Blotter updated: 06/17/12Show/Hide Show All

Image

Tag History
(edit info)
Rating

Prev | Index | Next

Comments

rabbit
#300965
1 year ago
Kind of expensive for just a 2/2 flying/haste...
Anonymous
#301004
1 year ago
@rabbit 6 power/6 mana. 7 mana/8 power. Pretty fair if not slightly unbalanced.
Have a potential to be broken. Need excessive testing.
@IPU How about changing mana cost to XXRW?
Invisible_Pink_Unicorn
#301094
1 year ago
@ 301004:
A casting cost of XXRW would do nicely to keep the power/cost ratio from exploding at high CCs, but I'm a little worried about the card being too attractive at X = 0 or 1.
I also want to offer players an incentive to be "greedy" and reward them for trying to get high values for X, and I'm less worried about the power ramping up with X = 3 or more (at a casting cost of XRRWW), as spells costing 7+ mana are supposed to be game-enders anyway.

You raise some valid points, though, and I'll test the card with both pricing models. :)
Anonymous
#301095
1 year ago
A 2/2 flying haste for 4. Plus another 2/2 Flying Haste for every 1 colorless you put on top of that.
Anonymous
#301205
1 year ago
Interesting point: Since the tokens enter the battlefield when you cast the original, you'll get them even if the original is countered.
Invisible_Pink_Unicorn
#301293
1 year ago
@ 301205
Some trivia if you're curious:
This was originally necessary when the CC was 2RRWW and the card gave you 2 tokens to prevent the infinite token generation an "enters the battlefield" trigger would have engendered.
I decided to keep the casting trigger to circumvent rules questions ("Do I get X tokens for the copies too?"/"Can I pay X again?"), and because the "you can't counter us all!" vibe fits, IMHO.
Anonymous
#301595
1 year ago
maelstrom pulse
Anonymous
#301648
1 year ago
Quite nice, but the legendary rule seems to clutter the card too much, and the tokens should only have flying and haste written, while the original card itself should specify the colors of the tokens. Having a repeatable ability with no tap also means that you don't need to have the tokens copy said ability.

Other than that I like the design and I am pleased no unnecesary flavor text was used on such a wordy card.
Drasvin
#301675
1 year ago
@anon 648 Though omitting the 'legend rule' exception and the token generation ability from the tokens would potentially cause trouble if the main card is destroyed. Without the exception, all the legendary tokens die. Without the generator, you can't make any more tokens, when the tokens are just supposed to be more Wonderbolts that were called in to help.
Invisible_Pink_Unicorn
#301740
1 year ago
What Drasvin said.
I wanted to make the Wonderbolts equals who can all summon more buddies (and are a very removal-resistant "finisher").
A cleaner (and weaker) version could be achieved by making a "mother" card (Spifire?) that spawns nonlegendary Wonderbolt tokens, but... where would that leave Soarin'? I also see the entire squad as legendary, flavor-wise.
feather
#303133
1 year ago
seems fine to me, balance wise. I like the legend rule exemption lawl
Breaker
#303372
1 year ago
I wouldn't make it legendary unless you're basing around a single member of the Wonderbolts.

But heres my take at your card so its not so cluttery.
Wonderbolts 2RW
Legendary Creature - Pegasus (R)
Multikicker - 1
Flying, haste
Put a 2/2 red and white Pegasus creature token with flying and haste onto the battlefield for each time Wonderbolts was kicked.
2/2
Anonymous
#303375
1 year ago
NNNNNNNNEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRDDDDS!!!!!
Anonymous
#303490
1 year ago
Speakin of nerdin' out. IPU, howzabout "Soarin' Markov"?
Breaker
#303499
1 year ago
^HAY I MADE THAT UP ALREADY GO AWAY
Invisible_Pink_Unicorn
#304630
1 year ago
@ Breaker:
Yeah, that would be the way to go for a "one shot" card. (This may be the better solution if the activated ability proves to be too aggravating.) You can simplify it further by using X instead of multikicker-1, and even reduce more clutter by making the card a sorcery that produces said tokens (for X1RW). This may steal some of the Wonderbolts' luster, though.
Invisible_Pink_Unicorn
#304652
1 year ago
Soarin' Markov? You two do realize that I'm going to have to make that card now, right?
... Don't worry. Just like Trollestia, it won't be part of the set. :P
Breaker
#305434
1 year ago
If you really want to keep the XWWRR cost, then i'd advice making it into a sorcery that produces said tokens.