Forum:Excalibur

Just wondering how do you guys feel about the new archetype Heroic, which seems to be based on supporting each other by absorbing ATK from another Heroic monster you control. Man, after I saw Heroic Champion Excalibur, I was annoyed as to why it would detach all its Xyz Materials to double its original ATK for 2 turns. If it was detaching 1 Xyz Materials, then i'm fine, but all of them is not okay for me. Then, I see its other monster Heroic Challenger Spartas, and i finally understood the idea of this archetype. Then, I gave up. Not sure if it's a good archetype or not.

What's your first thought about this soon-to-be archetype? LastMinute (talk • contribs) 20:06, February 16, 2012 (UTC)

I believe that there is a lot of potential for the archetype, but we probably haven't seen all of them so there is no way to make a definitive review on them. It's like trying to review Hieroglyph with only Seal and Nephte. But I can at least see potential. Jamesfury (talk • contribs) 20:11, February 16, 2012 (UTC)

While I'm not sure about the archetype, Excalibur itself I think is a great card. I run ninjas and he'd make a kinda cool substitute for when I run out of Blade Armor Ninjas or when I need a big beatstick fast. I'm also thinking that you could use the Utopia and Double or Nothing trick for a quick 8000k damage. Either way I'm sure he'll see a lot of play when he drops, with or without his archetype behind him. The magical archetype though seems a lot less spashable if every card in it requires 'Book of Magic' to run. Also I'm seeing 'Book of Magic' as being a support card archetype like Ninjitsu Art cards are. Rather than being just a card called 'Book of Magic' and it'd probably be changed to something like 'Grimoire' for the TCG.--The FireFALL (talk • contribs) 20:20, February 16, 2012 (UTC)

They're obviously Beatdown-oriented and I think Excalibur could be used in other Decks outside of its archetype, but I'll wait and see the other cards related to it before I can give my full opinion.--PoirotH (talk • contribs) 20:26, February 16, 2012 (UTC)

wow, i forgot that its effect has a "once per turn" text. What is the point of that, if you're going to detach all of its Xyz materials anyway?. LastMinute (talk • contribs) 00:41, February 17, 2012 (UTC)

2 level 4 warriors gets you a 4000 attacker(until the endphase ), its quite a high boost,if he was a machine, limiter removal could be abused easily. Speaking of which is there no chance of limiter removal changing it's position on the banlist?

[email protected] (talk • contribs) 01:21, February 17, 2012 (UTC)

At this point in time, no there isn't. Even though Shriek removed the list the front cover of that 'fake' list has now been revealed to be the real VJump cover for this month. So the odds of that 'fake' list being fake are now close to 0%. So no change for limiter removal.--The FireFALL (talk • contribs) 01:29, February 17, 2012 (UTC)

Well, you could still negate its effect, and who would go through the trouble to xyz summon this card then change it to machine-type to use limiter removal. LastMinute (talk • contribs) 01:38, February 17, 2012 (UTC)

Wow, i hit the nail on the head with that one, not only did I get the Book of Spells being like Ninjitsu Arts right but there's a Grimoire as well! Seriously that cool. Also The Necronomicon is now a card...the hell...and that is AWESOME!...But that is also so totally gonna get censored over here. No way are they letting the Book of the Dead get to us uncensored in a children's card game.--The FireFALL (talk • contribs) 02:25, February 17, 2012 (UTC)

Something tells me the Heroic archetype isn't going to be as good as the new Spellcaster (Magical? Magicians?) one.
I think it's because "magicals" look to be based around their spells Books of Magic so are likely to be a toolbox or similar archetype where they can search spells as needed.
Heroics seem to be a Warrior deck based around keeping monsters alive and raising attack (so far), it's most likely Yumas new deck.

And lol, anyone else notice Optimus Prime?
121.222.228.13 (talk) 11:28, February 17, 2012 (UTC)