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 - segura

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9
1
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: July 11, 2019, 02:38:04 pm »
Can we submit cards we've worked on before? I never finished working on my Plague Doctor/Plague cards and they would be perfect for this contest. I have never submitted them to design contests before.
Sure, as I said I don't want any tight rules.

Are we allowed to submit cards we’ve previously submitted, but haven’t won?
Sure.

2
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: July 11, 2019, 12:47:32 pm »
Can we submit cards we've worked on before? I never finished working on my Plague Doctor/Plague cards and they would be perfect for this contest. I have never submitted them to design contests before.
Sure, as I said I don't want any tight rules.

3
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: July 11, 2019, 11:45:53 am »
Self-junking as a straightforward nerf/downside like with Cursed Gold is not in the spirit of the contest whereas a card that would sometimes junk the opponents and sometimes you would. Junkin on-gain or on-buy or conditional upon the presence of a token are fine whereas a choice-junker like Torturer would be rather borderline.

I don't want to make the parameters too tight, if you have a good idea just roll with it.

4
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: July 11, 2019, 05:22:39 am »
Thanks, anordinaryman!

The new contest is about doing a non-conventional junker, i.e. it should not distribute Curses or Ruins unconditionally. You could do a Copper junker or come up with a new type of junk. Landscape cards are also OK.
Examples among official cards that would be good are Ambassador and Jester. Mountebank is also OK but something like Young Witch would be a bit borderline (lacking the third, Copper-junking option of Mountebank).

5
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: July 11, 2019, 12:42:43 am »
Guilds doesn't have VP tokens. Even if it did, this probably shouldn't have them. As long as Curses remain, Annexation with VP tokens is significantly better than Province at $8 (functionally 6VP in the form of 3VP that don't get in my way and -3VP in ~3 stop cards for the other players), let alone if you get $10+ to buy it. This would absolutely be strong enough without the VP tokens.
The Curses aren't automatically dead as the opponents can sift through them if you play Annexation. They can also sift through their Provinces.
This is nearly as good as a Fugitive (a $4.5) for the opponents which is why I disagree with your claim that the card would be overpowered even without the VP tokens.
It is probably too good but without the VP tokens it would be extremely weak in Kingdoms with other Cursers.

6
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: July 07, 2019, 07:50:13 am »
I wasn't really talking about that kind of rush. I just think being able to spend $2 and a Buy to deplete 2 piles is a very dangerous effect that'll probably lead to many very fast 3 piles, usually in engines.
Not really. If there is an issue with Parade, it is due to an Estate/Gardens/Silk Road rush.

Building up an engine that yields several Buys (and, supposing for the sake of simplicity a non-mirror game in which the opponent simply plays money, can deal with the incoming green) takes time.

16 Coins and 8 Buys lead to a VP spread of 16 and 2 empty piles if one does the Estate thingy.
16 Coins and 2 Buys lead to a VP spread of 12 if one goes for Provinces.

So all those extra Buys provide only moderately more VPs and moderately more (Buys always provide some) pile control. Hard for me to see the supposed brokenness.

7
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: July 05, 2019, 02:56:02 am »


I like this one the best.

Ok. I think I like that one too. I'll update my submission to that.
I'd consider a price of $4. At first play it is worse than Sea Hag and "trash 2, junk 1" is similar to Ambassador.

8
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: July 05, 2019, 02:11:01 am »
Would this make a slog of every game by hammering the Estates? A higher price seems much safer so decks build towards bigger greens.
Naturally Parade will rarely be bought at any price if other Cursers are present, they are simply quicker.
But in the situations in which there are tricks, like e.g. using Farmland to gain a Province hand out 2 Curses, one player might go for Parade instead of the other Curser. This interesting possibility would be undone at a Project price of $5.


If there is no trashing, then buying the Estates is the same as skipping a 3-4$ buy to take VP from baths.  2 VP advantage generated over the opponent, no overall change in deck quality.  People usually do not rush baths.  If you are playing big money and your opponent is trying to line up Festivals against Smithies you've broken the symmetry a little bit but if we've generated a game where people played engine vs. big money that's definitely a custom card creation accomplishment, not a failure, in today's engine mirror universe.

