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 - alion8me

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
1
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #125: What's the Draw?
« on: August 15, 2021, 12:51:25 am »


Quote
Farmer

+1 Card per differently named card you have in play (including this).

Action
$4





Illusionist
Action ($4)

Reveal your hand. +1 Card per different card type (Action, Attack, Treasure, etc.) revealed.

I originally designed this at $5 but after some playtesting on TTS my peers said it would be better at $4, so I'm gonna try it at that. I think it'll be better than Smithy overall, but it still has it's weaknesses (discard attacks for example) that make it acceptable at the same price.

I submitted a card with the same effect and cost a year ago to a different weekly contest here: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg854508#msg854508.

2


Quote
Magister

At the start of your next turn, +1 Card and +$1.
Until then, after the first time each other player plays a non-Duration card costing $1 or more that they already have a copy of in play on their turn, they trash it.

Night - Duration - Attack
$5

Ty to the people on discord that helped tighten up the wording.

edit: another wording fix

3
Here is my second attempt at a card:


It's a smithy, except it gets you one extra card this turn and one fewer card next turn. Playing multiple of them per turn is probably the best way to go (only 1 -1 card token)
Hey, could someone pls give me feedback on my card?
I feel like it's too powerful compared to other $5 Smithy variants, especially since you only get the debuff once and all other plays are Hunting Grounds. But I might be mistaken; the fact that this always reduces your starting handsize is a significant problem for consistency. I'd need to see how this plays.

I'm leaning on the too powerful side, although I agree with you that one would have to see how it plays IRL.  While the -1 Card token can hinder consistency in some engines, it's less of an issue if you have Draw-to-X cards in your deck. 

Some simulations comparing the card to smithy and hunting grounds.





Of course, there are ways to play around the downside this card gives compared to vanilla smithy. But this simulation indicates that the card is probably actually on the weaker end of $5 terminal draw.

4
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: March 01, 2021, 10:56:38 pm »
Unlimited Dawn cards per Dawn phase.


5
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #105: Attack with Choices
« on: February 18, 2021, 06:39:58 pm »

Quote
Haunted Shed

+1 Card
+$1
Choose one: +1 Action, or each other player gains a Curse.

Action - Attack
$5

6
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #104: Raise the Ceiling
« on: February 07, 2021, 05:20:51 pm »


Quote
Exhaust v2

Replay a non-Duration Action card you played this turn that's still in play. Trash it. If this is the first time you've bought Exhaust this turn: +1 Buy.

Event
$0

Quote
Exhaust v1

+1 Buy
Replay a non-Duration Action card you played this turn that's still in play. Trash it.

Event
$0

edit: tweak to make spamming Exhaust more difficult

7


Quote
Hearth

+4 Cards
+1 Buy
-
Instead of paying this card's cost, you may gain 3 Snow.

$7 - Action
Small pedantic thing. It should say "gain 3 Snows"

Thank you for noticing that - it's fixed now.

8


Quote
Hearth

+4 Cards
+1 Buy
-
Instead of paying this card's cost, you may gain 3 Snows.

$7 - Action

edit: Changed "Snow" to "Snows" after Bbobb pointed out that it should be written that way.

9


Eh? This card nets as being a cantrip, but it's a Laboratory now, pay back later kind of deal. No idea how to appropriately price this.

Very weak, I think. But a good idea nonetheless.
I am not so sure. If you can trash out of hand (Sentry, Lookout) or sift, this could be good. Plus, as always with Horse/Snow, Remodel.
The price is definitely correct, at $2 it would be too good.

The Snow-gaining can be less of a drawback in other situations too (and perhaps even desirable in some), e.g. if there are cards in the Kingdom that care about gains (e.g. Destrier, Sheepdog) or TfB where you want enough junk to feed it.  It helps that Snow has a cost of $3 unlike Ruins and Curses.   

I like Arctic Base.

I would be surprised if it were too weak for $4 even. I think it compares pretty favorably to Secret Passage. Although the $3/$4 price difference is fairly small anyways so it doesn't really matter.
I disagree. Would you ever prefer this over Caravan or Advisor?
There are pretty common scenarios where I think you would buy this over Caravan/Advisor.

