Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - FishingVillage

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
1
Turtle Way is awesome :o basically makes it possible to tavern any action card for as long as needed. It's a great perk of tavern cards like Ratcatcher and Transmogrify; once one is done with them, they can be left on the tavern and won't clutter up one's deck anymore.

2
So here we go have at it: http://globalnews.ca/news/3687647/mumbai-factory-dogs-blue/

It's not exactly a happy fun story, but by the accounts available it looks like consequences were met and the dogs are being treated.

3
Let's Discuss ... / Re: empires: legionary, the legendary
« on: July 26, 2016, 02:06:25 am »
A person in my group already wanted a soft ban on Legionary the first time it hit the table and was played. Having Wedding on the board probably didn't help either. The attack is strong, but it requires having a Gold in hand, and Legionary itself is $5. I think I can tolerate it.

I do think Legionary's attack is worse than Militia's in general though. With Militia, you drop to 3 cards but you can plan around that and you (usually) won't be harassed any further. With Legionary, you drop to 2 cards, which is pretty difficult to build a plan around, then you get a random card which may or may not help with whatever you were planning to do with 2 cards in hand. It can even work against you in some cases, such as if you're still working on trashing via Steward/Remake, leave a bad card in your hand, then end up drawing a card you don't want to trash.

Or maybe you decide to ditch the Steward/Remake/linchpin in the first place, then draw into a bad card. Hooray, you've basically got a completely useless turn. Which hopefully shouldn't be happening over 50% of the time (because half of your deck is better than the other half), but it can happen, and you might get some bad feels as a result.

Basically it feels like you will need to work around only having 2 useful cards that plays nice with the rest of your deck. That seems pretty brutal, but again the attack requires having a Gold to make it happen.

Once upon a time I played around with a custom card named Assassin that was "+1 Card / +1 Action / Each other player discards a card, then draws up to 3 cards in hand". Everyone hated it. Assassin doesn't immediately drag players down to 2 cards like Legionary does but it will eventually. I expected people to at least be bothered by Assassin but didn't realize how deeply despised it would be.

4
Let's Discuss ... / Re: empires: settlers and settler's village
« on: July 24, 2016, 11:56:18 am »
Fair enough, my comparison to Cities might not have enough similarities to be meaningful :) All the same, I am loathe to take the last Settler off and expose Bustling Village to other players if I can't do much more beyond that, and other players seem equally reserved usually.

5
Let's Discuss ... / Re: empires: settlers and settler's village
« on: July 23, 2016, 02:29:43 am »
+1 card +3 actions for $5 is pretty good. There are only 5 copies, but even 2 copies can sustain an engine fairly well. The fact that you could conditionally turn Bustling Village into +$1 +2 cards +3 actions (extra card from playing a fetched Settler and grabbing a Copper from your discard) is superb. It's almost a Super City, but Bustling Village trades the buy for another action.

There aren't a whole lot of cards that provide +3 actions on their own. There's Crossroads, but you only get the +3 actions the first time you play it. There's Fishing Village, but you get the 3rd bonus action at the start of your next turn (which you might prefer to keep a steady flow of actions). I don't think Crossroads could sustain an engine by itself, but Fishing Village has a pretty strong reputation. In fact I think it was recorded as one of the most often bought cards on isotropic when it was still up. tl;dr stuff that lets you play a lot of actions is good.

The thing is, there are 5 Settlers in the way, and Settlers is kind of a half-good Peddler variant. You get card and an action, then you sometimes get the equivalent of +$1 if you fetch a Copper in your discard. Early game this is useful, because hey there's a pretty good chance you have Coppers. Late game you probably won't want Coppers, so Settlers are going to fetch nothing. Because of the 5 Settlers in the way, Bustling Village has sort of the same problem as City; how often do you want to be the one that buys the last card that triggers Greater Cities or Super Cities for everyone else? If you want Bustling Villages and have some way to gain cards before buying, you could use that to get the last Settler and get started on Bustling Villages yourself.

6
Let's Discuss ... / Re: empires: city quarter
« on: July 19, 2016, 12:11:54 am »
Well, the boards I play on won't always necessarily have trashing, and I don't know how I feel about using City Quarter without the right action density in my deck. What I'm looking for is the option to have a card leave my deck each time I add an action card to my deck (not necessarily all in the same turn), and trashing that only accepts specific card type(s) stops working after awhile. Treasure trashing may be good enough since I can at least clear out the Coppers.

