Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

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.

1

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thre

« on: February 14, 2020, 07:53:21 pm »

Quite ironic that your sarcasm misses that I this entire discussion started with my arguing for INCLUSION of a good card idea and not for the exclusion or disqualification of anything.
And your point is still factually wrong. Setting up stuff is quicker than explaining stuff, taking out Potions takes a fraction of the time it takes to understand and explain Possession.

Leaders are good and simple, kinda like Preludes in TM but with downsides. But if folks care more about rigid contest rules (why do I get such heavy autistic vibes?) than how things work IRL games, who am I to object and defend a good card design against the algorithmic crowd.

User was temp banned for this post

2

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Garrison - an attacking village

« on: February 14, 2020, 07:21:33 pm »

I think you’d rather have a village AND Militia than this. +1 Card looks weird on terminals, even if they are optional terminals.

3

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: February 14, 2020, 07:19:33 pm »

No rules stipulated anywhere forces you to explain cards and go over the game board with your group. This is not part of setting the game up. You are welcome to chat and help players with game concepts and understanding cards, but again, this isn’t something a rulebook forces you to do everytime before a game starts.

You really wanna claim that you would behave like a total jerk and make the other players read the rules about your Strength cards and not explain them to them? Dude, we talk about board games, as in social stuff, not algorithms.
Wherever and with whomever I have played, whoever knew more about a particular game has always explained it. And that happened while/before/after we set up the game.

And would you then play the exact same set with the exact same people and still explain the same things you just explained to them the previous game? According to your "logic," you should, since that's apparently a set up rule. According to your reasoning, all possible entries for this contest would be disqualified.

I never play the same Kingdom again. You seem to confuse rules with common decency, algorithms with what actually happens when people play a boardgame.

IRL some messy mechanic like Strength swallows up far more time during setup than Leaders.

4

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: February 14, 2020, 04:20:49 pm »

No rules stipulated anywhere forces you to explain cards and go over the game board with your group. This is not part of setting the game up. You are welcome to chat and help players with game concepts and understanding cards, but again, this isn’t something a rulebook forces you to do everytime before a game starts.

You really wanna claim that you would behave like a total jerk and make the other players read the rules about your Strength cards and not explain them to them? Dude, we talk about board games, as in social stuff, not algorithms.
Wherever and with whomever I have played, whoever knew more about a particular game has always explained it. And that happened while/before/after we set up the game.

5

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: February 14, 2020, 04:03:26 pm »

I don’t think bringing “learning the rules of a new mechanic” is arguing in good faith. It simply is not part of the setup. It isn’t something that’s required to do before you start a game. You read the rules and learn the mechanics once and then you’re good to go for all subsequent plays. The mechanics we implemented do not force the players to go over the rules when a game begins.

Does not sound like you play the same game I do. Or your gaming group features players of equal strength / rule knowledge.

We always read all the cards and talk about them before we play a game of Dominion in my gaming group such that everybody is on an equal footing ... and if there are cards with complex mechanics or interactions that takes far more time than grabbing for some Shelters.

So yeah, IRL complex mechanics take more setup time than formal setup stuff. Like grabbing for some cards or cubes or whatever.

You can of course try to argue that you could simply pull out some of your Strength cards and let the other suckers figure them out for themselves. But you know very well that this is not how you would behave, you would explain them and answer all rule questions before you started the game. And you would explain rule ambiguities or even make a new ruling during the game. And if folks forgot some stuff, you would explain it again before the next game.

6

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: February 14, 2020, 03:53:14 pm »

Based on naitchman's comment I was under the impression the issue was more about choosing between the 4 Leaders at the start of the game. That seems quite against the no setup part of this week's challenge to me.

I don’t know, every new mechanism takes up setup time as you gotta explain it. Ironically overwrought mechanics swallow up more setup time than formal setup stuff like Baker or sideway cards. For example choosing Leaders would take far less time in my gaming group than explaining them how Strength is supposed to work.

