First off,the flavor is terrible.
A hard OPT effect + some form of targeting protection = Rapidfire... How?
Next, discard 1 to spin one is still extremely powerful. Even with the gamestate's creep (which does not excuse batshit design. Advanced is about designing in a more strict environment with a higher power level, not saying 'Konami did it so can I'), that is still a very strong effect, considering its one per turn on something difficult to remove. Making it free/lightly costed is just toxic design that rewards you for getting it out an sitting on it with a free once-per-turn Castel... Except it doesn't even say face-up.
Next, the monster immunity was already absurdly strong. Like, Yazi's secondary effect is just okay outside of its own deck and Leo has only a very strong, but imperfect, targeting immunity... This is a 2700 with perfect immunity, a strong effect (even with the discard), and has an amazing level.
I don't think it should even have the monster targeting immunity, much less full immunity. If anything, it should just have a weak protection effect (say s/t targeting immunity or a Blackwing - Kris style extra life) or no protection at all.
As for the Virgil point I saw, I am extremely disappointed. First off, Burning Abuss are among the worst examples of design the game has ever known. To use them, in any way, to justify a design is ludicrous. While this is a similar design to Virgil, it's more generic and it's not a Burning Abyss. These factors are enough to make them incomparable, never mind the lack of design intelligence found in the BAs.
I also want to reiterate the intent of advanced, as people seem to have missed it. While imperfect, refer to Blaze Accelerator Maagazine. Given the gamestate, this card's only issue is being able to kill Scattershot from the grave during the opponent's turn. And royal firestorm guards, but... otherwise, it would fit into AC.
Morphtronic Smarfon fits into casual. It doesn't do enough for its deck, at all, and isn't a problem solver, just extra combo pieces. It's not up to snuff, it's just cute. It's not harming the game, but it's not even trying to be a remotely viable design.
In my defense, I did state the costless spin was a bold suggestion.
It's just that I pictured this card in the meta and I didn't see it doing anything. First, as far as I know none of the dominant decks have access to Synchro8s, so if anything, a card like this would only boost those decks with access to it. Then, a "discard to spin" effect appeared to be too underwhelming for the current meta. Yes, you get to spin a card, but most likely any top tier deck will be able to shrug it off while you spent a card on it with the discard.
In other words, if you can Synchro Summon this, chances are you aren't Qliphorts, BAs, Shaddolls, etc. and thus cannot generate or recover resources as steadily as they do. Then, if you are fighting those decks, while you spend resources every turn through this card's cost, the opponent just keeps coming back; eventually you will run out of resources while the opponent endured the hits, and will proceed to simply run over you. And that's assuming the opponent didn't manage to remove your Synchro, but most likely they will be able to do so as soon as in the next 1~2 turns, even with this card's full protection vs. targeting.
However, I didn't consider the possibility of a top tier deck showing up in the future that had access to the Synchro8 pool, and thus would benefit from this card. Needless to say, at that point this card would become a problem.
My logic on Virgil was: If a Synchro6s gets to spin without a cost, then a Synchro8 could get to spin without a cost as well to keep up with the metagame. However, I do agree that BAs shouldn't be taken as examples of good design, plus their effects have different applications, so this comparison was flawed from the beginning.
But enough of excuses. I agree and was aware that making or suggesting cards or effects that are powerful/broken just because "the metagame can handle it" is a step on the wrong direction. And on the intent of Advanced, I admit that I had it slightly wrong and missed the point.
OT: I don't think the "Once per turn, this card cannot be targeted by an opponent's card effects." protection would work as intended. If it cannot be targeted at all, the OPT clause is redundant because technically it cannot be "used up" in the first place. I believe more proper OCG would be:
"Once per turn, during either player's turn, when a card or effect is activated that targets this card: [You can] negate that effect"
And re-visiting the spin effect, the discard cost should be fair after all. But perhaps you could get away with the following restrictions:
- Target only face-up cards.
- "Banish card of the same type" cost I suggested earlier. That way, if, let's say, you don't have Traps in grave, you can't spin Traps. It is still an insignificant cost, though.
- The "Cannot attack this turn" clause like Chaos Sorcerer.