Arctic Base is nicer as a consistency tool than Caravan is because Caravan only does something for you on half of the turns you buy it at most, whereas this can do something every turn. It's not net draw, of course, but the reason you're buying this is to make the chance that you are able to draw your smithy + village or whatever it is together more likely. For Advisor, Arctic Base doesn't fail in the way Advisor can when your deck has a lot of junk. Obviously Arctic Base will also occasionally get trash for benefit synergies as well.

Having said that - I don't believe this is particularly strong for $4 either, and Caravan/Advisor are probably stronger cards in general. But it also wouldn't look out of place at that price to me.

(I realize anordinaryman just responded in a similar vein, but I had finished typing this up before I had realized they posted and I think this is different enough to be worth posting anyways)

I do think it's kind of funny that segura said "would you prefer this over Caravan or Advisor" when both of those cost MORE. You generally prefer more expensive cards over cheaper cards, that's why they're more expensive...
I think the reason segura said that is because of my original claim "I would be surprised if it were too weak for $4 even."

10


Eh? This card nets as being a cantrip, but it's a Laboratory now, pay back later kind of deal. No idea how to appropriately price this.

Very weak, I think. But a good idea nonetheless.
I am not so sure. If you can trash out of hand (Sentry, Lookout) or sift, this could be good. Plus, as always with Horse/Snow, Remodel.
The price is definitely correct, at $2 it would be too good.

The Snow-gaining can be less of a drawback in other situations too (and perhaps even desirable in some), e.g. if there are cards in the Kingdom that care about gains (e.g. Destrier, Sheepdog) or TfB where you want enough junk to feed it.  It helps that Snow has a cost of $3 unlike Ruins and Curses.   

I like Arctic Base.

I would be surprised if it were too weak for $4 even. I think it compares pretty favorably to Secret Passage. Although the $3/$4 price difference is fairly small anyways so it doesn't really matter.
I disagree. Would you ever prefer this over Caravan or Advisor?
There are pretty common scenarios where I think you would buy this over Caravan/Advisor.

Arctic Base is nicer as a consistency tool than Caravan is because Caravan only does something for you on half of the turns you buy it at most, whereas this can do something every turn. It's not net draw, of course, but the reason you're buying this is to make the chance that you are able to draw your smithy + village or whatever it is together more likely. For Advisor, Arctic Base doesn't fail in the way Advisor can when your deck has a lot of junk. Obviously Arctic Base will also occasionally get trash for benefit synergies as well.

Having said that - I don't believe this is particularly strong for $4 either, and Caravan/Advisor are probably stronger cards in general. But it also wouldn't look out of place at that price to me.

(I realize anordinaryman just responded in a similar vein, but I had finished typing this up before I had realized they posted and I think this is different enough to be worth posting anyways)

11


Eh? This card nets as being a cantrip, but it's a Laboratory now, pay back later kind of deal. No idea how to appropriately price this.

Very weak, I think. But a good idea nonetheless.
I am not so sure. If you can trash out of hand (Sentry, Lookout) or sift, this could be good. Plus, as always with Horse/Snow, Remodel.
The price is definitely correct, at $2 it would be too good.

The Snow-gaining can be less of a drawback in other situations too (and perhaps even desirable in some), e.g. if there are cards in the Kingdom that care about gains (e.g. Destrier, Sheepdog) or TfB where you want enough junk to feed it.  It helps that Snow has a cost of $3 unlike Ruins and Curses.   

I like Arctic Base.

I would be surprised if it were too weak for $4 even. I think it compares pretty favorably to Secret Passage. Although the $3/$4 price difference is fairly small anyways so it doesn't really matter.

12
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #102: Unspent
« on: January 26, 2021, 11:45:42 pm »
Judgment is coming very soon.
Please ensure your entry is at the top of the thread.

Just noticed my card image wasn't updated to match the newest version of the text, this should be fixed now.

13
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #102: Unspent
« on: January 25, 2021, 06:33:51 pm »
Since there are only a total of four Events that cost $0 and don't give back +1 Buy*, I don't see this as a big problem...
Well, it's definitely a big problem with Advance + Fortress.