7

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: February 14, 2020, 03:47:38 pm »

Dude, implementation refers to whether you do this via one copy of each Leader and cubes or via several copies. But only few people here use fan cards IRL which is why the focus should be on the idea. When somebody posts a split pile and claims that it should be 4-4 or 6-6 folks should not sweat that: it only matter if you print the card and then you can still change that very parameter.
And before you claim that Kudasai‘s idea that he has worked on for some time is „incoherent“, you might wanna check the inconsistent wording on your own cards first.

8

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: February 14, 2020, 03:15:49 pm »

Huh? You print one card per player, period. No issue at all.

This is about ideas, not about excluding cool ideas because of utterly irrelevant implementation trivia.

9

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: February 14, 2020, 02:56:53 pm »

Nothing obvious about this decision. Seems arbitrarily bureaucratic to me. Who cares about how you implement a particular idea?

10

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.

« on: February 14, 2020, 02:30:20 pm »

Two of the promos are „fan cards“. And given the expansion model of Dominion, that is the best slot for them.

11

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: February 14, 2020, 02:24:41 pm »

Not cool, dude. Kudasai‘s concept is one of the best ones posted, exists for quit some time so quite some thought went into it ... and whether you use cubes or several copies of each card is fairly trivial and only relevant for choosing between a secret or open setup.

12

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Top 10 best recepients for the +Card token

« on: February 14, 2020, 12:56:43 pm »

Usually cantrips that cost less than $5 are more easily available and the preferred choice for the +1 Card token. Like all terminal drawers, Cultists wants the +1 Action token.

13

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: February 13, 2020, 12:44:07 pm »

both the enchantment & the gained card are still in your deck?

Yes.

and do you gain an additional copy of it to mske up for the set-aside one?

No, the idea was that you don't gain another copy. If you did, I think they'd be too similar to the token Events or Projects.

They're supposed to be slow but powerful; if you think any of them are too weak, the feedback would be welcome. Keystone does seem a little weak in retrospect, maybe it should be allowed to target any card rather than just Treasures.

Keystone is extremely weak; it only makes sense in overdrawing deck and to Coin-ify Potion.
I like the general idea quite a bit but like spineflu I worry that this is too weak. For example Future Sight looks at first pretty sweet, now those Mountebanks stop being terminal Silvers and draw. Great stuff! Then you realize that you gotta quasi-trash two $5s to do so and realize that this price is too large.

14

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Peon, a poor man's Nobles

« on: February 13, 2020, 12:37:55 pm »

Squire OR Moat is not exciting but seems fairly balanced at a first glance. Probably slightly above average in strength for a $2 but nothing lunatic like Lackeys.

15

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Isolated Village - inspired by Hermit and Hideout

« on: February 12, 2020, 04:55:51 pm »

It is a good example of a balanced and sound card that totally sucks. That describes the majority of my own designs; it is pretty hard to come up with something good. Not just in Dominion but in game design in general: being mechanically fine is fairly easy, at least relative to other game design issues.

As I already wrote, the issue is simply that the secondary option, a Necro that trashes, doesn’t lead to interesting play. Either this is the only trasher so, sure, go for it. Or there are better trashers and this is just a village for 4.

16

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Garrison - an attacking village

« on: February 12, 2020, 04:49:57 pm »

Obviously too strong for 4 and too weak for 5.

17

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: February 08, 2020, 10:47:34 am »

Single

There's only one copy of these cards, and they don't count towards the toal count of piles (like Events etc.), but are otherwise bought and gained like normal cards in the supply.

Example:

Conflict
Action/Single - $3
+2 cards
Starting with the player to your left, each player trashes any number of cards from their hand. The player who trashed the most cards gains this, and each other player gains a Curse.

Communion
Action/Single - $2
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Coffers
The player to your left gains this.
-
When you buy or trash this, put it on top of your deck.

I like this, kind of an inverse hot potatoe card.
If I understand how these cards are supposed to work correctly, the wording should be "Put this into the discard pile of the player to your left."

18

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: February 08, 2020, 03:09:16 am »

How is this mechanically different from “you may play an Action card for...“?

Only in the case of Cuirass does it to make a difference, but here Armor just eases tracking.

19

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: February 05, 2020, 12:48:24 pm »

Criminal is crazily overpowered. 2 Coins into 1 Coffers is already too good as an Event and this does some more.

