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 - popsofctown

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 198
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Split pile: Attendants/Old God
« on: Today at 08:30:25 pm »
That's definitely what you want.  As we are discussing, this is on the soft side of the power curve as printed ( but not terribly so ).  Forcing it to get stranded in play whenever you whiff would weaken it.

You should agree this is an appropriate necro.

After over one year of no active development, War of Omens has received a patch from a volunteer developer who is going to work on the game.

Based on his post, he's going to wait and see how motivated he feels about working on it.  It's not a lucrative endeavor.

The game's core gameplay is so good that the game has not died out at all.  Retention rate is still is so high that queue times are pretty reasonable.

The patch had only a couple bugfixes.  One of them was "fixed an issue requiring players to email in to get their Champion's Paiza."  Champion's Paiza takes hundreds and hundreds of hours to unlock - apparently people have stuck to this thing.

I still play some.  It's a great game.

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Split pile: Attendants/Old God
« on: Today at 03:52:15 pm »
Yeah.  That works.

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Split pile: Attendants/Old God
« on: Today at 12:28:29 pm »
I really like this design space.  The Old God strategy can really lock another player out of the game, but if it doesn't quite get there, it would expect to get out-rushed. 

Only criticism is that it's slightly ahead of every official Dominion card in making the game tricky to play by hand, since it creates the "duration is not in play, but will still have its effect" effect without requiring a 2 card interaction to invoke.  Every other case of that requires the duration and a non-duration effect to combine to make it possible.  It's considered a "gray sin" in the game's current game philosophy, there are some ways it might happen, but it's not super too likely.  (MtG has lots of game design "grey sins", like the confusion of +1/+1 and -1/-1 counters in the same game.  No card in a serious set is allowed to produce both kinds of counters, but it's permissible for them to have a small chance to run into eachother.)

It's hard to think of good solutions that wouldn't damage the nice design here, though.  It might be one of those cases where the best answer is to break the soft rule because the design is otherwise so cool.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Words in card names
« on: Today at 08:58:31 am »
the sequences "haunt house" and "bandit camp" appearing just from alphabetization are creepy.

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: A couple cards
« on: November 13, 2017, 09:22:44 pm »
Forgive my MtG ways.

Variants and Fan Cards / A couple cards
« on: November 13, 2017, 06:29:21 pm »
Circumnavigation - 0$ Event
Remove Circumnavigation from the game.  Take [DEBT] equal to the number of cards in the supply pile with the fewest cards.  The next time you become debt free, add a new Landmark without set-up to the game.

Convent - 3$ Action-Night-Victory-Duration
At the start of your next turn, set a card from your hand aside with Convent, face down.
On the following turn, discard it at the start of your Buy phase, and +1$, +1 Buy.
Worth 2 VP

I've always wanted "misses reshuffles as upside" on a card, this is a crack at it.

Panhandler- 2$ Action-Victory
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy
+1$ or gain a Panhandler
You can't buy non-victory cards this turn.
Worth 1 VP if paired with a Curse in scoring (otherwise, 0)
Philanthropist - 6$ Action
You may trash a non-victory card from your hand.  +VP equal to its cost in coins.
When you buy this, you may put your deck into your discard pile.

The idea for Panhandler came first, and I felt like it was mechanically o.k., shouldn't be any worse than Grand Market in terms of "this kinda replaced Province didn't it", and Grand Market was the inspiration.  But then I realized the emptiness of the Panhandler pile itself was a major balance issue.  "This doesn't count as an empty supply pile" is ugly, so I came up with this. 

Probably lots of engine mirrors end with using another source of +buy to gain just one or two Panhandlers, or buying them 13$ Herbalist style, but that should be fine.

My mind is really bad at reshuffle logic, but I have this theory that Inn's on-play effect doesn't really do anything if you shuffle in 5 cantrips into your empty deck and trigger the reshuffle anyway. 

Like... if you didn't buy the Inn, those 5 cards would be in the next reshuffle, just randomly mixed in through the whole deck.  When you shuffle those 5 cards in, you move them to the beginning of the reshuffle essentially, but they aren't part of two reshuffles, so it's like they're still getting their normal participation in the reshuffle.  You're just eating your Halloween candy on your way back to the minivan.

Putting cards at the earlier part of the reshuffle could be useful if the game might end soon.  But that's a condition that makes Duchy attractive too, and I've noticed at least most of the time when Inn is in the Supply, Duchy is too.  If you're ahead, Inn is probably the lower variance option, if you're behind, it seems better to buy the Duchy and then pray to whatever you worship in order to obtain Inn's ongain effect in the reshuffle and save the 5$ that way.