I understand Scrying Pool is effective, but I've never thought of it being a must have in a vacuum. If there were good non-terminal cards on the board, I definitely like going for SP. If there's unconditional trashing to go with it, even better.

The extra action that CQ gives is really good though, because unlike SP I can then actually play multiple terminals after playing CQs.

7
Let's Discuss ... / Re: empires: city quarter
« on: July 18, 2016, 07:46:25 pm »
I think getting City Quarter only makes sense if there is good trashing or good sifting on the board, and even then I'd prefer good trashing. CQ is comparable to a Madman that doesn't leave your deck if you can clean it up and fill it with actions, though that's sort of best case and maybe not reasonable to consider each game.

8 debt is a pretty high cost, but it can be worked on over time and CQ can conditionally do some great things. How often are you willing to pay 8 debt for a Village? If you can't trash cards from your deck, perhaps seeing 1 other action card each time you see your CQ is about the best you can manage, but maybe that's worth it.

8
Other Games / Re: CIVILIZATION VI
« on: July 15, 2016, 09:00:51 pm »
The corps option of limited stacking in CVI, I'm definitely looking forward to seeing how that works. Districts are going to be fun to mess around with as well, both because it won't become mandatory for me to put cities at the coast if harbor districts are a thing, and pillaging might actually be more meaningful if districts are more important than plain old improvements.

I personally prefer 1UPT over stacks of doom forever, but a variety of problems makes it a pain in the arse to use melee units in CiV.

1. There's a lot of dense terrain that slows your units down. Map choice can end up generating a lot of choke points all over the map as well.
2. Most melee units in the game only have 2 movement points. Combined with the dense terrain, your melee units could potentially be moving 1 tile per turn. That is really bad.
3. Building roads to increase the throughput of your army starts getting really expensive gold wise, which already sucks since unit maintenance costs scale very strongly.
4. Cities are really hard to kill and have a strong counter-attack.

Contrast this with ranged units, which
a. Can attack from 2 (or more!) spaces away, granting all sorts of initiative and the ability to focus fire more effectively.
b. Can attack without worrying about counter-attacks, and even counter-attack against melee attacks.
c. Generally don't cost that much in hammers or gold over their melee counterparts.
d. Can't capture cities! But oh boy, they're way better at actually fighting cities than melee units are.

I remember a few articles a long time ago about CiV taking some inspiration from Advance Wars (it was one of the reasons they went to 1UPT). But even in AW, units didn't always move at glacial speeds, and there was still a limited stacking option instead of disallowing stacking outright. General map design usually avoided making choke points all over the map, and didn't cover like >50% of the map in mountains and forests.

9
Let's Discuss ... / Re: empires: $5s that require a lot of deciding
« on: July 15, 2016, 01:36:31 pm »
Crown is just Throne Room that never misses.

Crown + 4 Provinces.  ;)
Don't be daft. Who would be silly enough to buy that many provinces and gum up their deck as a result?

10
I haven't played with Triumph yet. Seems like it would pair very happily with Goons. Buy up a ton of stuff, use your last buy on Triumph, get nearly double the number of VPs you would normally get from buying stuff with Goons alone. If you've got enough money and buys, I'm assuming Triumph's +VP / gain will stack, though the payoff on just buying only Triumph isn't great. In a vacuum though, without extra buys and/or ways to gain additional stuff in a turn, I don't think Triumph is worth it. 2 points for <5>? I guess you could feed the Estate to a Temple or a Bishop.

The game I played with Conquest also had Catapult / Rocks and Tomb, so that turned out hilarious. I think I bought Conquest on its own once or twice. I went double Catapult and basically started launching treasures as often as I could. I got Rocks whenever I had the money for it. Once or twice I was able to Catapult a Rock, which gains me a Silver, then bought a Conquest for more VP than usual, that seemed fun. Even in a vacuum, Conquest has the same total cost as two Silvers, which is what it gives. It's harder to hit $6 in one turn than $3 over two turns, but you only have to spend 1 buy and you get VPs out of it, so your effort is somewhat rewarded. I might be happy to get Conquest over Gold once or twice?

