Flooding | Inundation

[Kardo]

What if the center row was determined by the number of Flooding/Inundation on the field? For example:

1 Flooding = Top/Bottom row and 7th slot flooded
2 Flooding = Top/Bottom row and 6th-7th slot flooded
3 Flooding = Top/Bottom row and 5th-7th slot flooded
4 Flooding = Top/Bottom row and 4th-7th slot flooded
5 Flooding = Top/Bottom row and 3rd-7th slot flooded
6 Flooding = Top/Bottom row and 2nd-7th slot flooded
7+ Flooding = Top/Bottom row and 2nd-7th slot flooded (to prevent Mindgate and Arena/FG decks from flooding the whole field)

Keeping 6 Flooding up at one time isn't exactly easy, plus you'd have to draw them all. If this were to happen then there's the possibility of changing them to stack the way some Shards were, though 1 PA to protect them all may be overpowered.

edit:
After looking at the way creatures are positioned, it may make more sense visually (but be harder to play against) if Flooding worked in this order:
1 = 7th
2 = 7th, 6th
3 = 7th, 6th, 3rd
4 = 7th, 6th, 3rd, 2nd
5 = 7th, 6th, 3rd, 2nd, 4th
6 = 7th, 6th, 3rd, 2nd, 4th, 5th
as creatures are played in this order:
7th - 3rd - 4th - 1st - 5th - 2nd - 6th

[OldTrees]

@kardo
That is interesting. A 7 card combo (plus absorb) feels easily justified in blocking the entire field. Either method would work with the first having 3 hills [x3x1x2x] being flooded and the second having 1 long hill being flooded. (however they probably shouldn't form stacks)

[Xenocidius]

I'd probably have the 7th Flooding flood the entire field. Because, you know, it's fairly hard to get that many out (and maintain them), even if you're a False God. Other than that, it sounds like a good idea.

[RRQJ]

I agree, this only really is useful against FFQ, Pharaoh decks, and some Fractal decks. I understand Tikos point about how lots of cards gain a bonus vs different decks, but I don't know how you can say that Flooding is anywhere near as versatile as Reverse Time, Dimensional Shield, and the others you said. Flooding is 100% useless vs a very broad range of decks but then completely shuts down a few archetypes. Black Hole is obviously much better versus rainbow decks but still has a decent effect versus monos and duos- and even if it didn't decks that use a lot of different elements are a lot more common than spam decks.

I think something like "enemies can't use abilities/your abilities are free" would be better. Something that can be useful in most of the games you play.

purify exists, and it is useful against exactly one type of deck. 

[Pineapple]

@Tiko: Why are we dissatisfied?
Because this buff doesn't really do much, it just makes Flooding better at doing what Flooding could always do: stop swarming and take advantage of soft cc.

I'd suggest a reworking of all but the first creature losing attack equal to its HP per turn (because heavy things drown faster), but this isn't the thread for that.

[johannhowitzer]

This is why I love Zanz.  He ignores all the baseless complaints and sees what really needs to be done, and does it.

Best thing that could have happened to Flooding, at least by my reckoning.

[RRQJ]

@Tiko: Why are we dissatisfied?
Because this buff doesn't really do much, it just makes Flooding better at doing what Flooding could always do: stop swarming and take advantage of soft cc.

I'd suggest a reworking of all but the first creature losing attack equal to its HP per turn (because heavy things drown faster), but this isn't the thread for that.

Imo, flooding did nothing before this buff.  It did not stop most swarms because most swarms worked sufficiently with 7 creatures.  Now though, they only have 5 slots, which will probably create a noticeable bind. So this buff actually does a lot.

[Pineapple]

@Tiko: Why are we dissatisfied?
Because this buff doesn't really do much, it just makes Flooding better at doing what Flooding could always do: stop swarming and take advantage of soft cc.

I'd suggest a reworking of all but the first creature losing attack equal to its HP per turn (because heavy things drown faster), but this isn't the thread for that.

Imo, flooding did nothing before this buff.  It did not stop most swarms because most swarms worked sufficiently with 7 creatures.  Now though, they only have 5 slots, which will probably create a noticeable bind. So this buff actually does a lot.

...
If it "swarms" sufficiently with 7 creatures, it's not swarming.

[TakoMan02]

Alright, I have a semi-good suggestion to make this card more realistic.

Flooding doesn't occur in rows, it occurs across a large area.  Killing creatures would make it way too overpowered and unrealistic, unless it's flood is made of acid.  So, here is my suggestion:

Flooding happens for 5 per turn. When played, the ENTIRE field is flooded, and all creatures that are not airborne / water / neutral will be in a time bubble for 3 turns, and after the three turns they die (suffocate).

Specific digits can be changed, of course, but you get my drift.

Flood = unable to attack, slowly dying
Flood != immediately die in certain areas

[OldTrees]

Alright, I have a semi-good suggestion to make this card more realistic.

Flooding doesn't occur in rows, it occurs across an elevation

The yellow text explains the current realism. Flood creates a moat around a hill.

[TakoMan02]

The yellow text explains the current realism. Flood creates a moat around a hill.

Okay, other than that, what do you think of the idea?

[OldTrees]

The yellow text explains the current realism. Flood creates a moat around a hill.

Okay, other than that, what do you think of the idea?

I dislike 1 card taking out an entire decks offense even at an absorb cost of 5.

That is why I like the rising tides idea where it takes 7 floods to cover the entire middle row.