Net Trap

[biogopher]

People don't seem to use the Net Trap + Burning/Poison Arrow combo. It's a great combo.

I like the sound of this:
Net Trap
Cost 3
Play face down. The next enemy ally to be summoned cannot attack or defend for 3 turns.

Actually this is a really good idea, itll solve two problems in one. By making it cost three people wont be able to tell the difference between it and death trap.

I believe that net trap should counter portal, not the other way around. Net trap is already useless enough as it is, we dont need that 2 resource wasted cuz they portaled.

[Dai]

I think that there is no solution in making it costs equal that death trap, cause it's basically a trap that costs the same but its worst. If it affects different the gameplay it's ok to cost 3 but being less good that the other trap is not good for the gameplay. For the other player, the good option every time is to play the weaker ally first to die off the trap an then the good one. Only to guess what is the trap face down? the good one or the bad one?

Sorry about my english :P

[Scion]

I think that there is no solution in making it costs equal that death trap, cause it's basically a trap that costs the same but its worst. If it affects different the gameplay it's ok to cost 3 but being less good that the other trap is not good for the gameplay. For the other player, the good option every time is to play the weaker ally first to die off the trap an then the good one. Only to guess what is the trap face down? the good one or the bad one?

Sorry about my english :P

I proposed to another thread that it should cost three and as an addition it should 1 card draw for each turn the enemy ally remains exhausted. So it your ally going to be killed from that 3 cost trap or will it grant cards to your opponent and keep your ally useless on the board for 2 turns?

[Dai]

That is a good idea

[Scion]

And i had suggested also for careful planning to work along the traps that not only you get to look your deck's top card but if it's a trap to set it for free immediately!

[jonathan strange]

not a bad idea

[HoneyBadger]

Net Trap
Cost 3
Play face down. The next enemy ally to attack your hero or an ally you control deals no damage and is disabled for 3 turns.

[Wtzky]

Whatever happens just improve this horrible card ASAP please!

[andy01q]

It should cost 3, exhaust all remaining opponent ressources and destroy 1 opponent ressource if he has more (and not(!) as much. Since it activates in his turn he will be having more ressources than you often enough.) ressources than you.
So if you're opponent has enough ressources for one strong and one weak ally against Net trap (which actually should be renamed then, lol.) it would be wise to play the strong ally first. Against death trap however it would be still the right choice to play the weak ally first.

[Hazunia]

@Andy,
That would make it much stronger than trueblade which has 4 casting cost, which to me seems quite high. The only reason it is so high is because it destroys a resource, yuippee.

I do agree that the net trap needs a buff to be viable alternative to the death trap. However there have been couple nice suggestions how to make it actually worth not only having in your deck, but actually play as well.

Playing for free on the very first turn idea seemed interesting to me, but...
T1: Net Trap, Wyld
T2: Blake
T3: ???
T4: Profit, troll face

To me it would be better to either reduce its cost to 1, or having the caster draw additional cards during the capture time, or making it permanent like so many other capture / disabling cards, but then it's bit too similar to the death trap.