|
|
Post by Killix on Jul 13, 2008 12:45:07 GMT -5
[glow=red,2,300]Killix, how would you like your card re-written? We could keep as is, +2 for 1 round when she's benched. Or what Vyt said. Or +2 for 2 rounds, one-time-only? [/glow] A one-use activation for +2 damage for two turns is kinda meh. I think I'd rather leave it the way it is now if the alternative is to make it a one time use skill. I don't see why it can't be the same it is now except for two turns instead of 1. XD;Wait, do you mean turns or rounds? 2 rounds would be 4 turns.  |
|
|
|
Post by Stal on Jul 13, 2008 12:51:20 GMT -5
[glow=red,2,300]Killix, how would you like your card re-written? We could keep as is, +2 for 1 round when she's benched. Or what Vyt said. Or +2 for 2 rounds, one-time-only? [/glow] A one-use activation for +2 damage for two turns is kinda meh. I think I'd rather leave it the way it is now if the alternative is to make it a one time use skill. I don't see why it can't be the same it is now except for two turns instead of 1. XD;Wait, do you mean turns or rounds? 2 rounds would be 4 turns. Rider messed up what Vyt had said. Personally, I think nerfing the card is a little of a stretch. The card itself isn't overpowered. Some situations make it stronger in the beginning than others, but in the long run, everything balances out. Nerfing a card simply because some people think it's "too good" isn't something I really see as should be done. People should instead play better and learn defenses to it. I've seen much more broken cards in the games I play that you have just as easy responses to. |
|
|
|
Post by Killix on Jul 13, 2008 17:58:28 GMT -5
Personally, I think nerfing the card is a little of a stretch. The card itself isn't overpowered. Some situations make it stronger in the beginning than others, but in the long run, everything balances out. Nerfing a card simply because some people think it's "too good" isn't something I really see as should be done. People should instead play better and learn defenses to it. I've seen much more broken cards in the games I play that you have just as easy responses to. That exactly what I was trying to say, but you said it better. XD 'cause in the end: TCGs are all about strategy and a little luck. |
|
|
|
Post by Vyt: Down, but Not Out on Jul 14, 2008 2:31:29 GMT -5
Personally, I think nerfing the card is a little of a stretch. The card itself isn't overpowered. Some situations make it stronger in the beginning than others, but in the long run, everything balances out. Nerfing a card simply because some people think it's "too good" isn't something I really see as should be done. People should instead play better and learn defenses to it. I've seen much more broken cards in the games I play that you have just as easy responses to. I don't think they nerfed the card simply because "it's too good". Looking at the post where Killix suggested the first version of her card and taking note of the points given to players for use in their Common Forumer cards, the Special Ability already exceeds the points given (Note: It's not just 2 points for adding two damage when the effect lingers all throughout the Fighter's life). To be honest, I was rather surprised when the card was included on the list, but since at that time I wasn't so involved in this game, I reckoned that they had a pretty good reason why they let the card stay that way. Also, I've seen the way some players use Killix. Single-handedly, it turned the tides on unsuspecting players, giving their usually fresh Fighters (Benched to Active, remember?) two added Damage. That's 4 Damage for a 2-Damage attack, and that already hurts. Not only that, in the first revision of the card, its effect lingers for four turns, and since the definition of "Turns" hasn't been refined yet, it stayed for a pretty long time. I don't think it can fit in the one card point left for the card (7 HP + 2-Damage = 9 points). I'm not nitpicking or anything, but I thought these observations I've had can help. |
|
|
|
Post by Scar on Jul 14, 2008 2:55:31 GMT -5
Judge Magister Rider and I the leading man have discussed the issue.
The Killix card now reads as follows:
099:
Killix (Colorless)
HP: 7
Special Power: Rally – Whenever this Fighter is benched from active, your current active Fighter's attacks get +2 Damage for 4 turns. This effect cannot be stacked.
(*) Thwack – 2 Damage
In summary, this means you cannot alternate two Killixes to give each other a constant total of +4 Damage each because their effects do not stack.
I will be discussing the issue of damage stacking with multiple types of cards (For example: Killix and Fanboy at once) with Rider soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Amneiger on Jul 14, 2008 10:01:29 GMT -5
Personally, I think nerfing the card is a little of a stretch. The card itself isn't overpowered. Some situations make it stronger in the beginning than others, but in the long run, everything balances out. Nerfing a card simply because some people think it's "too good" isn't something I really see as should be done. People should instead play better and learn defenses to it. I've seen much more broken cards in the games I play that you have just as easy responses to. That exactly what I was trying to say, but you said it better. XD 'cause in the end: TCGs are all about strategy and a little luck. ... But it might be a bit late for that now. |
|
|
|
Post by Killix on Jul 14, 2008 19:38:13 GMT -5
Judge Magister Rider and I the leading man have discussed the issue. The Killix card now reads as follows: 099: Killix (Colorless) HP: 7 Special Power: Rally – Whenever this Fighter is benched from active, your current active Fighter's attacks get +2 Damage for 4 turns. This effect cannot be stacked. (*) Thwack – 2 Damage In summary, this means you cannot alternate two Killixes to give each other a constant total of +4 Damage each because their effects do not stack. I will be discussing the issue of damage stacking with multiple types of cards (For example: Killix and Fanboy at once) with Rider soon. Yaay, thanks for reconsidering. =D I'm happy with that revision. *skips off merrily* |
|
|
|
Post by Spoon on Jul 15, 2008 1:49:15 GMT -5
With the Killix card (just want to confirm something rather than change anything), the four turns refers to two by your opponent and two by you? Or does it mean +2 for four of your turns?
|
|
|
|
Post by Scar on Jul 15, 2008 2:29:27 GMT -5
With the Killix card (just want to confirm something rather than change anything), the four turns refers to two by your opponent and two by you? Or does it mean +2 for four of your turns? 4 turns starting from when the power takes effect. So it would be 2 of your turns and 2 of your opponent's. The exact order would be: 1. You (turn Rally is used) 2. Opponent 3. You 4. Opponent Rally is only useful for 3 turns so the 4th turn is purely for cosmetic reasons only. |
|
|
|
Post by Omni on Aug 5, 2008 14:58:44 GMT -5
Are there any rule-differences for getting shinies from a duel that ended through forfeiture/someone not responding for a week?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rider on Aug 5, 2008 19:36:57 GMT -5
Are there any rule-differences for getting shinies from a duel that ended through forfeiture/someone not responding for a week? [glow=red,2,300]No, you still get as many shinies. ^_^[/glow] |
|
|
|
Post by Omni on Aug 9, 2008 22:28:26 GMT -5
Are there any rules on the rarities of cards in your deck? Edit: 4,444th post.  |
|
|
|
Post by Rider on Aug 10, 2008 8:53:52 GMT -5
Are there any rules on the rarities of cards in your deck? Edit: 4,444th post. [glow=red,2,300]No sir. ^_^ And congrats on the 4,444th post. XD[/glow] |
|
