Unladen Swallow | Unladen Swallow

[davidy22]

YOU PEOPLE ARE NEVER HAPPY.

Raised cost back to 3.

[The_Mormegil]

You might want to consider looking into Old Tree's balancing cost theory before randomizing the attack / cost value again. Also, you need to clarify how the deckout avoidance works in your notes.

[davidy22]

You might want to consider looking into Old Tree's balancing cost theory before randomizing the attack / cost value again. Also, you need to clarify how the deckout avoidance works in your notes.

I have read his post. He assumes a fixed quantifiable value can be assigned to an ability, and tries to apply formulae to find optimal costs for cards. Two issues I have with that are that it is not the single card that determines usefulness, but that card in relation to others. An ability on it's own may be useless, but the card may be suitable for a combo that easily outmatches a brute-force dragon loaded mono deck. Also, I am not randomizing the cost and attack values, I am raising and lowering them according to the movement of the poll.

The deckout avoidance was a trick that I only thought of after I posted this card. I didn't intend for the card to be used to stop deckouts, but I'll add it anyways.

[mildlyfrightenedboy]

YOU PEOPLE ARE NEVER HAPPY.

Raised cost back to 3.

+1.
Also, I think that the extra cost will be enough to balance the deckout counter.  The trouble with finding a cost for this card is that you aren't playing it once, you have the potential to play it a thousand times, so you really don't know how much it is worth.

[Higurashi]

8 is way too high ^^;; This clearly casts a shadow over wyrm if its attack is left at 8..

^
Even with the reversing mechanism, this improves rush decks too much. Besides, a swallow isn't that strong.

[ZephyrPhantom]

Not sure if this was mentioned on the thread already, "returns to your hand if you do not already hold 8 cards." isn't needed since you have to discard a card if you have 8 cards before creatures attack. I also agree with the fact that theme is somewhat off. A swallow sounds like a strength 1-4 creature to me. 8 ATK seems like it's pushing it a bit.

Regarding balance : See Twin-Headed Wyvern | Twin-Headed Wyvern (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,20663.0.html).

Comparing the upped (most similar versions), Twin-Headed Wyvern pays to stay alive each turn, while Swallow pays . Both do 8 DoT if upkeep is payed, ignoring shields or healing.

The difference is that multiple Swallows can prevent each other from going back to the hand (1-8 swallows fly back to max out the hand size, the others just stay there. Wyvern dies if you don't pay, period. It sounds fair, but I have one question : is the ability active or passive? I'm assuming it's passive, but you could make some powerful combos with ability negation like Mitosis and Lobo if it was active.

[mildlyfrightenedboy]

@ Zblader
I already said that, but someone said that it is there if you have more Swallows than open spaces (i.e. 4 swallows versus 6 cards in your hand, you now have 8 cards in your hand - two of which are the swallows - and two swallows on the field).

[davidy22]

8 is way too high ^^;; This clearly casts a shadow over wyrm if its attack is left at 8..

^
Even with the reversing mechanism, this improves rush decks too much.

It requires a 3 quanta upkeep each turn. The cockatrice does 4 damage every turn, without upkeep. Think reusable shockwave that can be blocked by sheilds.

Besides, a swallow isn't that strong

Oh, but it's an unladen swallow.

Not sure if this was mentioned on the thread already, "returns to your hand if you do not already hold 8 cards." isn't needed since you have to discard a card if you have 8 cards before creatures attack. I also agree with the fact that theme is somewhat off. A swallow sounds like a strength 1-4 creature to me. 8 ATK seems like it's pushing it a bit.

Regarding balance : See Twin-Headed Wyvern | Twin-Headed Wyvern (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,20663.0.html).

Comparing the upped (most similar versions), Twin-Headed Wyvern pays to stay alive each turn, while Swallow pays . Both do 8 DoT if upkeep is payed, ignoring shields or healing.

The difference is that multiple Swallows can prevent each other from going back to the hand (1-8 swallows fly back to max out the hand size, the others just stay there. Wyvern dies if you don't pay, period. It sounds fair, but I have one question : is the ability active or passive? I'm assuming it's passive, but you could make some powerful combos with ability negation like Mitosis and Lobo if it was active.

It's not just a swallow. It's an unladen swallow, with razor sharp talons built for cracking beetle shells and caterpillar flesh.

Twin -headed wyvern can we killed with creature control. Unladen swallow needs to be held in place by a full hand.

It's a passive ability.

[Pineapple]

I'd still drop it down to 6, because of its invulnerability aspect compared to other 3 cost creatures. And Air doesn't have the cheapest creatures, you know.

Have you tried 2 cost, 6 attack?

[davidy22]

I'd still drop it down to 6, because of its invulnerability aspect compared to other 3 cost creatures. And Air doesn't have the cheapest creatures, you know.

Have you tried 2 cost, 6 attack?

Added a poll. You indecisive cretins.

[Higurashi]

Changing a card right off the bat and to the most extreme degree because someone has provided feedback makes you the only indecisive and rash one here. x)
2 for 6 would be fine when upped. 2 for 4 unupped. With those stats I'd use it both for bouncing and rushing.

[davidy22]

Changing a card right off the bat and to the most extreme degree because someone has provided feedback makes you the only indecisive and rash one here. x)
2 for 6 would be fine when upped. 2 for 4 unupped. With those stats I'd use it both for bouncing and rushing.

Will make the change when vote count hits 10. Looks like 2 quanta 6 damage though.