Finally found the time to give some input to this!
| Delete | 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 27, 29, 30, 34, 35 |
| Rework | 1, 5, 6, 11, 14, 17, 23, 26, 28, 31, 33, 36, 37, 39 |
| Keep | 4, 25, 32, 38* |
For opinions about each deck:
1- flying adrena-staves. think it could be tweaked a little.
2- there are better rainbows
3- there are better rainbow-dragon rushes.
4- very detailed.
5- The quanta balance seems a bit off, but, at the very least, it's an interesting take on fractal chrysaora.
6- It's a different take on fractal devourers, but it's this really odd rainbow version of it that seems a bit too off for me. To play it safe, I'll put it as rework, though.
7- There's really no need to have two versions of this (an unupgraded/upgraded version with practically the same cards as the other article).
8- Definitely delete.
9- There's funky tower/pillar-age going on here. I just think there are better dune scorp rainbows/decks.
10- This isn't even a deck. All it really says is "Make a rainbow and throw in Earthquakes." Not helpful.
11- It's a rainbow creature rush that could be tweaked a little (maybe a precog?)
12- This looks like a rainbow deck that's trying to do everything but can't. Also, what's with the random pillars?
13- To be honest, Antagon's Rainbow does this better.
14- It's a bit of a thick deck at 40 cards with no Hourglasses (there are 3 sundials, but that seems too few). And the damage output seems so small with fragile creatures. But there's some potential with editing.
15- There are better mutation decks.
16- There's already a good article on the wiki on building golem rushes (
http://elementswiki.co.cc/articles/a-guide-to-lava-golem-rushes/).
17- Alright, I'm putting this as "rework" instead of "delete" because this can be remade into an article as opposed to a deck (because there isn't one explicitely stated here, just on building anti-fg rainbows).
18- Another golem rush variant. Doesn't seem too good either.
19- Maybe I just don't like mutation decks? It seems off, though.
20- There are better farenheit-based decks.
21- Damage potential is too low (4 fragile ruby dragons and a morning star).
22- This deck suggests grinding elders with it. Seems slow for that; definitely not something I'd suggest grinding with. There are faster decks.
23- Skimmed it. Looks like there might be an interesting idea(s) you can add to the flying weapons article. Then delete this one.
24- Apparently this is a "for fun" deck. It's not really a good deck, though.
25- No-Land Stompy is a well-known AI3 grind deck, but this is the version from the old wiki. Perhaps update it with plastiqe's version? (
http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,12102.0.html)
26- A different variation on the Lava Golem rush, this one claiming to grind t50. If that were the case, imo black holes might be better than momentums. Either way, it doesn't look bad.
27- So ... this deck comes with a nice disclaimer in big letters on the top of the article: "Do not use! This deck SUCKS!" To be honest, I don't think it's that great either.
28- A Phoenix-bow, eh? The idea of it is nice; perhaps it can use some more creatures, though? (Lycanthropes, Graboids?)
29- Deck list is missing, so I checked it out on the old wiki. It isn't a good deck.
30- I get the idea, but it's off.
31- Might have potential?
32- Fat timebow. A lot of people have variants on them; this is just one of them
33- There's some novelty to this one (what, with dis. shield). It's not the worst dragonbow I've seen.
34- Yowza that's a 60 card deck with 1 Hourglass. I can see a lot of bad draws with this.
35- You're better off concentrating on 1 type of scorpion instead of all 3 (and trying to launch them with pendulums and no novas seems like a bad idea).
36- Another variation on a timebow.
37- I think there are better rainbows than this (at least upgrade two of the non-upgraded cards).
38- This is an article. Relabel it.
39- Rework maybe? I don't have any experience with poisonbows.
Would definitely like other people's opinions, though! Hope I wasn't too harsh for some of the decks I put in the "Delete" pile.
