Armory | Armory

[Naesala]

Please vote for the cost. Is there anything else this card needs?

[majofa]

To make it playable?

1 / 1

[furballdn]

To make it playable?

1 / 1

This would be my ideal for the cost, but I voted 2|1 since it was the closest. A card like this is pretty situational, and you really only need 1. It also seems to be comparable with flying weapon, so a cost of 1 | 1  seems reasonable.

[Naesala]

Private message from OT when I asked his opinion

Multiple weapons/shields tend to be dead draws. This gives them a -3 cost reduction. Your armory card removes some of the causes of the dead draw symptom. You did a good job balancing Wings and Dimensional Shield. Since this reverse the cause of the cost reduction, it should cost around 3 cost units (2 +1card). Modifying this cost would be the still existing restriction of only having 1 weapon in the weapon slot at a time and by the synergy certain shields will inevitable have. I would go with 2 |1 .

I'll wait for a view more votes and opinions, but the cost will come down.

[Naesala]

Updated card cost. Please comment!

[majofa]

I'd still reduce the cost since this card can't win you the game, prevent your opponent from winning the game, and needs specific decks to be useful.

[Naesala]

My concern with having the upped be 1 is that it can then be abused in monoaether/monoair. Even with counters being saved, chaining becomes much easier. I want to require at least 1 earth to make such decks a duo. Besides, as has been said, this is mostly useful in fatty rainbows, crusaderbows, or possible SoSe decks (to make use of all the junk you get), all of which should be able to get 1 earth easy enough.

[Drake_XIV]

Actually, considering the fact that shields are included, perhaps there should be no cost drop for the upgraded in reference to the unupgraded.  Of course, both need a cost boost in my opinion.  So maybe 3/3 or 4/4 to seem rather reasonable.

[Cheesy111]

Actually, considering the fact that shields are included, perhaps there should be no cost drop for the upgraded in reference to the unupgraded.  Of course, both need a cost boost in my opinion.  So maybe 3/3 or 4/4 to seem rather reasonable.

Why would it be 3/3 or 4/4? It has an EXTREMELY limited functionality, almost completely limited to crusader/flying weapon decks.  Heck, I'd say this is less powerful than Flying Weapon.  Please explain your reasoning.

[Drake_XIV]

Actually, considering the fact that shields are included, perhaps there should be no cost drop for the upgraded in reference to the unupgraded.  Of course, both need a cost boost in my opinion.  So maybe 3/3 or 4/4 to seem rather reasonable.

Why would it be 3/3 or 4/4? It has an EXTREMELY limited functionality, almost completely limited to crusader/flying weapon decks.  Heck, I'd say this is less powerful than Flying Weapon.  Please explain your reasoning.

You're right, it doesn't really need to get that kick.  I always end up assuming there's always some strategy I'm overlooking.  Looking at it now, 2/2 is really reasonable, which is where my vote is even if that isn't listed in the polls.

[ChemMan13]

I saw this card from OdinVanguard's card idea  knife juggling and came up with a question. http://elementscommunity.org/forum/card-ideas-and-art/knife-juggling-blade-juggling/?topicseen
When the AI plays this card and the effect activates, what is to keep the AI from infinitely cycling through weapons? I know that under current AI logic, if it has a weapon in its hand it will play it (as long as it isn't another copy of the same weapon).

[Naesala]

Good question, I suppose the AI would need a rework with this card, some kind of check to not play more than X weapons or shields per round.