Thank you for pointing this out. Took a while thinking about this, I've come up with a solution that's hopefully not too clunky and also doesn't have any awful edge cases, also updated the original post with it.

Quote
Goods v4

$1
+1 Buy
If at the end of your Buy phase you have no Buys left, +2 Coffers.
-
In games using this, all Events cost $1 more and when you buy an Event, +1 Buy.

$4 Treasure

14
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #102: Unspent
« on: January 22, 2021, 03:13:58 pm »
Thank you for pointing this out.

I was curious to see how strong this strategy actually was so I added my card to the Geronimoo sim and tried it out. The $2-cost version is crazy fast. Playing around with it it seems like costing $4 makes the monolithic strategy comparable with some of the basic "big money + x" strategies - which seems to prevent that problem. I'm also pretty sure that the card is still buyable in the non-monolithic case, too - the only reason it cost so little in the first place was because I thought I could get away with it but that clearly isn't true.

The update is reflected in my original post.
That's an improvement for sure. It still has very powerful combos, say with Watchtower. That is probably fine, as Watchtower is all about enabling such combos. But it also works super well with any $0 Event, and whereas the Watchtower thing feels like a cool combo, this feels more like an exploit.

Not sure how to fix that though. It would be good if it forced you to spend the Buys on cards, but there is no elegant way to do this. A radical modification might be "+1$. You may gain a Copper for +2 Coffers", but that disqualifies it and also makes it less interesting.

Yeah, this also seems like a problem to me.

After some consideration I decided that adding "In games using this, when you buy a Landscape, +1 Buy." to the card is probably the best way to go. I think it produces interesting effects sometimes while never leading to super monolithic strategies, and hopefully isn't too complex.

15
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #102: Unspent
« on: January 22, 2021, 02:53:26 am »
It's quite similar to a submission segura made a short while ago for the Renaissance set expansion contest.

Wow that is remarkably similar to what I had.

I'll submit this instead then:



Quote
Goods

$1
+1 Buy

If at the end of your Buy phase you have no Buys left, +2 Coffers.

$2 Treasure
This is unfortunately way too strong. If you open Goods/Goods, then it's not too hard to get 6 Goods by the end of shuffle 2. That means that, if you use spare buys on Coppers during shuffle 3, you'll end up with 12 Coffers. That's enough to consistently buy Provinces for the next 3 turns while probably amassing even more Coffers.

(Even worse, since this strategy uses 6 Goods, it will only be available to the first player.)

Thank you for pointing this out.

I was curious to see how strong this strategy actually was so I added my card to the Geronimoo sim and tried it out. The $2-cost version is crazy fast. Playing around with it it seems like costing $4 makes the monolithic strategy comparable with some of the basic "big money + x" strategies - which seems to prevent that problem. I'm also pretty sure that the card is still buyable in the non-monolithic case, too - the only reason it cost so little in the first place was because I thought I could get away with it but that clearly isn't true.

The update is reflected in my original post.

16
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #102: Unspent
« on: January 21, 2021, 06:53:08 pm »
It's quite similar to a submission segura made a short while ago for the Renaissance set expansion contest.

Wow that is remarkably similar to what I had.

I'll submit this instead then:



Quote
Goods v4

$1
+1 Buy
If at the end of your Buy phase you have no Buys left, +2 Coffers.
-
In games using this, all Events cost $1 more and when you buy an Event, +1 Buy.

$4 Treasure

Quote
Goods v3

$1
+1 Buy
If at the end of your Buy phase you have no Buys left, +2 Coffers.
-
In games using this, when you buy a Landscape, +1 Buy.

$4 Treasure

Quote
Goods v2

$1
+1 Buy

If at the end of your Buy phase you have no Buys left, +2 Coffers.

$4 Treasure

Quote
Goods v1

$1
+1 Buy

If at the end of your Buy phase you have no Buys left, +2 Coffers.

$2 Treasure

edit: Changed pricing after faust pointed out it was too good as a monolithic strategy.
edit2: Added additional effect after faust observed the interaction this has with the $0 cost events.
edit3: Changed effect to prevent Advance+Fortress+Goods interaction seen by Something_Smart.

17
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #102: Unspent
« on: January 21, 2021, 04:13:10 pm »
Wanted to finally get back into this after getting busy a while back.