When you shuffle in stuff that won't trigger a reshuffle, like three festivals and two monuments or whatever, you get two uses, which seems good.  But even then, reshuffle logic is complicated and iterative and confusing, because you will reach the 2nd or 3rd iteration of your deck, when it is stronger, one hand slower, I think.  I guess the clearest way to demonstrate this point is to say, what if you shuffle in four Squires and a Festival, you guarantee a 6$ hand, and you also get the Inn action card, that's cool.  But what if, next reshuffle, there's a Gold in your deck that makes it possible you'll get your first King's Court, and what if the pivot point for either player this game is when their King's Court first collides with their Bridge?  Maybe you don't want to be one hand behind on a shot at that, even if you'll get 2 Labs that aid the collision in exchange (the Inn, and whatever you buy with that 6$ hand).

Ok I'll try to stop hear before this gets moved to Articles, then gets removed from Articles for being amateur.

Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Re: Is it okay to buy Possession?
« on: November 11, 2017, 10:40:37 pm »
I just think Scrying Pool isn't that interesting.  I don't think the 0-1 Silver call successfully sorts the wheat from the chaff in player skill.

Other Games / Re: A Link to the Past Randomizer
« on: November 11, 2017, 06:03:39 pm »
To elaborate on 4 swords being completely different, like, screenshots will make it look like it's similar gameplay to LttP, because a lot of the same tropes appear, but it's way different.  You tend to encounter hordes of small weak enemies that you are required to clear to move, instead of a few tough enemies that challenge you to decide whether clearing them is a better alternative to evading them.  The puzzles are trivial, to the point of being a form of going through the motions that should have been excluded from the experimental game entirely.  (I feel like the combat was decent at what it was trying to be, they could have stuck with that and expanded on it.  If you picked your favorite item and wielded it to kill the small, weak enemies a little faster than your teammates, at the end of the level you got a little sticker that said "a winner is you".

The game is 100% linear.

Afaik, it holds the first appearance of the trope of touching grass with the fire rod actually burning away the environment around you, as repeated in BotW, so that's kinda cool.

Other Games / Re: A Link to the Past Randomizer
« on: November 11, 2017, 05:54:50 pm »
You don't actually need the shovel to do the digging game. When you pay the guy 80 rupees your item is switched to the shovel automatically until time runs out or you leave the screen. Assuming you can get into the village of outcasts, digging game is open.

Correct. In the real LTTP game; you lose the shovel permanently when you dig up the ocarina. Doing the digging game is no different with or without the shovel in your possession.

(If you do have the shovel, you could keep digging after the time runs out; but it would be just like digging anywhere else in the world; the field only contains extra money and a special item during the game).

I parsed this as "just like digging IRL".  I want to stick with that though.  Digging IRL is largely a crapshoot.

Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Re: Is it okay to buy Possession?
« on: November 09, 2017, 07:54:24 pm »
Coppersmith is a great card.  How is that some kind of low bar to demonstrate how awful Possession must be?

Debt should have been implemented by adding a stack of debt cards that you put on your tavern mat and ungain by paying 1$.  Isn't that so beautiful? Also, a stack of 9999 coin token cards that are always gained to the tavern mat, may be called for +1 coin, then trashed, and are treasures with "When you play this +9$ +9 VP +9 Buys" (and in this world the player who got them into their discard pile through Possession's special text is going to keep those VP tokens any time it's played".

This post is so serious.

Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Re: Is it okay to buy Possession?
« on: November 09, 2017, 08:40:42 am »
That article is satire. 

It was super briefly banned in block constructed, is what I heard, unlikely to have a large digital footprint since it's a small format. 

Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Re: Is it okay to buy Possession?
« on: November 08, 2017, 06:56:21 pm »
Now Donald is banning Possession.

When will I ever get to control somebody's turn.

You can control my turn too, it's ok.  I just want us to have some philosophical questions about identity and some fun.

Donald is not banning Possession in the way you describe here. Dominion and Magic are fundamentally different games, and the concept of banned cards in magic does not translate to Dominion. You can still play with Possession, it just won't be forced upon you anymore.

I suggest you ask your opponent once in a while what they think about Possession. If it turns out they like it, you propose another game after this one with Possession as only required card.
If you pull that off in about 3% of your games, you're back at your old Possession frequency. Except now all those games will be with players that don't yell at you for buying the card and probably like to think about its strategic implications.

In the meanwhile, the vast majority of players seems to be happy with the ban.
Can I start a ranked play game with the old chance of having Possession in it, and ask people to join that game and play with me?  Regardless of whether I can get the %age to match what it used to be precisely, to me there's something I really love about starting a game without specifying that any specific card appear in it. 