I'd probably value Conquest more on boards with lower costing alt VP. Smoothing out my hands for more even slightly-above-average hands would be fun if I don't care as much for Provinces. Like ignoring Feodum or Gardens, which would be the obvious enablers imo, I think I could be happy to tunnel vision for Conquest over Gold on boards with Dukes or Silk Roads. I make it easier to get alt VP per hand, and I shore up the potential Province differences with minor amounts of VP from Conquest.

11
Let's Discuss ... / Re: let's discuss matters of empires: advance!
« on: July 11, 2016, 08:27:48 pm »
I haven't had a chance to play Advance yet :( At first glance, Advance seems pretty cool, but requiring an action card in the first place means you need multiple pieces on the board to make this worthwhile, and the right pieces need to be good choices too. Usually you're just Remodeling or Expanding an action up, which can still be decent option.

It's probably not worth using Advance to go just $1 up on an action though unless the resulting card is hotly contested. Like how often does it make sense to be trading a Worker's Village for a Mandarin, or a Count, or a Margrave? You bought the Worker's Village for some reason right, and it's probably more important than Advance fodder, and you can eventually just buy those cards anyway for their given cost. On the other hand I might be fine with doing the same trade for a Minion or a Laboratory, if I feel that contesting for said actions is necessary.

12
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Make an attack that dishes out Debt
« on: July 11, 2016, 06:04:22 pm »
Unfortunately debt is a rather nasty drawback if it can be stacked indefinitely on others.
I don't think so. Cutpurse, while being weaker than a Debt attack (but also hitting earlier in the game when you have less coins), is not the end of the world.
Torturer shows us that as long as you give the defending player the option to do something else, basically what you suggested, stackable attacks are fine.
That probably depends on the number of players involved and/or whether there are ways to play multiple Cutpurses in a turn. Individually, sure, Cutpurses are somewhat annoying and become trivial later in the game. Having multiple plays of Cutpurse happen before your turn will probably start to become aggravating. Having that happen to you in multiple consecutive turns will probably make you stop playing altogether.

My opinion is probably influenced by the groups that I normally play with as well. If we get a board that has Torturer and consistent action splitters, or Torturer in games involving 3 or more players, we're likely to replace one of the cards with a protective Reaction, or just replace Torturer itself. I don't mind oppressive combos (particularly since I gravitate towards them ;D) but I've seen other players feel otherwise, and I would probably feel bad if I drove someone to never play Dominion ever again just because I like Torturer + Village a little too much.

13
Let's Discuss ... / Re: Let's Discuss Empire Events: Wedding?
« on: July 11, 2016, 05:46:34 pm »
That's interesting. As per my limited knowledge, I generally want to be drawing my Gold(s) more often than not in order to maximize the amount of money that my hands can make, and so I'd rather keep my deck as thin as possible, filling it with Gold and VP when I feel like my deck can take the fat. I'm assuming the 3 in the 3/4 split is generally for Silver?

14
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Make an attack that dishes out Debt
« on: July 09, 2016, 04:46:00 pm »
Unfortunately debt is a rather nasty drawback if it can be stacked indefinitely on others. Even being able to consistently give debt is very harmful. Here's an example that's basically a variant of what you have in your opening:
Quote
Debt Attack
$5 - Action - Attack
+$2
Each player (including you) may discard any number of cards from hand. Then each other player with no debt gains 1 debt per 2 cards in hand.

And, well, here's another idea, which tries unlimited stacking of debt, but gives other players a way out to not get completely flooded by it. Also I wonder how much one is willing to overpay to slap others with debt.
Quote
Debt On Buy
$4+ - Action - Attack
+2$
Each other player discards 1 card from hand or gains 1 debt.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
When you buy this, you may overpay for it. For each $2 you overpay, each other player gains 1 debt.

15
Dominion General Discussion / Re: My first Empires game
« on: July 08, 2016, 12:04:05 pm »
@Titandrake: that experience sounds awfully familiar :P in a game with the same setup that played out exactly the way you described...

I think if I had picked up even 1 Bustling Village during that game, it would've given me room for a Smithy, which I hoped I didn't need. The entire game was me playing like an idiot though.

- Enchantress was my first $3 but it hardly hurt either player and was made trivial by Settlers. I think the other player managed to actually capitalize off of it by using a terminal as a cantrip. I've struck out in every game when I bought an Enchantress, which makes me sad.

- I was triggering Colonnade in unnecessary ways in order to get the points, and I ended up with too many terminals in my deck.