When trashing is available, buying Estates should be even worse because it feels better to trash a Curse than it does to trash an Estate.  Trash for benefit is unlikely to make enough difference.

So yeah I think the rush criticism fails on its face by comparison to Baths.  It empties one more pile than Baths does but buying two of the curses yourself after you skipped a 4$ buy to unlock these Baths at all doesn't sound like a threatening strategy.
 

Baths doesn't empty 2 supply piles though. It's the pile emptying that makes this dangerous.
I don't see how a junky deck full of Estates (and Curses if the "buy Estate to distribute Curses" strategy is mirrored) is quickly ably to empty a third pile (except for Mapgies). Even if you gain the Estates via a Workshop variant, it will take quite some time.
And, as popsofctown has mentioned, tempo kind of matters. In a 2P game you need 9-10 (10 if you open 3-4) turns to empty Estates and Curses while having achieved a VP spread of 16 (and as already mentioned, a gainer will not speed this up significantly). In the meantime the other player had the opportunity to do something constructive.

We have evidence of this kind of thing: Followers mainly hurts due to the discarding, and not due the VP spread (you nearly always want to trash the Estate). And Followers doesn't cost a buy to gain the Estate. This is pretty basic, Curses suck mainly because they are dead cards. That they also provide -1VP is less relevant.
Also IGG. The key difference to IGG, which also empties two piles, is that IGG provides economy which often suffices to empty Duchies.

So yeah, I am pretty sure that the Estate rush rarely works which is why one could formalize the idea also as a general rule that does not have to be unlocked, i.e. put it on a Kingdom (Victory) card via a "in games using this" wording.

9
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Strictly Better
« on: July 04, 2019, 05:08:10 pm »
That's not a genuine edge case. You may decide you'll never trash Mining Village, in which case it is identical in behaviour to regular Village. It's better unless you somehow deem worthless the option to decide otherwise.

To take an extreme and pared-down analogy: I give person A a dollar. I give person B a dollar plus the option to toss a coin for double or quits. What I've given person B is better.

No I think he's right... imagine in your analogy you gave person B a dollar plus the option to roll a d-1000 for double or quits... he gets $2 on 2-1000, and nothing on 1. The mathematically right move is to always take the roll, and that's also the practical right move unless a person is in a situation where they really need 1 dollar, but don't need 2.

The fact that a person can choose to not roll doesn't seem to matter here, because basically everyone will roll; it's the correct decision financially and in terms of game theory.

But for the person who rolls a 1, it would have been better for them if they hadn't had the option to roll.

*Edit* This just comes down to a part of the definition of "strictly better" that I don't think has ever been defined. For a person who has incredibly bad luck, his overall outcome will be worse if he's given the die roll choice with his dollar every time, assuming that he plays correctly. But it's still true that a person can choose not play correctly and instead pretend that his dollar is just a dollar without the die roll.
Ignoring your probabilities which heavily favour one outcome, I disagree. What faust mentioned is a risk management issue and has less to do with "strictly better". I know too little about stochastic game theory but I guess that technically speaking you could say something like: not liquidating does not stochastically dominante liquidating Mining Village or vice versa and thus by extension, Mining Village does not stochastically dominate Village as you can pick an option which is good ex ante but turns out to suck afterwards. In other words, via buying Mining Village instead of Village, you gave yourself rope to hang yourself (more technically speaking, more options are not better than fewer options in a stochastic world or when you cannot calculate everything; e.g. in chess keeping the position opaque and giving your opponent more options instead of forced moves can be a decent strategy, especially if the opponent is in time trouble).

This risk management issue would still occur if, as DXV has suggested somewhere, Mining Village could be trashed for Coins at the start of the Buy phase (as you can still make a mistake concerning judging how long the game will take; you can still trash the Mining Village too early) but Mining Village 2.0 would then be superior to Village (ignoring funky edge cases like Possession, Will-of-Wisp with cost reduction and a deck with Forge and a lot of 5s that want matching 3s instead of 4s to forge into Provinces).

