Pepsa Papyrus Uxsyl

[HQCardmaker]

Pepsa Papyrus Uxsyl - Charcoal and Soda Kirby

Warrior/Effect Monster/ Water (might change it to Fairy tomorrow to see if that gives me better results.)

Level 3

Effect:
This Monster also has the EARTH Attribute while face-up on the Field. If this Monster gets attacked by a Monster then post-damage calculation if this card were to be or have been destroyed as a result of battle and this Monster's Attack is more than 0, it loses Attack equal to half the damage you received in that battle rounded down instead. Once per turn, you can declare at the start of a Battle Phase that you will not be attacking with "Pepsa Papyrus Uxsyl - Charcoal and Soda Kirby" and if you do, add 1 Traversal Counter (max. 3) to this card. If this card has 3 Traversal Counters, you may swap those counters for a Soda Counter (max 3.). Twice per turn, you may remove 1 Soda Counter from this card and if you do, increase this Monster's Attack OR Defense by 100.

[Sleepy]

I have questions about the extremely roundabout way in which it gains ATK/DEF. 
So you have to keep it face-up and not attacking for 3 turns in order to produce the Transversal Counter,
Which has a max cap... so if you don't spend them to make a Soda Counter it doesn't keep building any more regardless of turns passing.
Then you can remove the max amount and produce 1 single Soda Counter, 
Then you can remove said Soda Counter to gain JUST 100 points, and not even on both stats but you need to choose ATK or DEF.

. . . . Why can it happen up to twice per turn? Would you go the 3 turns protecting this and then go "nah I don't wanna use it just yet" and wait for 3 more so the card can match the mighty Hitotsumi Giant? xD

Maybe it is more of a flavor thing than a balance thing...... w-why? xD
Believe me, with that amount of effort you could have this card gain 100,000 ATK with the Soda Counter and I think it wouldn't be overpowered ^^"

Effect is written a little funky and it sounds like it'd be tricky to word properly but if you want I could have a got at fixing it (without altering the effect even). xP

[HQCardmaker]

On 5/21/2023 at 1:22 PM, Sleepy said:

I have questions about the extremely roundabout way in which it gains ATK/DEF. 
So you have to keep it face-up and not attacking for 3 turns in order to produce the Transversal Counter,
Which has a max cap... so if you don't spend them to make a Soda Counter it doesn't keep building any more regardless of turns passing.
Then you can remove the max amount and produce 1 single Soda Counter, 
Then you can remove said Soda Counter to gain JUST 100 points, and not even on both stats but you need to choose ATK or DEF.

. . . . Why can it happen up to twice per turn? Would you go the 3 turns protecting this and then go "nah I don't wanna use it just yet" and wait for 3 more so the card can match the mighty Hitotsumi Giant? xD

Maybe it is more of a flavor thing than a balance thing...... w-why? xD
Believe me, with that amount of effort you could have this card gain 100,000 ATK with the Soda Counter and I think it wouldn't be overpowered ^^"

Effect is written a little funky and it sounds like it'd be tricky to word properly but if you want I could have a got at fixing it (without altering the effect even). xP

You have a point. Okay, feel free. I'm open to the idea. I'm curious.

[Loleo]

On 6/5/2023 at 3:35 AM, HQCardmaker said:

You have a point. Okay, feel free. I'm open to the idea. I'm curious.

How about if he would be destroyed by battle or targeted by a card effect, he can remove a traversal counter and double his ATK and DEF it instead. If he gets 3 traversal counters, he can attack directly? If you did do this, I would also say he should probably start with slightly lower ATK (500-800).

[Problamatico]

4 hours ago, Loleo said:

How about if he would be destroyed by battle or targeted by a card effect, he can remove a traversal counter and double his ATK and DEF it instead. If he gets 3 traversal counters, he can attack directly? If you did do this, I would also say he should probably start with slightly lower ATK (500-800).

Honestly I'd say leave it at 1000. The effect you made is FAR better, but not so much it needs to change the ATK. Because your opponent, based on this effect, could attack and activate an effect and get rid of it easy. All in all, it's still not amazing. 

[Loleo]

13 hours ago, Problamatico said:

Honestly, I'd say leave it at 1000. The effect you made is FAR better, but not so much it needs to change the ATK. Because your opponent, based on this effect, could attack and activate an effect and get rid of it easy. All in all, it's still not amazing. 

Fair enough, but keep in mind this is a level 4 monster with protection and it can its own attack to 4k in 2 turns.

[HQCardmaker]

On 6/7/2023 at 11:43 AM, Loleo said:

Fair enough, but keep in mind this is a level 4 monster with protection and it can its own attack to 4k in 2 turns.

 

On 6/6/2023 at 5:57 PM, Loleo said:

How about if he would be destroyed by battle or targeted by a card effect, he can remove a traversal counter and double his ATK and DEF it instead. If he gets 3 traversal counters, he can attack directly? If you did do this, I would also say he should probably start with slightly lower ATK (500-800).

 

On 6/6/2023 at 10:26 PM, Problamatico said:

Honestly I'd say leave it at 1000. The effect you made is FAR better, but not so much it needs to change the ATK. Because your opponent, based on this effect, could attack and activate an effect and get rid of it easy. All in all, it's still not amazing. 