20

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: February 02, 2020, 02:11:51 am »

That's an old one, eHalcyon did one called Harbinger for the contests long ago. But yours is correctly priced and of course the idea is super cool.

21

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Improving play at 3+ players

« on: February 02, 2020, 02:05:07 am »

"It hurts more to not get a curser, since you will receive them at double the tempo." It sounds like you're saying that you will receive them at double the tempo if you don't get a curser. Which of course is false.

It would indeed be wrong. But that's not what I wrote:

In 3P games, it hurts more (relative to 2P) to not get a Curser as you will receive the Curses at double the tempo.

The goal of my last post was to clearly seperate the marginal benefit of getting a Curser (intra-game) and the comparisons of those benefits over different player counts (extra-game). So please don't blur those very differences via misquoting me.

22

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Improving play at 3+ players

« on: February 01, 2020, 05:33:49 pm »

In 2P games you get one Curse per shuffle, in 3P 2. Of course there are feedback effects, due to the junking the frequency of playing Curses decrease. But a rough benchmark is nonetheless twice the speed. It is pretty basic and it is beyond weird to see the denial of the fact that that Alice gets one Curse per Bobˋs shuffle yet two if Charlie also plays along. Dude if you don’t believe basic arithmetic, just play a simple 4P base game with Witch. Lots of purple landing in your discard.

What you seem to be not getting is that we are not talking about Alice, we're talking about Charlie. The question is, should Charlie buy the attack if both Alice and Bob is giving out curses. If he does, that will have exactly the tempo effect you're talking about for Alice. But we're talking about the player considering whether to buy it - Charlie! It will have no tempo effect on Charlie whether he buys it or not.

Do you really not get that this features 2 layers, first calculating marginal benefits of buying a Curser and then comparing these very marginal benefits of the 2P and 3P game? In case you really don't get it, and are not just willfully ignorant to deny the tempo issue, I will go over it again.

Step 1 - marginal benefits of getting a Curser relativ to not getting a Curser:
2P: difference is 5 Curses at normal tempo.
3P: difference is 3.3 Curses at double the tempo

Step 2 - compare these marginal benefits with each other:
In 2P games, it hurts more (relative to 3P) to not get a Curser as you will end up with 5 more Curses than you would otherwise. In 3P games, it hurts more (relative to 2P) to not get a Curser as you will receive the Curses at double the tempo.

Which of these effects dominates is Kingdom-dependent. For example if there is good trashing, the tempo issue is less relevant and your argument that junking is nastier in the 2P game likely holds. But if there is no or slow trashing, the tempo issue matters a lot and the junking in the 3P game is likely harsher.

23

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Improving play at 3+ players

« on: February 01, 2020, 04:10:08 pm »

Another funky card which neatly illustrates how junkers scale with the player count is Ambassador. Assuming symmetrical play, it is a net trasher in 2P, keeps the equilibrium in 3P and becomes a net junker in 4P.

24

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Improving play at 3+ players

« on: February 01, 2020, 04:00:12 pm »

In 2P games you get one Curse per shuffle, in 3P 2. Of course there are feedback effects, due to the junking the frequency of playing Curses decrease. But a rough benchmark is nonetheless twice the speed. It is pretty basic and it is beyond weird to see the denial of the fact that that Alice gets one Curse per Bobˋs shuffle yet two if Charlie also plays along. Dude if you don’t believe basic arithmetic, just play a simple 4P base game with Witch. Lots of purple landing in your discard.

The only exception to that is a situation in which only one player has a junker. As I regularly play 3P games, that is not a situation which frequently occurs so I do not view it as relevant (you can make the case that we are all idiots or that not getting a junker while only one player has one is frequently a dominant strategy; I obviously do not think so).
What occurs is two players having one but one player not getting a junker. And I totally agree that this can be the best strategy in a particular Kingdom. For example if there is good trashing, you can deal with the high tempo of incoming junk. Bu in Kingdoms in which this tempo issue is more relevant than the final distribution of Curses, it can also be the best strategy for everybody to get a Curser.

25

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: February 01, 2020, 03:31:57 am »

Unless the Kingdom leads to a high demand of cantrips that do nothing, e.g. due to Conspirator or Golem or Herald, Advocated are not gonna see the light of day.