Dominion Strategy Forum
Dominion => Variants and Fan Cards => Topic started by: werothegreat on December 09, 2016, 12:12:46 am
-
Decided to test out Violet's new card generator, and came up with this:
(http://i.imgur.com/8Ko8gNl.png)
Kind of a mixture of Prince and Summon. Does this seem balanced?
-
This seems quite better than prince.
Yay not only do i have a princed band of misfits I also have a princed workshop.
-
Check this out (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=14964.msg657072#msg657072 date=1479965482)
-
Check this out (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=14964.msg657072#msg657072 date=1479965482)
I can't link messages.
Here it is:
New idea. Weak or broken?
Unnamed Princess
cost 6P - Duration
For the rest of the game, at the start of your turn, gain a card costing up to $4, putting it into your hand.
-
This seems quite better than prince.
Yay not only do i have a princed band of misfits I also have a princed workshop.
It is not strictly better than Prince. For example if you Prince Smithy you have the equivalence of 3 Labs at the start of very turn whereas with Admiral you would have to clog your decks with Smithies in order to get the same effect.
Of course you can easily imagine a situation in which gaining and autoplaying a 4 every turn is better than just having a Princed card. Easiest scenario is again a Kingdom with Smithy but also Village.
So it is hard to say whether this is better or weaker than Prince. I'd worry more about the piledriving.
-
You could make it discard itself from play / stop its effect when you gain a Victory card (and maybe adjust the price accordingly).
Although agree that the "clogging" of your deck makes it not-strictly better than Prince, but still, it's a hell of a lot more flexible, and doesn't need to be collided with other cards, etc.
-
Seems very similar to this idea:
New idea. Weak or broken?
Unnamed Princess
cost 6P - Duration
For the rest of the game, at the start of your turn, gain a card costing up to $4, putting it into your hand.
This is better than prince in a few ways: 1. It takes less set up; 2. nets you a card every turn.
There are only real two downsides: 1. Kingdom piles being empty; 2. Filling your deck with too many terminal actions in a non village kingdom, however you could use this card to target actions that gives +1 action to net an action.
-
Make it trash the card during clean-up? That would be an interesting twist; it trades flexibility in starting your turn for acccelerating the end of the game and cutting off your own supply of the very engine pieces you were hoping would be in your deck.
-
Yeah this is way better than Prince (no, not strictly better. No one's saying it's strictly better). Prince requires you to 1) Buy Prince. 2) Buy the card you want to Prince. 3) Manage to get Prince and the card in your hand at the same time.
For all of that, you get the benefit of playing a $4 at the start of every turn (the same $4 each time).
Admiral requires you to 1) Buy Admiral. 2) Play it as soon as you draw it.
And for those much easier steps, you get the benefit of playing a $4 at the start of every turn, that can be whichever $4 is best for you at the moment, AND you get to gain a copy of that $4. The suggestion that gaining the card is more of a detriment than a benefit is like saying that Throne Room is better than Disciple, because Disciple could cause you to clog your deck with the card you are throning.
Yes, the fact that a pile can run out can hurt Admiral. It's not as good if there's only a single card that it works with. But even in that case, by the time you run out of the pile, you should have already gotten a LOT of benefit from it.
-
The suggestion that gaining the card is more of a detriment than a benefit is like saying that Throne Room is better than Disciple, because Disciple could cause you to clog your deck with the card you are throning.
This is nonsense. As always it depends on the Kingdom.
If you prince a Smithy you get 3 extra cards at every turn from then on. If you admiral a Smithy you only get 3 extra cards for this turn but you get the Smithy into your deck.
In a Kingdom with no villages you would definitely prefer to prince the Smithy whereas in a Kingdom with villages or lots of cheap non-terminals you would rather have Admiral.
-
The suggestion that gaining the card is more of a detriment than a benefit is like saying that Throne Room is better than Disciple, because Disciple could cause you to clog your deck with the card you are throning.
This is nonsense. As always it depends on the Kingdom.
If you prince a Smithy you get 3 extra cards at every turn from then on. If you admiral a Smithy you only get 3 extra cards for this turn but you get the Smithy into your deck.
In a Kingdom with no villages you would definitely prefer to prince the Smithy whereas in a Kingdom with villages or lots of cheap non-terminals you would rather have Admiral.
Agreed, but saying this is nonsense, and then proceeding to say that it could happen based on the kingdom is a little, well, nonsensical.
-
The suggestion that gaining the card is more of a detriment than a benefit is like saying that Throne Room is better than Disciple, because Disciple could cause you to clog your deck with the card you are throning.
This is nonsense. As always it depends on the Kingdom.
If you prince a Smithy you get 3 extra cards at every turn from then on. If you admiral a Smithy you only get 3 extra cards for this turn but you get the Smithy into your deck.
In a Kingdom with no villages you would definitely prefer to prince the Smithy whereas in a Kingdom with villages or lots of cheap non-terminals you would rather have Admiral.