10
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: July 04, 2019, 04:53:58 pm »
Also Sorcerer's Apprentice's ability to tuck Victory cards away forever is trying to slip under the radar here. That effect is pretty ridiculous. I think it should not be able to put Victory cards away, let alone giving a benefit for doing so.
Seems pretty good at the first glance but the fact that this draws after having Tavern-ized the Victory card matters quite a bit (although not as much as the matching problem of ordinary villages & Smithy variants vs. non-drawing villages like Festival/Villa/Conclave & Smithy variants as Sorcerer's Apprentice features other options besides setting aside green).
This is counterbalanced by the ability to always set aside Treasures at near Moneylender like strength and IMO this is the real issue. Without this ability, Sorcerer's Apprentice would be far more risky in non-alt-VP middlegames.

So I'd either keep it as a card that is similar to Sacrifice but change the bonus of setting aside green or I'd do a card that can only set aside green and purple, e.g.
+1 Card
+1 Action

You may put a Victory or Curse card from your hand onto your Tavern mat for [mild bonus].

11
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: July 04, 2019, 04:39:20 pm »
Submission for Renaissance.



I guess I came up with this because I like it when junking happens later in the game. First I wanted to do it on-buy but on-gain seems more fun as funky things can happen e.g. with Ambassador, Replace and Farmland.

12
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: July 01, 2019, 01:17:48 am »


A buffed version would be without discarding, i.e.: Reveal your hand. For each Victory card revealed, gain a Spoils from its pile.
Probably mainly useful early on, with alt-VP or in an overdrawing engine.

13
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 28, 2019, 09:47:05 am »
Discovery
$4 Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of the Black Market deck. You may play one of the revealed cards. Put the rest on the bottom of the Black Market deck in any order.
When that card leaves play, put it on the bottom of the Black Market deck.
Setup: Make a Black Market deck out of different unused Kingdom cards.
Ignoring whether this is balanced and should perhaps cost $5, it is far more practical than Black Market as you do not have to exchange the randomizer for the Kingdom card.

14
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Kru5h's card ideas
« on: June 28, 2019, 05:23:56 am »
I know stuff like this has been done before, but the most recent expansion makes the wording a lot easier.

Plague, Reaction $0 (Supply = Same as Curse Supply)
When something causes you to reveal this (using the word "reveal"), gain a Plague.

Plague Doctor, Action-Attack, $5
Gain a Silver to your hand.
Each other player reveals their hand and gains a Plague.
I like it but it is kind of the opposite of Mountebank, i.e. it is a junk amplifier instead of moderator.

15
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 28, 2019, 04:00:19 am »
Polymath
$3 - Action

If you don't have Deluded or Envious, take Envious.
Do this twice: Choose one: Put your deck into your discard, or look through your discard pile and reveal a card costing up to $6 from it, and put it into your hand.
Updated version of Polymath to make it more useful.
As this is not limited to drawing Treasures anymore, Envious and the cost limitation seem out of place. It also nerfs the card too much, i.e. targetdraw 2 cards (best case scenario) plus -x Coins seems pretty weak.
I'd also buff the card further: if you have no discard simply draw like Mountain Village.

16
This can get away with no price restrictions. $2s are unproblematic, stuff that costs more than $5 is rare, Potion cards are basically dead and Debt cards seem unproblematic. I'd also test 3 as 4 cards could make it too automatic (likelihood of trasher/junker on mat conditional on no trasher/junker in the Kingdom).

17
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Wording Challenge: Planetarium
« on: June 27, 2019, 05:31:58 pm »
Cool bluffing card. Spineflu's wording is best IMO as it shows the 3 options very clearly.

18
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 27, 2019, 05:27:49 pm »
Returned Adventurer
cost $5 - Action
Name a type. Reveal 5 cards from your deck. Put 2 cards with that type into your hand, and discard the rest.
Cool idea but strictly worse than Embassy. I'd make the card dig for 2 cards of the named type and consider a price of $4 or consider another buff.

That would be strictly better than Adventurer.
And? Adventurer is a) removed and is b) underpowered like Mandarin, i.e. it sucks at any price.

Even though it's small, the fact that Embassy gives your opponents a Silver on-gain is intended to act as a drawback; which means that Returned Adventurer having a strictly worse effect for the same price is ok. Though I agree it's probably much weaker than Embassy.