Hearthstone / Re: Dungeon Run
« on: November 08, 2017, 02:09:58 am »
How is that different? Here are three things, pick one of the three things to modify your deck and prepare you for a random set of possible foes (random bosses instead of random classes played by humans)

It's about as different as when a new set releases, we're now offered Knights of the Frozen Throne specific cards in arena now.  If you want me to count Dungeon Run as a new expansion, sure, it's that.  But it's not sealed or something.

I don't know how I'm supposed to be extra excited about the cards that cost 0 mana and start in your hand.  Nonccg RPG elements in the ccg game, sure.

I'll play this, though.  It's a new expansion.  It's just one I have to play against AI which is likely to be less fun.  I expect I'll get less out of it than Halloween.

Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Re: Is it okay to buy Possession?
« on: November 08, 2017, 01:21:30 am »
This makes me super sad.

The control somebody's turn effect is so cool.  Everyone wants it to be ok, man.

MtG first did it with Mindslaver, which they had to ban (oddly, though, it didn't really have much to do with what you could do with your opponent's turn, the problem was that people were having their opponent's turn be do nothing, and had a way to play Mindslaver every turn, since it's not an -extra- turn like Possession.)

They did it again with Sorin Markov, as his ultimate, so the card didn't always do the thing.  Sorin Markov has never touched a tournament table due to low power level.  But it was like, hey, we did it though, it wasn't too powerful, obviously.

Most recently, just a little over a year ago, Emrakul, the Promised End came out, which gave the opponent an extra turn instead of controlling the turn they were supposed to have.  Unfortunately it was super important to the story, and was supposed to bring doomsday, and it was really important that every single number on the card be 13.  But really if you playtested the thing and gave it unbiased development, it would have either come out to 15/15/15 or 13 on the bad number, the cost, lower numbers on the other good numbers, the ones that say how fat she is.

I bought 60$ worth of Emrakul, they went up to like 80, but then later, they had to ban her.

Now Donald is banning Possession.

When will I ever get to control somebody's turn.

You can control my turn too, it's ok.  I just want us to have some philosophical questions about identity and some fun.

Hearthstone / Re: Dungeon Run
« on: November 08, 2017, 01:05:01 am »
PvE arena? Uh, no thanks.

Rules Questions / Does Sage skip past Vineyards?
« on: November 03, 2017, 09:11:36 pm »
? I searched "Sage" here, I swear.

Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Re: Banning Cards?
« on: October 30, 2017, 02:59:53 am »
Is it o.k. to say that Stash is not actually a fun card to play with?

It's not actually that fun.

It's okay, but man it's pretty hard to miss it.

Why does Tulip field trash the Estate pile instead of the Tulip Pile?  There's so many cards with special mechanics that must mess with the Estate pile to make them work, like Baron, Official Shepherd, Inheritance, Salt the Earth.  If it's remotely reasonable to mess up your own pile instead of the Estate pile to reduce the damage from colliding with those other cards in kingdoms, it seems like a good call.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: What do you forget IRL?
« on: October 30, 2017, 01:22:41 am »
To apply the weird new shuffling rule.

Dominion: Nocturne Previews / Re: Bonus Preview #1: Crypt
« on: October 25, 2017, 12:39:10 am »
This thing has seemed crazy skill intensive when I play with it.  The complexity of what's gonna miss the reshuffle, what's going to be saved for a key turn, whether you should store fewer than the full amount of treasures so you can redraw it, attempts to use it as a pseudo trasher on boards with no trashing or only estate trashing but good engine pieces, then like, the normal is this as good as the other 5's right now.

Really sweet card.

The archive one isn't sweet like that mostly because it sucks.

Other Games / Re: Asmodee Digital sale
« on: October 19, 2017, 09:42:09 am »
Not that there are a bunch of nondigital match 3's or anything, but I get annoyed by people who compare every match 3 to Candy Crush.  It's like calling all shooter games "call of duties" or something.  It's not the first match 3, and it's also not the first match 3 to hit very very broad exposure, that would be Bejeweled.

Dominion General Discussion / Dominion flavor
« on: October 14, 2017, 03:22:59 pm »
Wait, is Mountebank like a snake oil salesman? So like if you remember the last time he came to town (you have a curse..) you're immune to him?

General Discussion / Re: Board game businesses
« on: October 06, 2017, 09:47:08 am »
That sounds great.  We host LCG events at a bar/activity center a lot.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 198

Page created in 0.1 seconds with 19 queries.