cents on the card: It's too costly. I think the costs should be 4(un) and 5(up), but that's just me. Simply because Scorpion decks are generally low-cost and it's a very conditional card. Also, I suggest you state whether the effect stacks or not in the NOTES section of the tables. Otherwise, great card.

thanks for the curator like suggestions
i will change the cost if at least 3 people find a new general range or specific number and, of course, convince me to change it. i think 4 would make it too good. my original cost range was 5-7.

[Rutarete]

Remember that  is 3x easier to aquire than non quanta. This card costs the equivalent of 2.33 Elemental quanta.

so are you saying that it's cheap (in cost)?

[OldTrees]

Remember that  is 3x easier to aquire than non quanta. This card costs the equivalent of 2.33 Elemental quanta.

so are you saying that it's cheap (in cost)?

Yes. I am saying it is cheap (in cost). However it is important to note that I did not say if it was undercosted, overcosted or balanced.

[Rutarete]

Remember that  is 3x easier to aquire than non quanta. This card costs the equivalent of 2.33 Elemental quanta.

so are you saying that it's cheap (in cost)?

Yes. I am saying it is cheap (in cost). However it is important to note that I did not say if it was undercosted, overcosted or balanced.

would you like to say which of those three (you think) it is?
criticism is welcome

[OldTrees]

My intuition tells me that it is too cheap but my intuition is not very reliable.

[Rutarete]

My intuition tells me that it is too cheap but my intuition is not very reliable.

really? i get the feeling from your posts on the forums that i've seen that you've been playing elements or at least been active in the forums for at least twce as long as i have. so i think your intuition should be more trusted than not. or is biased-ness a factor?