[Written] Insidious Infection Virus

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

Insidious Infection Virus

Normal Trap Card

Tribute 1 DARK monster with 2500 or more ATK, and 1 other Trap Card from your field (if that card is set, reveal it); check your opponent's hand, GY, all monsters they control, and all cards they draw until the end of their next turn after this card's activation, and banish all monsters, except those with 1000 or more DEF. During the Main Phase, except the turn this card was sent to the GY: You can banish this card from your GY; activate a Trap Card you control that was set this turn. You can only use this effect of "Insidious Infection Virus" once per turn.

 

So, hopefully I worded this right in that it hits link monsters. The idea was to create a super-mega-ultra-virus that could properly halt plays like the viruses did so long ago. Rather than destroying, it banishes, making the cards much more difficult for the opponent to gain from, and it hits the grave because why the hell not. Additionally, I gave it a second effect to just speed up the rest of the deck a little bit. In return, I made its cost quite high, but Lair of Darkness makes the monster requirement easier, allowing cards like Firewall Dragon (I don't know any other cards that see play right now).

 

Since the rest of the deck got sweet new cards, I thought it deserved a trap that truly felt deserving of being called an upgrade.

[Mr. Best Male 2008]

Why do I have to reveal the trap that is being tributed? I like the banish from grave effect.

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

Why do I have to reveal the trap that is being tributed? I like the banish from grave effect.

I definitely just copied wording from Critias. I don't really know why it was there, but I figured whatever reason would apply here as well.

[Sleepy]

I needed that "affects Links" clarification. That went from "weird choice of words" to "that's cleverly good".

 

In the Critias comment, I am trying to think of a good reason why the text is there. It's probably something like "the game itself needs proper public confirmation that you are about to use a legit target" although cards that have that line usually do it after the cost/condition so it is not like players won't immediately see the card going to the GY or can chain anything by the time it reveals. Either way, I guess it's harmless to keep it there.

 

The cost of Eradicator Epidemic Virus plus an extra Trap, is about the steepest cost for a Virus card. If not for the field spell, it would be pretty unreasonable.

Though as it stands now you can even Tribute an opponent's monster that'd be out of this card's destructive range anyways, so it got its weakness turned strength, and I'm a big fan of the GY effect. Temple of the Kings is not good enough at a dedicated OPT effect with a fragile field presence to hold, so bonus effects like this one are IMO the way to go for this sort of thing.

[Darj]

Looked around, and I would think Links would still be unaffected, since with no DEF they aren't affected by anything involving DEF, and IMO it's not intuitive enough. You may have to specify it also affects monsters with no DEF, IDK.

 

Not quite sure why it needs the Tribute of a Trap in addition to the monster. I get that it's intended to balance the stronger effect compared to the other Viruses, but I get the feel that you can get away with it. Anyway, sucks the Field Spell specifies monsters, otherwise you would have been able to Tribute an opponent's Trap instead.

[Sleepy]

Looked around, and I would think Links would still be unaffected, since with no DEF they aren't affected by anything involving DEF, and IMO it's not intuitive enough. You may have to specify it also affects monsters with no DEF, IDK.

 

Not quite sure why it needs the Tribute of a Trap in addition to the monster. I get that it's intended to balance the stronger effect compared to the other Viruses, but I get the feel that you can get away with it. Anyway, sucks the Field Spell specifies monsters, otherwise you would have been able to Tribute an opponent's Trap instead.

 

I've seen that sort of wording in the past used for Level-related stuff, in the same exclusive way so that they can affect other systems such as Ranked monsters (Xyzs). I agree it's not the most fool proof intuitive of texts but wouldn't say it is invalid at all. It works for all monsters, except monsters with X+ DEF. Which means monsters with no DEF stat are NOT monsters with X+ DEF. Sounds legit.

 

I'm gonna look around for effects similar in wording. Something along the lines of "except monsters with X+ Level". I'll see what I can find.