I like this but I feel like it needs deeper analysis
I don't think that it could be analysed sufficiently, because it's really depends on the opposing side. And a lot of different deck, where it could work (GoO based Trident trio, normal EQ based duo, Inertia fueled SoFocus+Grav nymph duo, Pestal...). So a 'test phase' would be better for it.
^ I agree that a lot of in game testing is likely going to be the only way to really assess this card... A little initial analysis can be done though.
For instance,
1) since this card imparts an upkeep on each individual creature, decks that use a small number of high power creatures will be less strongly impacted than decks which use swarms of small low cost creatures.
2) Similarly, decks that have an abundant quanta supply will see less impact from this, where as decks that are streamlined to produce just enough quanta to cast their creatures will be significantly weakened.
As a consequence of (2) some elements will be more strongly burdened than others. The reason being that some elements are better at producing quanta.
The elements that would survive best:
- locket + inertia combo produces so much quanta that this can be ignored effectively
- cremation and thermal recoil
- GoO and dryspell
- solar shield and luciferin
- soul catcher and its many combos
The elements that would probably be hampered significantly:
- fractal would even harder to pull off, spark effectively loses its
production utility
- many of the best strategies are highly dependent on numbers
- non-pillar decks (except locket inertia based) have issues since they typically make just enough quanta to bring out what they need.