- I Expanded one of my Temples into an Expand; that should've been a Gold.

- And of course me not contesting for Bustling Villages lol. Even without any Settlers, +3 actions is not something I should've overlooked. Especially with the number of terminals I had left in my deck at the end.

16
Dominion Articles / Re: Delve: A Brief Overview
« on: July 06, 2016, 03:05:21 pm »
I haven't had a chance to play with Delve yet, but even without enablers on the board, it already seems fairly strong on its own. To begin with Delve is strictly superior to Silver since:

1) Delve costs $1 less
2) Delve gives you back a buy

I definitely feel that Delve makes the biggest impact at the start of the game for the reasons given already; if there's a strong $5 or $3 card on the board, one can get 1 or 2 Silvers to go along with that card and not miss a beat.

I'm not sure how much I would prefer having the 3 Silvers over a Gold though. I get a stronger distribution, sure, but with a Gold I can get stronger spikes, and I also draw through my deck faster due to having fewer cards in the deck. In general, since the higher priced cards tend to give a better return for cost, I'd rather add 1 strong expensive card to my deck over 2 middle of the road cards (or outright start putting high cost points into my deck if I feel my deck can deal with the friction).

Past early game, if I hit $6 or $7 and think that I still need pieces in my engine to keep it smooth, being able to pick up a Silver on the side instead of letting $2 or $3 go to waste sounds pretty nice. My general habit in this case would be to just get a Gold and eat the $1 waste if I had $7, but I'd like to play with Delve before I say that my old habit is definitively the better choice.

17
Let's Discuss ... / Re: Let's Discuss Empire Events: Wedding?
« on: July 01, 2016, 07:35:20 pm »
Simulator suggests that for a treasure based deck, buying wedding instead of silvers will give you a 70-30 advantage over someone who doesn't. Longer games (like purely treasures) will give a bigger advantage for weddings and faster games will give less advantage.
That seems about right. I think in general I'd rather have 1 Gold added to my deck instead of 2 Silvers.

18
Let's Discuss ... / Let's Discuss Empire Events: Wedding?
« on: July 01, 2016, 02:49:18 pm »

Wedding is a powerful event, but it also taught me the value of being able to divide the cost of a card over multiple turns, and made me less apprehensive about the super high debt cost of certain cards in empires.

I think Wedding could've not had the +1 VP rider along with gaining the Gold, and it would still be a great deal at $4 and 3 debt. I think Wedding could've been a straight up $7 for a Gold and +1 VP, and while that might seem like an iffy choice sometimes I'd still go for it over Duchies until the game starts looking like it'll end soon. But having the choice to put off some of the cost (minimum $4), and to get a Gold that comes with a VP which doesn't clog your deck? This thing is insane.

As long as the board doesn't have something which demands my immediate attention, I'm usually happy to use Wedding at the start of the game. A 5/2 or 4/3 split would be the most ideal opening, as I'd end up with a Gold in my deck by turn 3 and +1 VP on the side, which is quite nice. A 3/4 split isn't completely disastrous though; I'd still use Wedding on my second play and deal with the debt cost next turn.

Going into mid game, I'm very happy to flood my deck with Gold that come with VPs as often as I can. I guess the question is if Gold and 1VP over two turns is better or worse than whatever else one can get on the board, but the choices that beat that are probably very few.

And then going into late game and greening... I mean I've been flooding myself with Gold this entire time, and I probably don't have much else taking up space in my deck, mostly thanks to debt actually. My chances of getting a hand with 3 or more Gold will be pretty high, so even nasty attackers will have some trouble stopping me from brute forcing my way to Provinces.

I'm curious how strong Wedding is in a game involving Platinum and Colonies though. Do I still want to go deep on Wedding, then ratchet up to Plats and Colonies? Or can I actually flood myself with Gold so quickly that I'll deplete the Province pile before anyone else can get enough of a lead with Colonies?

So anyways...
- Do you think the Wedding is event is good?
- If Wedding is in the game and you plan to use it, how long will you use it before you stop?
- What other cards work well with Wedding? When do you find the turns to go for these cards over Wedding?

19
I've only been able to play the two recommended Empires-only sets last week :'( Going to be playing with the same folks again tonight, so hopefully it'll hit the table.