Edit: removed submission because it was uncomfortably similar to something submitted for a different contest before

18
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: October 21, 2020, 12:22:02 pm »
Weekly Card Contest 91 Results

This week I didn't have the ability to test the cards myself, so results are based on theory, this time.

Twins - gambit05



I believe this has the most twos out of any card submitted, coming in at a total of 6! The effect is pretty nice, although I do agree with commenters that it's almost a strict upgrade to Ride. I also can't remember the last time I've seen a fan card that would make a stronger Mouse than Encampment. The implications of having this be your only +Buy source are also pretty neat.

Caver - Aquila

Quote
Caver - Action, $2 cost.
+2 Cards
If your deck is empty, + $2.
-
This is gained to the bottom of your deck (instead of your discard pile).

It's a $2 Moat with the bonus effect being that overdrawing with it lets you get +$2 instead (and perfect draws that leave your deck empty, but I imagine it'll more often be used for the latter considering that buying terminal +2 Cards in a more money-ish deck isn't a very good idea usually). It strikes me as being fine power-level wise, but also I don't see it playing very differently from a vanilla +2 Cards.

Edict - majiponi


Quote
Edict
cost $2 - Action
Reveal the top 2 cards of your deck. Discard them for +$2 or put them into your hand.

Another $2 Moat; this one lets you sift instead of draw if the revealed cards are bad. It sounds pretty nice. A technical point: it can say "look" instead of "reveal", because other players don't need to see the cards for accountability reasons (see Catacombs VS Journeyman). I like it overall.

Coachman - Freddy10



This strikes me as powerful relative to its cost. The downside on this is fairly low, and it's also optional - you can choose not to take the extra +2 Cards after seeing your initial draw. That being said, it also leads to an interesting new dynamic regarding how you have to put your deck together compared to most other draw cards.

Huckster - Xen3k



Now, an attack. I don't think I agree with other commenters at all that this is close to militia in power; it's somewhat reminiscent of Vault's optional benefit to other players, except that you're forced to do it. Although it won't always be a beneficial effect for your opponent, I suspect it will be often enough that you don't really want to play this at all, with all the cycling you'll be giving your opponent for free.

Butler - NoMoreFun

Quote
Butler
Action - $5
Choose one: +2 Coffers; or +2 Villagers; or play an Action card from your hand twice

A throne room variant. It obviously draws a comparison with Crown; usually the Throne effect will be the one you want, but the others are a nice consolation prize, and in the case of Butler, they are very nice indeed. The fact that you fundamentally want this to act as a Throne most of the time really makes it so this doesn't go off the rails easily. I like how this card solves the problem of "making Villagers take effort to get".

Prayer - silverspawn



The first card I've reviewed thus far without multiple twos on it! It's a neat idea that I think solves the problem inherent with cards that take other cards out of play looping way too easily. It probably isn't worth buying in every game; you really want +Actions or some method to gain multiple cards a turn (probably both) in order to have this be effective. Being situationally useful isn't a bad thing to have in a card; I am somewhat worried that this is dead too often though.

Combine - anordinaryman




I like how it can trash cards in play; I think this ability is deceptively powerful, but in a way that makes the game more interesting rather than less. The main issue I have with it is that estate trashing with this is super swingy; if you buy it in the opening, the difference between drawing two estates in hand with this and one is enormous.

Import - spineflu



I really like this card; I have a soft spot for gainers, and this certainly does a lot of that. One concern is that it might empty piles too easily. I don't think that's the case, since it can't gain itself, but it would be worth keeping in mind when testing it. I especially like how this works early-game; it can potentially get you a lot of cheap cards very quickly, but it also makes it even harder for you to get more $5s unless you have a plan for it.

Anvil/Hammer - spheremonk



These feel weak to me. Trying to use these as your primary draw seems very difficult, and they're not a great supplemental one-shot given their terminality. I like the general concept of "shuffled pile of one-shots that you can reveal the other one to keep", though.

Wine Cask - D782802859



Very interesting. Playing with this seems difficult; it generates a crazy amount of money for how little it costs to add to your deck, so you probably want it at some point, but it also does nothing until then, making it hard to tell when exactly you should pick it up. Obviously it's also great if you can somehow get it into your deck without gaining it; I believe Camel Train is currently the only way to do this without cooperation from your opponent.

