[Leaderboard] Season 16 Postseason (Match 1-1)

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

Rules

 

- First one to 3 votes or whoever got the most votes by deadline wins.

- Voters must explain their thought process when voting, or else it will be rejected.

- Participants or I reserve the right to contest a vote. (I reserve the right to overrule vetoes/acceptance of votes if need be)

- Card C votes are permitted.

- Winner moves on to round 2.

- Voters will be given reps for each accepted vote post they make.

 

Deadline: 6/26/2017 @ 1:00 am HST

(Because I am doing summer school stuff, I will close this up when I get online a few hours later.)

 

Theme: Make a Thunder-Type Xyz Monster

(Konami, y u no make more besides Chidori?)

 

 

Card A

 

Powhunder

LIGHT | Rank 4 | Thunder | Xyz |Effect

2400/1900

2 Level 4 monsters

If you control another Thunder-Type monster: You can Normal Summon 1 monster from your hand in addition to your Normal Summon/Set this turn. You can detach 1 Xyz Material from this card, then target 1 monster your opponent controls; destroy it, then, if that target is still on the field, send it to the Graveyard. You can only use each effect of "Powhunder" once per turn.

 

Card B

 

Enelysia the Lightning Diva
LIGHT | Rank 4 | Thunder | Xyz | Effect
2300/2200
2 Level 4 monsters
While this card has an Xyz Material attached to it that was originally LIGHT, it gains 300 ATK, also it cannot be destroyed by battle, or targeted by your opponent's card effects. Once per turn: You can detach 1 Xyz Material from this card, then target 1 face-up card on the field; negate its effects. If you have 3 or more Thunder monsters with different names on your field and/or in your GY, you can activate this effect during either player's turn.

 

=============

Alright then, go ahead and vote, guys.

 

[«CØgni§»]

(I never noticed that there was no other Thunder Mosters that were XYZ, wowzers...)

 

To start, bit sad that they are both generic XYZ's in regards to the whole R4 2 N/S Mats, but I won't hold it against the cards. Would have just been a bit more interesting. Anyway, to each individual card:

 

Card A:

The first part of the effect is really cool, with a cascade-style of play (have X on the field, then drop this guy, then drop another card, then drop ANOTHER card if you haven't played one normally etc. etc.). It would allow some of the slower decks to catch up just by controlling one guy, sort of a nexus if you will, and it would be a great asset to the "hunder" archetype. The second effect is weirdly generic, I didn't realise that you could destroy something and it not go to the GY, but then again some can negate their own "destruction", so it is nice to have the backup. Fluff-wise, I don't see how this fits the archetype it is part of (not a family-related name), but I can let that slide.

ATK/DEF seems to be generically average for R4, if on the lower side in some cases. No protection, but that's not what the card is designed around. Honestly, I could see it being used in play even outside of a "hunder" deck.

 

Card B:

First off, the name doesn't link into the Diva side of things (at lease, not that I can find), but that's a nit-pick if I ever made one, so disregard that.

Powerful first effect, giving extra attack to make it match up to the upper-scale of the R4s, even some of the lower R5s, and giving it much more protection from battle and from targeted effects/removal/lock-down. The second effect is quite utility, and can be a bit useless if the effects it is blocking are either Summoning other stuff (since even though you can use it during either player's turns in a Thunder deck, it isn't a Quick Effect as stated), or are cards that also have the target blocking abilities. That said, being able to negate key components of a deck is quite useful, and as it doesn't have a cap-off point as to when it can get its effects back, it becomes rather strong.

This card is one that I can see being used regularly, as it is very strong. I do feel as if it is a bit too strong for the requirements of 2 N/S Lv4 Mats, maybe upping it to 3 to make it fairer, but still a very decent card, and completely different from the first card.

 

 

Vote:

This is difficult. Both cards are commendable in their execution, and both card makers should be pleased. They each perform a different role, with the first being an engine, and the second being more of a mini-me boss monster. The question is, which one fits better into a Thunder deck, since I can see both being used outside of it. And, unfortunately for Card B, Card A has it beat here. It is designed around a deck type, and as such isn't a generic mini-boss.

 

 

As such, my final vote goes to "Powhunder" (Card A)

 

(Side note: N/S here is for "Non Specific")

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

To be fair, there is no precedent on if Thunder Xyz need to have some condition on their summoning, because yeah, Konami legitimately didn't make a new one besides Chidori. But yeah, I didn't either until I went to search the YGOPro database and stuff came up. 

 

But anyway, 1-0 card A. 

[.Belle]

(I never noticed that there was no other Thunder Mosters that were XYZ, wowzers...)

 

To start, bit sad that they are both generic XYZ's in regards to the whole R4 2 N/S Mats, but I won't hold it against the cards. Would have just been a bit more interesting. Anyway, to each individual card:

 

Card A:

The first part of the effect is really cool, with a cascade-style of play (have X on the field, then drop this guy, then drop another card, then drop ANOTHER card if you haven't played one normally etc. etc.). It would allow some of the slower decks to catch up just by controlling one guy, sort of a nexus if you will, and it would be a great asset to the "hunder" archetype. The second effect is weirdly generic, I didn't realise that you could destroy something and it not go to the GY, but then again some can negate their own "destruction", so it is nice to have the backup. Fluff-wise, I don't see how this fits the archetype it is part of (not a family-related name), but I can let that slide.