I'm not as experienced as everyone else here, but imo Wedding is so very very good :o Being able to split the cost of a Gold over two turns is totally worth the +$1 cost, and one gets 1 VP out of the transaction anyway. If I get a 4/3 split and Wedding is in play, it's very hard to say no to Gold and 1 VP. Even deciding to pay the total sum of $7 for a Gold and 1 VP is more worthwhile than most other choices.

20
Hmmm. How well does Hunting Party interact with PStone? Playing HP increases your hand size, but it's much better at filtering out and finding an individual PStone if you manage to bloat your deck up really fast.

21
Dominion General Discussion / Re: IRL Adventures stories
« on: May 08, 2015, 08:39:48 pm »
I tried Storyteller again last night... and I have to say, it still seems rather underwhelming. I think Storyteller needs easy ways of generating Gold or Silvers in the kingdom to feed it, or high value treasures of some sort, or else a bunch of non-terminal actions that make money. There was no trashing or cursing in the kingdom, so I thought I could at least get a lot of use out of cycling my deck with Coppers, but that never seemed especially helpful.

There was Relic, but it doesn't have any strong synergy with Storyteller anyway.

There was Magpie, which I got two copies of but one other player managed to pile it out quickly.

The other 2 players bought Bakers for most of the game, and while I could cycle through my deck a little faster, the other players could hit $6 and $8 way more consistently than I could.

Unfortunately I don't remember what the rest of the kingdom was like, but I'm pretty confident I lost that game.

22
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Really bad card ideas
« on: May 07, 2015, 07:06:29 pm »
Then what happens to the bought event? It just stays on the top?
Uh I guess it goes back under as well. Will edit.

23
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Really bad card ideas
« on: May 07, 2015, 06:24:40 pm »
Witch Mirror
Event $1
+1 Buy

Reveal the top 3 Events of the Witch Mirror deck. You may buy one of them immediately. Put the Events on the bottom of the Witch Mirror deck in any order.

(Before the game, make a Witch Mirror deck out of each Event not in the game.)

24
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Ideas Inspired by Adventures
« on: May 07, 2015, 12:01:59 am »
Monastery $4
Action - Reaction
Draw up to 6 cards in hand. Trash up to 3 cards from your hand. Discard up to 3 cards from your hand.
---
When another player plays an attack card, you may play this from your hand. (Discard this from play during your own Clean-Up phase.)

That looks ridiculously powerful, even without the Reaction. For the most part it's a way better Chapel.

Also, parenthetical stuff on a card is used to remind you of rules, not to change them. Monastery would be discarded at the end of the turn on which it is played. Why would you even want to change that?
Sorry, is there precedence for a card played out of turn outside of Caravan Guard? I wasn't aware of how cleaning up a card played out of turn would work if it wasn't a Duration, which is why I added the reminder text. If the rules can already handle cards played out of turn, then okay the reminder isn't needed.

As for Monastery being too powerful, would it be more interesting if it had a mandatory trash 1 and a mandatory discard 1 instead?

25
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Horse Archer! The scourge of civility!
« on: May 05, 2015, 10:10:48 pm »
So draw up to 6 then trash one is basically Masquerade, which is a very powerful $3. So this has that plus a Militia attack; sounds too strong for $5 maybe.

The reaction is a neat concept; but it has a problem.... "when you have fewer than 4 cards in hand" is not an event; it's a situation. When exactly do you use the reaction? At any moment? There needs to be a specific event that it's responding to. It could be "when you discard or trash a card from hand, if you have fewer than 4 cards in hand..."
Personally I think there's a lot more going on with Masq than just "draw up to 6, trash a card from hand". I guess drawing up to 5, then discarding/trashing would bring it more in line with Militia, but still a little stronger since it can sift and trash.

What if the event was "When a card leaves your hand, if you have fewer than 4 cards in hand..."?

Edit: Oh hmm, that's interesting... if Horse Archer only draws up to 5, then trashes/discards 1, then it's worse to have it trigger at the start of your turn, as that just takes 1 card from your hand. Maybe it'll be better to just increase the cost to $6...

Edit2: Actually yeah, I got a little overexcited on the idea and I admit to not thinking it through much. The trigger is interesting and I'd like to explore it for another card, but it's too powerful for this one. I'll pare Horse Archer down a bit but I'll leave the old version there for context.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5

Page created in 0.093 seconds with 18 queries.