I mean, the guy you replied to has a point, Loleo. The monster would be good tribute/overlay fuel for a certain Rank 3 monster Shark. (whose name escapes me) So I can see a lower attack being more balanced. Like at the very most, maybe 930 if it were to be one of those *Awkward* cards like that zombie. It is a close squeeze; and with no 4 Star Ladybug Setup to stop it unless you raise it's level as prevention, it would be quite the tricky combo; at 3720, it would easily get taken down by a Red Eyes Black Dragon and that zombie with the goofy Attack/Defense stats with the right set-up. But keep in mind, this card's current right set-up requires the declaration of not attacking with it to gain counters, meaning you have to willingly be partially a sitting duck for a good portion of the duel to get that combo yourself. 4 cards - 4 cards = 0 cards. Making it the furthest someone is willing to go with the attack if I am to really believe you two are both in a way partially right.

I might not have my research exactly right though, so keep in mind some of this is speculation.

[Loleo]

6 hours ago, HQCardmaker said:

I mean, the guy you replied to has a point, Loleo. The monster would be good tribute/overlay fuel for a certain Rank 3 monster Shark. (whose name escapes me) So I can see a lower attack being more balanced.

I'm the one that suggested lowering the ATK though? @Problamatico suggested keeping it at 1000.

Like at the very most, maybe 930 if it were to be one of those *Awkward* cards like that zombie. It is a close squeeze; and with no 4 Star Ladybug Setup to stop it unless you raise it's level as prevention,

My previous suggestion was lowering the ATK to ~800 on the high end. I would suggest keeping a multiple of 50 for simplicity unless you had a specific reason otherwise. As for the level, you shouldn't be too concerned with the tools that opens. Typically, power levels are separated between levels 1-4, 5/6, 7-9, 10-12. You shouldn't worry about that.

it would be quite the tricky combo; at 3720, it would easily get taken down by a Red Eyes Black Dragon and that zombie with the goofy Attack/Defense stats with the right set-up.

I'm curious what you're referring to? Red Eyes has 2400 ATK and I have no idea what zombie you could be referring to.

But keep in mind, this card's current right set-up requires the declaration of not attacking with it to gain counters, meaning you have to willingly be partially a sitting duck for a good portion of the duel to get that combo yourself.

Yes, that was well taken into consideration... although I wouldn't consider it much of a combo.

4 cards - 4 cards = 0 cards. Making it the furthest someone is willing to go with the attack if I am to really believe you two are both in a way partially right.

I'm really lost as to what you are talking about at this point.

I might not have my research exactly right though, so keep in mind some of this is speculation.

I'm sorry I'm having such a difficult time parsing together what you are saying, but long story short I still think less ATK is a good idea in the doubling setup.

 

[Zamazenta the OS-Tan Fan]

AI AI AI AI AI Your a very big Theif use Real Art instaed

[HQCardmaker]

On 6/11/2023 at 10:32 PM, Zamazenta the OS-Tan Fan said:

AI AI AI AI AI Your a very big Theif use Real Art instaed

Technically, the problem isn't intrinsically AI, but the fact that AI doesn't give credit where credit is due; the database just has reference and creator alike stirred in. The way that poster says it it sounds like you want to get paid or something. But okay, I'll make it a New Years Resolution to shrink drastically my use of AI. Just beware of lilyunad on DeviantART; I think she takes the crusade a little *too* seriously. I'll still use desmos calculator, mind you. Just not to steal credit.
(Might still use AI on Discord, but I'll keep it to a super-minimum to appease you.)

[Zamazenta the OS-Tan Fan]

4 hours ago, HQCardmaker said:

Technically, the problem isn't intrinsically AI, but the fact that AI doesn't give credit where credit is due; the database just has reference and creator alike stirred in. The way that poster says it it sounds like you want to get paid or something. But okay, I'll make it a New Years Resolution to shrink drastically my use of AI. Just beware of lilyunad on DeviantART; I think she takes the crusade a little *too* seriously. I'll still use desmos calculator, mind you. Just not to steal credit.
(Might still use AI on Discord, but I'll keep it to a super-minimum to appease you.)

Thank You we must hold these corporations accountable this is not okay what their doing they are stealing and not crediting the artist that is why I hate AI Art and its just so wrong on so many levels, also we gotta think about these companies know what there doing is wrong they just don;t want to credit the artist or pay them because if they had to do that then they cannot train their stupid database which is stolen art btw.

[Red Astral Qwipling]

On 6/12/2023 at 10:32 AM, Zamazenta the OS-Tan Fan said:

AI AI AI AI AI Your a very big Theif use Real Art instaed

Eww, such toxicity. Prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that a specific company has stolen a specific art(s) from a specific artist.

No entity can copyright an art style. This 'guilty until proven innocent' position should not be tolerated anywhere.

[Zamazenta the OS-Tan Fan]

57 minutes ago, Red Astral Qwipling said:

Eww, such toxicity. Prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that a specific company has stolen a specific art(s) from a specific artist.

No entity can copyright an art style. This 'guilty until proven innocent' position should not be tolerated anywhere.

You don't know what your talking about.

[HQCardmaker]

5 hours ago, Zamazenta the OS-Tan Fan said:

You don't know what your talking about.

The very last sentence he/she said begs to differ. Anyway, I'll just close that side-topic for now.