I feel like just quoting Seprix here, but I'm a bit more polite. OF COURSE it depends on the Kindom! It alway does. Every time. Is Gold a lot better than Copper? Yes. The fact that i can design a Kingdom where I'd prefer Copper is not relevant to that fact. I even clarified, for your benefit, that I was NOT talking about strictly better. Your response is only relevant to the argument that it is strictly better, which no one is arguing.
So please stop responding to "x is better than y" with "nuh uh, you're wrong, here's a kingdom where y is better!" I mean, do you look at card rankings lists and say "look at these idiots claiming that Chapel is better than Pearl Diver. What if the Kingdom doesn't benefit from trashing at all?"
Finally, it would take a Kingdom with no non-terminals under $4, not just a Kingdom with no Village, to make me prefer a Princed Smithy. If there's any non terminal, then on any hand that I start with multiple Smithies, I would get a Village by playing a non-terminal.
-
Maybe you should just gain the card to your hand without getting to play it?
-
The suggestion that gaining the card is more of a detriment than a benefit is like saying that Throne Room is better than Disciple, because Disciple could cause you to clog your deck with the card you are throning.
This is nonsense. As always it depends on the Kingdom.
If you prince a Smithy you get 3 extra cards at every turn from then on. If you admiral a Smithy you only get 3 extra cards for this turn but you get the Smithy into your deck.
In a Kingdom with no villages you would definitely prefer to prince the Smithy whereas in a Kingdom with villages or lots of cheap non-terminals you would rather have Admiral.
I feel like just quoting Seprix here, but I'm a bit more polite. OF COURSE it depends on the Kindom! It alway does. Every time. Is Gold a lot better than Copper? Yes. The fact that i can design a Kingdom where I'd prefer Copper is not relevant to that fact. I even clarified, for your benefit, that I was NOT talking about strictly better. Your response is only relevant to the argument that it is strictly better, which no one is arguing.
So please stop responding to "x is better than y" with "nuh uh, you're wrong, here's a kingdom where y is better!" I mean, do you look at card rankings lists and say "look at these idiots claiming that Chapel is better than Pearl Diver. What if the Kingdom doesn't benefit from trashing at all?"
Finally, it would take a Kingdom with no non-terminals under $4, not just a Kingdom with no Village, to make me prefer a Princed Smithy. If there's any non terminal, then on any hand that I start with multiple Smithies, I would get a Village by playing a non-terminal.
You claimed that clogging your deck is never an issue with Admiral wheras it actually is in some Kingdoms. So your claim was total nonsense.
Admiral is probably better than Prince in most Kingdoms but without villages Princing a Smithy might be better. You only get one pseudovillage if you admiral Pearl Driver so you can hardly play a draw engine.
-
Pretty much what the non-tristan people are saying is that in general admiral is way better than prince.
Tristan is pretty much saying that these people are wrong because that isn't true on a few boards. General means mostly so one counter example doesn't contradict the general trend.
If tristan continues to argue this way we probably shouldn't argue back because he is unwilling to listen.
-
That's factually wrong. There are ample of Kingdoms without a village and in such Kingdom you cannot play a draw engine. Prince-Smithy is equivalent to 3 Labs per turn whereas Admiral-Smithy and later Admiral-whatevercheapcantrip-Smithy is equivalent to 2 Labs.
No this ain't bad but in such a Kingdom you'd have to sooner or later clog your deck with cheap terminal crap that you don't really want with Admiral.
So GendoIkari's notion that clogging your deck with crap is never a problem is simply factually wrong. Admiral is probably only good in Kingdoms in which you'd also want a gainer.
Also,as you get Admiral or Prince fairly late in the game the permanent effect of Prince could easily trump the constant gaining of Admiral. Gaining <=4$ is good for build-up and not so much for endgame play.
Doesn't mean that Admiral isn't better than Prince though, it is probably too cheap for 8$. But to pretend that Admiral never has any drawbacks is preposterous.
-
That's factually wrong. There are ample of Kingdoms without a village and in such Kingdom you cannot play a draw engine. Prince-Smithy is equivalent to 3 Labs per turn whereas Admiral-Smithy and later Admiral-whatevercheapcantrip-Smithy is equivalent to 2 Labs.
This is factually wrong. Admiral-cantrip+Smithy is equivalent to 3 Labs, as both give you an 8-card hand with an Action left.
(And you also have the choice to go for Admiral-Smithy+Smithy for a 10-card hand without an Action left.)
-
True that. You still cannot play a draw engine with Admiral and no village though.
-
So GendoIkari's notion that clogging your deck with crap is never a problem is simply factually wrong.
Please stop misrepresenting my position and arguing against a strawman. You know very well that I never claimed anything involving the words "never" or "always".
