2011-2-12 CL Rayquaza SL10

[MrMeches]

"Before posting, please review the FAQ and follow the Guidelines provided for Card of they Day. Whereas we enjoy opinions of the cards, it is necessary to include a Brief Description for all players to understand your point of view and an optional Rating (ex. x/10). In the future, posts not using the FAQ information may be deleted and reported. Thanks, Mgmt"​

[gal= 51470]
2011-2-12 CL Rayquaza SL10
[/gal]​

 

[idrumprettywell]

looks awesome, bad card.

first

 

[Elite_4_Allen]

Dang, I got second today, I was close.
Anyway, The second most playable "shiny" in the set.
It could possibly make a fun deck with pachirisu from the same set and typhlosion prime, but fun only.
4/10.

 

[Dude]

Could be a fun deck but the only good thing about it is its artwork. Just like most of Col

 

[LauraKitazawa]

Love the artwork, could be playable with Magnezone SF I guess.

10/10 for art, 5/10 for fun playability.

 

[Scipio]

If it did 150 damage (Like the LA one), it'd be playable.
It doesn't.
If it did 110 damage, it'd be considerable for fun decks for OHKO on SP X's.
It doesn't.
If it didn't have a Colorless weakness, it wouldn't be easy pickings for Garchomp C.
It does.
Bad card is bad.
Prerelease: 5/10. While awesome, getting him charged is annoying, leave alone striking twice in a row. Colorless is also prevalent.
Modified: 1.5/10. Its...at least looking awesome.
Unlimited: Are you kidding me/10

 

[Dragon Strife]

It's my fave shiny! That is the only thing that is good -_-. 10/10 for the artwork, but 2/10 for being a card in a deck.

Definatly a put in the binder card.

 

[wakonow2]

(a lot of people are going to hate on me for this, but...)I don't get the whole artwork thing. I don't think the artwork is all that great. I mean, yeah, the Rayquaza is shiny. But that's all. The background is just colors and white swirls. I could make this on Adobe Photoshop. The attack is no good either. 4 energy, no colorless, for 100+ the discard of 2 of them. Maybe if you discarded all fire, it would be better(Typhlosion prime) But no. Really this card is no good. Yeah, it collectable because of how it's shiny and it's rarity. But the artwork is terrible IMO and the attack is no better.

 

[Regis_Neo]

Today's CotD is Rayquaza from CL, the shiny one...well, while I do love the charcoal colored one over the basic green scheme, the card itself is nothing spectacular. Statwise 100 HP is great for a Basic, x2 Weakness to :colorless: is meh, -20 Resistance to :fighting: is good, and :colorless::colorless: to Retreat is a tad pricey. Rayquaza has one attack, Inferno Spear, which with its unorthodox cost of :fire::fire::lightning::lightning: for 100 while having to discard a :fire: and :lightning: on him to use, makes it mediocre at best.

Modified - 2/10 (I can't think of a practical way to use it unless you're into the impossibility of getting Magnezone and Heatran Lv X out at the same time)
Limited - 7/10 (Adequate time to build him up, or he provides a few turns worth of stalling as your opponent struggles to beat down a 100 HP Basic)
Unlimited - 1/10 (Just as impossible, if not more so, to use here than in Modified)

 

[LauraKitazawa]

(a lot of people are going to hate on me for this, but...)I don't get the whole artwork thing. I don't think the artwork is all that great. I mean, yeah, the Rayquaza is shiny. But that's all. The background is just colors and white swirls. I could make this on Adobe Photoshop. The attack is no good either. 4 energy, no colorless, for 100+ the discard of 2 of them. Maybe if you discarded all fire, it would be better(Typhlosion prime) But no. Really this card is no good. Yeah, it collectable because of how it's shiny and it's rarity. But the artwork is terrible IMO and the attack is no better.

Some people like pretty colours and white swirls on their Pokemon cards.

 

[wakonow2]

Some people like pretty colours and white swirls on their Pokemon cards.

Yeah, I understand that. But it just looks to simple. IDK, maybe it's just the scan of it(i haven't seen actually seen one)

 

[Scipio]

Okay, you can make the background and paste Rayquaza on it.
Now make the Rayquaza itself.

 

[Dragonflames1994]

Awesome art (I pulled this at PR! :biggrin, but sadly not much use in the TCG. Keep it in your binder. 3/10

 

[David Hura]

Unlimited: Are you kidding me/10

I lol'd hard

I agree with others in saying that the art is nice, but yeah... its really not playable. Oh well.

 

[kekaw2]

this is for the little kids only. X/10
X=the # of other cards better than this.

 

[wakonow2]

Okay, you can make the background and paste Rayquaza on it.
Now make the Rayquaza itself.

There is barely any geometry in Rayquaza what so ever. But I understand what your saying...

 

[Kagennotsuki272]

this is for the little kids only. X/10
X=the # of other cards better than this.

So... let |x| be the number of elements within the set {x| x = every other Pokemon card ever printed}.
For the sake of simplicity, let's say |x| = 9001.

This would mean that Rayquaza's rating is 9001/10, making it the most amazing card ever.

But no! We have a paradox! Because of how horrible Rayquaza is, its rating should be closer to 0/10.

Thus, allow me to posit that Rayquaza's proper score should be (-X/10), with X being defined as it were. Now Rayquaza's rating is so far below par that it simply cannot be compared to any "playable" card - not even Quagsire.

 

[Nintendan]

Modified - 2/10 (I can't think of a practical way to use it unless you're into the impossibility of getting Magnezone and Heatran Lv X out at the same time)

Dude, not even! Heatran X only works on :fire: or :metal: types.


While the art is nice, the actual card itself, in this format, is disgusting. 4 for 100? 2 different types of specific energy? No thanks. There are much better cards that can do 100 (or around that) for much less or are easier/faster to set up.