Flooding | Inundation

[BluePriest]

I agree with PhuzzY LogiK that now player should have some influence on his creatures position, especially because it also affects which creatures attack first (important when you have antimattered creatures, feral bond, opponent has a bone wall etc.)

Also if in your middle row there are less than 7 creatures (eg. one was killed) but you have creature in top or bottom row, you should be able to move it to middle row. Also after you make a creature immortal you should be able to move it to top or bottom row to make space for non-immortal creatures.

Unless it is Zanz's intention that you cannot move your creatures, not a 'not yet implemented feature', then it would also make sense, though I would prefer being able to move.

I dont think this will ever be implemented, and I personally wouldnt like it if it was anyways. Other card games make you have to think about if you want to put a creature down because the space is limited (some only allow 5 creatures)  this one lets you have nearly unlimited amount, so unless you are worried that they have a rof, then you can just put it down, and if you dont care abotu the creature, you can just put it down. But now, even the creatures you dont care about, you will think tice about putting down because you might need the space if the opponent has a flood. Adds more strategy, I like that you never know what you have to prepare for.

Also, I would hate to have to choose where to put my monsters at each turn, it makes the battles go quicker. You cant make your creatures stop attacking when thiers a fire shield, so why should you be able to move them away from, or to the flood?

[casthegamer]

i'm still not the greatest fan of this card, but with the nerf it seems okay now.

[MrSexington]

Honestly, I don't like the card.

Not its function or its art, but it just doesn't fit in with everything else.  Maybe if this was introduced with 11 other cards for the other elements that act as "environmental" cards, it would be okay.  But on its own, it just seems out of place.

 

[Xinef]

I dont think this will ever be implemented, and I personally wouldnt like it if it was anyways. Other card games make you have to think about if you want to put a creature down because the space is limited (some only allow 5 creatures)  this one lets you have nearly unlimited amount, so unless you are worried that they have a rof, then you can just put it down, and if you dont care abotu the creature, you can just put it down. But now, even the creatures you dont care about, you will think tice about putting down because you might need the space if the opponent has a flood. Adds more strategy, I like that you never know what you have to prepare for.

Also, I would hate to have to choose where to put my monsters at each turn, it makes the battles go quicker. You cant make your creatures stop attacking when thiers a fire shield, so why should you be able to move them away from, or to the flood?

Well... most of CCG games I know either have unlimited number of creatures, or a single creature which is replaced when you play a new one...

Though I agree moving creatures would slow the game a bit (though you rarely would have to), I guess at least some rules could be implemented that eg. when a creature is killed move all the next ones so that there is no gap (or move the last one to fill the gap)... though on the other hand it adds a few new twists to strategy (eg. you can decide to fill that gap with some low attack creature to increase your probability of EM with bond)...

Though in 'non computer' CCGs I like it if attacker can chose in what order his creatures attack, or all attack at once. The order of attack in Elements (mostly chronological, though not always) seems a bit chaotic to me.

[storyteller]

you have absolute control over where your creatures will be placed, by the order you place them in.

[Xinef]

you have absolute control over where your creatures will be placed, by the order you place them in.

Not absolute, you can't make a firefly attack before FFQ that created it without killing or rewinding your own creatures (or your opponent doing so), so it's not only the order of placement, but also order of killing, rewinding, spawning etc.

I wouldn't call it absolute control if you need to rewind two creatures to change the order they attack in, and you still can't do so without removing their buffs or abilities if they were mutants.

Also 'the order you place them in' can not help you against a player playing antimatter on one of your creatures, because no matter in what order you place them, your opponent can always decide to antimatter the first one (if he wants to be healed before recieving damage) or the last one (to have full HP at the end of your turn). The only thing you can do is guess his strategy and put the lowest attack creature first/last.

[storyteller]

or you can just play a small group of creatures and momentum and quint them.

[Essence]

Maybe this is obvious to non-me people, but:

Don't ever play more than one Flooding at a time!

I assumed that one would replace the other (it should!), but it doesn't.  They both sit on your board, sucking up 6 per turn with no additional effect than just having 1.

[kidtroubadour]

Can someone define what a "neutral" creature is??

[storyteller]

the cancer cells, or a weapon from the other category that was animated.

[ddviper001]

i dont think its that OP its stupid picture though

[lunter]

They changed the picture now its more "elementaly"