-
Also, it was mentioned in my first post, but the discussion since then has been all about the effects of a Princed Smithy vs the effects of a played Admiral. As if those 2 are comparable in opportunity cost. Which they aren't, not even close. As I said, a Princed Smithy requires 1) Buying Prince; 2) Buying Smithy; 3) Managing to draw both in the same hand. An Admiral requires 1) Buying Admiral.
And I can't believe I'm still arguing this, but... Tristan's entire argument seems to be "A Princed Smithy is better than using Admiral to gain and play a Smithy every turn." Well great, no one has actually disagreed with that at all. It's never been what our point was. A kingdom with Smithy as the only $4 or less card is a very small minority of all Kingdoms.
-
So GendoIkari's notion that clogging your deck with crap is never a problem is simply factually wrong.
Please stop misrepresenting my position and arguing against a strawman. You know very well that I never claimed anything involving the words "never" or "always".
War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength and Gendo did not really say what he said:
The suggestion that gaining the card is more of a detriment than a benefit is like saying that Throne Room is better than Disciple, because Disciple could cause you to clog your deck with the card you are throning.
-
So GendoIkari's notion that clogging your deck with crap is never a problem is simply factually wrong.
Please stop misrepresenting my position and arguing against a strawman. You know very well that I never claimed anything involving the words "never" or "always".
War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength and Gendo did not really say what he said:
The suggestion that gaining the card is more of a detriment than a benefit is like saying that Throne Room is better than Disciple, because Disciple could cause you to clog your deck with the card you are throning.
Could you go ahead and use bold or something to mark the place in that quote where it says "never" or "always"?
-
You guys could spend this time on designing a new traveller.
-
I honestly don't know why people still bother arguing with Tristan. You guys may as well start arguing with a brick wall.
-
You guys could spend this time on designing a new traveller.
The final form gives you +1 buy every time you buy something and the option to buy coin tokens for $1 each.
-
You guys could spend this time on designing a new traveller.
The final form gives you +1 buy every time you buy something and the option to buy coin tokens for $1 each.
Hmm, so remove limited buys as a rule in the same way Champion removes limited actions. I like it.
-
So GendoIkari's notion that clogging your deck with crap is never a problem is simply factually wrong.
Please stop misrepresenting my position and arguing against a strawman. You know very well that I never claimed anything involving the words "never" or "always".
War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength and Gendo did not really say what he said:
The suggestion that gaining the card is more of a detriment than a benefit is like saying that Throne Room is better than Disciple, because Disciple could cause you to clog your deck with the card you are throning.
Could you go ahead and use bold or something to mark the place in that quote where it says "never" or "always"?
It is pointless to discuss with pathological liars.
I mentioned the POTENTIAL problem of clogging in my first post whereas you responded with an UNCONDITIONAL statement about clogging not being a problem.
-
The suggestion that gaining the card is more of a detriment than a benefit is like saying that Throne Room is better than Disciple, because Disciple could cause you to clog your deck with the card you are throning.
That seems pretty conditional to me. Nowhere did he say something unconditional.
On a side note, what price do you think this is best at Tristan?
-
So GendoIkari's notion that clogging your deck with crap is never a problem is simply factually wrong.
Please stop misrepresenting my position and arguing against a strawman. You know very well that I never claimed anything involving the words "never" or "always".
War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength and Gendo did not really say what he said:
The suggestion that gaining the card is more of a detriment than a benefit is like saying that Throne Room is better than Disciple, because Disciple could cause you to clog your deck with the card you are throning.
Could you go ahead and use bold or something to mark the place in that quote where it says "never" or "always"?
It is pointless to discuss with pathological liars.
I mentioned the POTENTIAL problem of clogging in my first post whereas you responded with an UNCONDITIONAL statement about clogging not being a problem.
*Must stop replying, must stop replying, must stop replying....*
My statement was literally that gaining the card is more of a benefit than a detriment. That is absolutely in no way anything like an unconditional statement that clogging is never a problem. To repeat my previous analogy, I stand by the statement that Gold is better than Copper. That is NOT an unconditional statement that buying a Copper instead of a Gold is never the right move.
Literally no one has made any unconditional statements here; and you have done nothing but argue against imaginary strawmen arguments.
-
Yes, uou must stop replying.
Why don't you go and design a travellerline and send it to me?
-
On a side note, what price do you think this is best at Tristan?
I have no idea, high cost cards are hard to balance. Wero is probably right to start to playtest this at 8. If it turns out to be to strong the right move is probably to nerf the card, not to make it Platin or Colony level expensive.
Usually you get Prince during the middlegame and play it the first time somehow around 2/3 of the game in.
So Admiral will also be permanently in play fairly late and while gaining and Summon-style autoplaying cards will still be good it will not be as good as early in the game. You also gotta care about pile-rushing, especially if the VP count is close. As Admiral gains one extra card per turn it could be detrimental if you are behind but could also help you to three-pile the game and rush towards victory if you are ahead.
All this makes it hard to evaluate this card. While some folks pretend that this is simple and virtually always better than Prince I don't think so.