Battalion

[Erundil]

Cost: 7 - 2
Type: Creature
Overflow, 6/6

[snowdrop]

All seems fine, but the name could probably be something else: In WT usually units will be portrayed solo (regardless if we with our imagination believe they are part of a squad or a representative of one, which they actually are not.)

In any case battalion seems to suggest 300+ creatures according to Wiki. I follow the thinking since it has some huge ATK/DEF, but it doesn't scale properly even then if we have singular creatures with 1/1.

[Erundil]

Ehm, here comes in the discussion I made on having creatures/units. A unit would do, a creature won't.

[snowdrop]

I don't get the discussion: 99% of the art shows singular creatures. We could of course call a creature a unit for reasons argued elsewhere, but that doesn't remove the fact that a creature/unit is a representation of one organism, not a group of them. Names also suggest the same.

[Erundil]

As if hundreds of cards were done. It was obvious that new things would emerge has cards are made. A batalion is a unit. A batalion unit.
A creature is more striclty reffering to a single entity.

[snowdrop]

As if hundreds of cards were done.

We had 200-something portraits of singular creatures when we started out. We have also added at least 30 - 50 in addition to those and keep on producing art that evolves around single creatures.

It was obvious that new things would emerge has cards are made.

Yes, I agree new stuff should be developed. But from that it isn't obvious that we go from singular to groups being protraid. It's also unclear how that would work/compare mechanic and combat-wise in the game.

A creature is more striclty reffering to a single entity.

Yes, exactly. (That said I am having less and less issues with the word "unit" instead of "creature", although I still believe that "unit" might as well be singular as plural while we always use singular)