Removed or not; no official second edition cards are strictly stronger or weaker than first edition cards. Even if it's a really minor drawback (like hey, maybe your opponents gain a Silver when you gain it!), I think it should have something to prevent it from being strictly stronger than Adventurer.
I faintly remember that LFN argued that Adventurer could cost $2. Sounds right given that in an engine it is worse than Moat.
Using a mispriced, underpowered, removed card as benchmark for fan cards leads to mispriced fan cards.

19
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 27, 2019, 05:01:24 pm »
Returned Adventurer
cost $5 - Action
Name a type. Reveal 5 cards from your deck. Put 2 cards with that type into your hand, and discard the rest.
Cool idea but strictly worse than Embassy. I'd make the card dig for 2 cards of the named type and consider a price of $4 or consider another buff.

That would be strictly better than Adventurer.
And? Adventurer is a) removed and is b) underpowered like Mandarin, i.e. it sucks at any price.

20
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Kru5h's card ideas
« on: June 27, 2019, 03:29:24 pm »
Jetty looks fine. Easy to test it directly in a Kingdom with Artisan and Lab.

21
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 27, 2019, 03:26:43 pm »
Returned Adventurer
cost $5 - Action
Name a type. Reveal 5 cards from your deck. Put 2 cards with that type into your hand, and discard the rest.
Cool idea but strictly worse than Embassy. I'd make the card dig for 2 cards of the named type and consider a price of $4 or consider another buff.

22
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Strictly Better
« on: June 19, 2019, 03:12:42 pm »

I can't tell if you're joking or not. I was talking about Coppers, not Estates.

He's doing that thing where he pretends like it was clear and obvious that he was only considering trashing Estates.
Well, that's not how Chapel works which is why Chuckles was right while that other poster was beyond totally wrong about it.

23
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Strictly Better
« on: June 19, 2019, 02:13:27 am »
I was talking about Coppers, not Silvers. Trashing Copper has the (big) upside of making it easier to draw, with the downside of losing some payload. Gaining a Lab, though, is the best of both worlds: you get more draw without losing that $. That's the crucial difference.

Trashing two Estates is like gaining two Labs and taking Miserable. Trashing a Curse is like gaining a Lab and taking a token. Trashing a Lab is like gaining a Lab and then trashing two Labs.
This is a decent heuristic but equalizing trashing and drawing is only OK when there is no source of draw/sifting on the board . For example a hypothetical card which says +3 Cards +1 Action | When you gain this, gain 2 Curses. seems, if one uses such static, non-comparative analysis, like getting a cantrip and taking Miserable, i.e. not something you ever want. But perhaps there are sifters or trashers that can deal with the Curses such that the Double Lab is actually a pretty strong card.

You always have to analyze comparitively, a board can have drawers, sifters and trashers and the relative strength of each influences the relative strength of the other cards. If there is only Trade Route to deal with the junk, Trade Route is stronger than in a situation in which there is also Dungeon.

You always have to analyze dynamically, i.e. when you use e.g. Hideout as a trasher and a village you might want to trash slower than in a situation in which you only use it as trasher. Tempo always matters and it influences how quickly you want to trash, how quickly you want to build up draw power and how quickly you want to build up payload.

These intricacies are, at least to me, at the core of the game. If things were as simple as Cathedral = 3 Labs, easily by far the most lunatic thing I ever heard concerning Dominion, the game would be solved and not be as opaque and and as interesting as it is.

24
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 18, 2019, 12:15:16 pm »
It is a slight nerf and I guess it also makes the card more smooth.

Gardens is something you could do via card counting but for Feodum, Silk Road and Vineyard you'd have to reveal your hand, deck and discard pile and then count everything. That's cumbersome and you'd then need some extra rule about how you do it. One way would be to reveal your hand, discard your deck and then reveal your discard pile.

25
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Strictly Better
« on: June 18, 2019, 11:46:06 am »
I have never made ridiculous comparisons in the first place

Quote
open with a $3 Lab that gives you two more free labs on the first reshuffle, due to inflation.

No comment.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9

Page created in 0.083 seconds with 19 queries.