Colosseum - scolapasta



This project doesn't seem to me like it would add to the game in an interesting way. Events are, generally, quite strong; most of the time, at least one of the random events added to the kingdom with this will be good enough that buying Colosseum is worth it, especially with the cost reduction component. And then if the set aside events are both bad, you just don't buy it. Either way, I don't think this plays out differently enough from simply having 2 events on the table to be worth it.

Sycophants - Fragasnap



This feels confusingly wordy to me. It also has the issue where +Cards is generally not as valuable a bonus later in your turn; in order to draw with Sycophants, you've probably already come close to drawing your deck anyways. It's final mode is also not as great as it sounds, as you probably won't get to take advantage of its cantrip nature. I'm not really sure why it has a cap, either.

Monk - chronostrike



I like this. It seems like you can get it to trigger fairly often, both from attacks and from yourself, while not being something you can just base your entire game around most of the time. Reactions like this are pretty fun to play with.


This week's winner was Wine Cask, by D782802859. The way that it would play is fairly unique (Miser, Pirate Ship, and Travelers are the only cards that I can think off the top of my head that start weak and power up over the course of the game for one player, and this is quite distinct from all those), and it really encourages you to think about building in a different way than you normally do. I'm not 100% certain on the numbers, but given that this is a weekly contest, that's kind of to be expected; it seems like it's in the ballpark, though.

The runners-up this week are Import, by spineflu, and Monk, by chronostrike. Both of these cards just hit a very nice point in "simple but interesting", to me.

Anyways, that was a great contest. The cards this week were fun to read through and it was also enjoyable to see how many twos ya'll tried to fit onto a single card.

19
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: October 20, 2020, 01:55:49 pm »
Contest entries are now closed.

Results will be posted soon.

20
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: October 19, 2020, 11:59:00 am »
24 Hours Remaining for Contest Entries

I've been a bit busy lately, sorry for the delay. Tomorrow after the submission deadline ends I'll start judging; hopefully I'll be able to finish the same day but there are a lot of entries so it's possible I won't have results until sometime on Wednesday.

21
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: October 14, 2020, 12:59:31 am »
To clarify because multiple people asked: you can enter previously made cards as long as it hasn't been a winner or runner up to a contest before, if you want to.

22
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: October 12, 2020, 10:50:40 pm »
Weekly Card Contest 91: If Dominion is so good why didn't they make a Dominion Two?

This week's challenge is relatively simple: the card-shaped-thing you submit must have the number two on it somewhere, whether in the cost or in the actual text. Both expressions with the numeral "2", such as "+2 Cards", and with "two" spelled out, such as "Trash two cards from your hand", are acceptable.

23
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: October 09, 2020, 11:53:18 am »
Using Aquila's card costs: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=20533.msg855268#msg855268



Quote
Doppelgänger

Exchange this for a non-Command Action from the supply you have no copies of in play. Play it.
-
§: To buy this, discard an Action card that you have a copy of in play.

Action-Command
§

What can I gain when I trash this with Remodel?

In theory: A card from the Supply that costs up to more; e.g. .
In practice: Either you take a Randomizer card costing more, or if you can't find it, discard an Action card with a copy in play and then you get one costing up to more.
Finally, after some futile attempts you will get a 痛 token.

Aquila's post doesn't seem to definitively answer this. I assume that you get something that costs up to $2 § (though I really can't imagine why you would want to trash Doppelgänger in the first place).

24
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Set Expansion Contest
« on: October 09, 2020, 01:09:46 am »


Quote
Shipyard

+1 Action
At the start of your next turn, discard a card from your hand and gain a card costing up to $5.

Action - Duration
$4

25
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: October 08, 2020, 07:06:03 pm »
*Doppelgänger*

The “discard, revealed” wording is only used/needed when discarding multiple cards at once. If discarding a single card (Mountebank, Cutpurse, etc); “revealed” isn’t necessary.

Thank you; the card post has been updated with the unnecessary wording removed.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6

Page created in 0.094 seconds with 19 queries.