ATK/DEF seems to be generically average for R4, if on the lower side in some cases. No protection, but that's not what the card is designed around. Honestly, I could see it being used in play even outside of a "hunder" deck.

 

Card B:

First off, the name doesn't link into the Diva side of things (at lease, not that I can find), but that's a nit-pick if I ever made one, so disregard that.

Powerful first effect, giving extra attack to make it match up to the upper-scale of the R4s, even some of the lower R5s, and giving it much more protection from battle and from targeted effects/removal/lock-down. The second effect is quite utility, and can be a bit useless if the effects it is blocking are either Summoning other stuff (since even though you can use it during either player's turns in a Thunder deck, it isn't a Quick Effect as stated), or are cards that also have the target blocking abilities. That said, being able to negate key components of a deck is quite useful, and as it doesn't have a cap-off point as to when it can get its effects back, it becomes rather strong.

This card is one that I can see being used regularly, as it is very strong. I do feel as if it is a bit too strong for the requirements of 2 N/S Lv4 Mats, maybe upping it to 3 to make it fairer, but still a very decent card, and completely different from the first card.

 

 

Vote:

This is difficult. Both cards are commendable in their execution, and both card makers should be pleased. They each perform a different role, with the first being an engine, and the second being more of a mini-me boss monster. The question is, which one fits better into a Thunder deck, since I can see both being used outside of it. And, unfortunately for Card B, Card A has it beat here. It is designed around a deck type, and as such isn't a generic mini-boss.

 

 

As such, my final vote goes to "Powhunder" (Card A)

 

(Side note: N/S here is for "Non Specific")

Hmm.. the vote is good for the most part. However, I believe there is a misunderstanding regarding the bolded part. Based on Card B's wording, I believe its creator wanted the effect to be quick effect, similar to SQ Xyzs, and that little difference would affect the card's performance a lot. So I think I'll have to reject the vote for now. Once that specific issue was addressed, the vote will be gladly accepted.

[«CØgni§»]

Hmm.. the vote is good for the most part. However, I believe there is a misunderstanding regarding the bolded part. Based on Card B's wording, I believe its creator wanted the effect to be quick effect, similar to SQ Xyzs, and that little difference would affect the card's performance a lot. So I think I'll have to reject the vote for now. Once that specific issue was addressed, the vote will be gladly accepted.

Ah, got you, sorry about that! I didn't realise that. Here is an addendum to that vote:

 

 

If the effect is meant as a quick effect, then yes it does make it more useful. HOWEVER, it also highlights one of the criticisms of the card that I had: The number of Mats. At 2, this is a very strong card for its cost, but also has the limit of you can negate all the effects of 2 cards per summon of this card (unless you use additional support cards to re-attach cards to it, then you get some more uses). 3 Mats makes the card harder to summon, and would give it more mileage for its second effect.

And, as stated before, Card A has the advantage of being designed around an Archetype, and as such gets some bonus from being part of that. A stand-alone card has to, unfortunately, "stand on its own", and has to be able to fit into more decks than an Archetype-specific. It is a fine balance that has to be struck, and unfortunately for Card B, Card A has utility outside of the "hunder" Archetype, whilst fitting into it incredibly well.

 

My vote remains for "Powhunder" (Card A). I hope this clears it up!

[.Belle]

Ah, got you, sorry about that! I didn't realise that. Here is an addendum to that vote:

 

 

If the effect is meant as a quick effect, then yes it does make it more useful. HOWEVER, it also highlights one of the criticisms of the card that I had: The number of Mats. At 2, this is a very strong card for its cost, but also has the limit of you can negate all the effects of 2 cards per summon of this card (unless you use additional support cards to re-attach cards to it, then you get some more uses). 3 Mats makes the card harder to summon, and would give it more mileage for its second effect.

And, as stated before, Card A has the advantage of being designed around an Archetype, and as such gets some bonus from being part of that. A stand-alone card has to, unfortunately, "stand on its own", and has to be able to fit into more decks than an Archetype-specific. It is a fine balance that has to be struck, and unfortunately for Card B, Card A has utility outside of the "hunder" Archetype, whilst fitting into it incredibly well.

 

My vote remains for "Powhunder" (Card A). I hope this clears it up!

Thank you very much. The vote is accepted, 1-0 Card A.

[.Belle]

Bump. Need more votes.

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

Considering how dead this section tends to be, getting 1 vote at all is actually progress. Least I don't have to tiebreak like I had to for Season 15. 

 

(Also going to mention that stuff in parentheses; if I have to, I can force the acceptance / rejection of a vote; refer to the CC veto system in the rulebook. I haven't had to use it much lately, but yeah.)

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

Unless either Dova or Belle have FINAL objections, card A wins 1-0 (and that means Dova's moving on to round 2)