(http://i606.photobucket.com/albums/tt146/chaitori/stopwatch5.png) | (http://i606.photobucket.com/albums/tt146/chaitori/stopwatch6.png) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Very clever. Fun with Vanadium Warden as well, which would activate this twice (once because it delays itself and once because it delays the opponent's creature.) :earth / :time / :aether trios FTW!Thanks. Adding Vanadium Warden to the notes.
I quite like this one. Why does silence count though?Because it delays the elemental himself :)
I like the :aether producing part though...Really?
It seems expensive for a situational quanta producer. Usually you want alternative quanta production to be quanta acceleration: i.e. happen fast, or grant you different kinds of quanta for one card (without conditions though). As this needs to fulfil a condition to do anything at all, and won't generally be something you choose to play first if you're low on quanta due to the fact that you probably have other threats to deal with first, this would probably need to cost 2->1 to even approach being competitive.Considering how common Delay mechanics are used in game (especially permafrost), the opponent will half the time fulfill the condition for you at least half the time.
This is quite an entertaining idea, but I'm not sure it'd get much use, because by the time you get enough quanta to consistently delay the enemy's creatures, you might not need the quanta produced by this card. I do see some uses, but my problem is with eventual efficiency.If you want consistent delay with this card, add Silence, Dim. Shield or Turtle Shield, etc. Unless It's in the Arena at an FG level or just plainly mid-late game, I don't think you'd be able to use it consistently much. But don't forget that those 3 turns of delay save you the time to use the next one.
I second making this card cost 1 or even 0 quanta.Soul Catcher is a good example for comparison. By 'maffs' do you mean 'Wall of math text'?
I have basically no knowledge, thoughtful insight, or maffs to dazzle you with. But an example: Soulcatcher is a 0 quanta cost card that generates :death :death quanta whenever a creature dies. Stopwatch generates :aether :time whenever something is delayed.
In both instances, there is a net gain of 2 quanta in return for fulfilling a condition of some sort.
....Soooo why not make the card cost 0? Seems more than fair to me, and honestly I doubt I'd want to use this card when it has such a relatively high price and (imo) little use.
While it does warrant +cost for being a duo, that gets balanced by the fact that it's more situational than Soul Catcher (which can run pure mono and works with more cards) and that it forces a duo to be fully effective. I'd recommend changing the cost to 1 :time | 1 :rainbow .I second making this card cost 1 or even 0 quanta.Soul Catcher is a good example for comparison. By 'maffs' do you mean 'Wall of math text'?
I have basically no knowledge, thoughtful insight, or maffs to dazzle you with. But an example: Soulcatcher is a 0 quanta cost card that generates :death :death quanta whenever a creature dies. Stopwatch generates :aether :time whenever something is delayed.
In both instances, there is a net gain of 2 quanta in return for fulfilling a condition of some sort.
....Soooo why not make the card cost 0? Seems more than fair to me, and honestly I doubt I'd want to use this card when it has such a relatively high price and (imo) little use.
Stopwatch produces a duo-output. Soul Catcher produces a mono-output. Doesn't the duo warrant +cost? Also, if the unupped cost 0, what change would you make for the upgraded? The same as Soul Catcher?