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 - Asper

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: 1 ... 154 155 [156] 157 158 ... 183
3876
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Monty Python and the Holy Grail Board
« on: September 16, 2013, 02:46:23 am »

I still think the Spanish Inquisition should be a randomly shuffled pile with 10 different cardinals that all have the same action and reaction effect. Only that the reaction is always triggered by something else your opponents could do, and that even the top Cardinal is invisible - so neither your reaction-triggering opponents nor you expect what you get.
(Edit: Not-that-good example here)

If LastFootnote hadn't forbidden Knights-piles for Dark Ages, that would definately have been my entry.

3877
Some last thoughts i had:

Midnight Gathering and Shaman are basically the same idea, but differently balanced. I like Midnight Gathering a bit more, and i also think it's not such a bad idea. Of course it's basically a 5$ that only later decides which of your cards it will be, but it still needs you buying those originals.

Stranger should use the Tribute method to find the cards which should become cheaper. I like the general idea and so i'll vote for it. Same goes for Artefact which probably should just be "+1Card, +1Action, Trash a card from your hand"  on play.

Mill and Lucky coin are both no-fun cards that can wreck even your opening buys and leave you with a serious disadvantage early on. Lucky Coin is the worse.

I feel Troglodyte Cave might work better costed at 6$ with a little bonus, so gaining Duchies would be possible.

Ring Leader, if played in an engine, can wreck your next hand, leaving you with only one valuable card. I considered voting for it before, but i guess i won't.

Cards i consider voting for:
Consulate, Artefact, Troglodyte Caves, Sanctuary, Witch Doctor, Midnight Gathering, Stranger


Oh, i just see i don't have much time left :P
Better decide now...

Edit: Oh yeah, cards should fit Hinterlands... Guess that narrows my choice a bit.

3878
Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Mini-Set Contest: Bold predictions
« on: September 13, 2013, 03:29:53 am »
I predict at least two more type combinations that have not been on any official card will appear.

...What are the plausible ones? (And by "appear" do you mean be selected, or just be submitted?)

Treasure–Attack seems like the one with the most room for development—and indeed, one has already been submitted.

Treasure–Looter (or Treasure–Attack–Looter) similarly seems fairly unobjectionable.

Victory–Looter is possible (x points per Ruins in your deck?), though it doesn't seem very likely to me. Action–Victory–Looter seems more plausible than just Victory–Looter.

Reaction on a card with more than one other type (Action–Attack–Reaction? Treasure–Victory–Reaction?) has nothing wrong with it in principle, though you'd have to take care not to let card effects get needlessly complex.

Treasure–Duration also seems reasonable, though it causes hairy rules interactions with Herbalist and a few other things.

Victory–Prize is a possibility if we do a new Prize, though remember Donald X playtested Victory–Prize and found it not worthwhile. ("Worth 1 VP per Prize in your deck"? Eh, it's just winner-wins-more, and probably balanced but not very interesting.) Action–Victory–Prize or Treasure–Victory–Prize could have potential.

I don't think Action–Treasure has a realistic chance of being effectively designed, though I guess anything's possible.

Anything–Curse is a non-starter ruleswise. A kingdom card saying "Setup: in games using this, replace the Curse pile in the supply with" could make a mixed-type Curse more feasible, but (a) LastFootnote's contest rules don't allow for this, and (b) this is what Looters and Ruins were invented for anyway.

We're clearly not seeing new Ruins, Shelters, or Knights.

I meant submitted. Not counting the Treasure-Attack because i made the prediction after that.

3879
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Monty Python and the Holy Grail Board
« on: September 12, 2013, 08:01:55 am »
If I have to close my eyes while shuffling, I don't get the benefit of Stash. I guess you could make me separate the Stashes, shuffle with my eyes closed, and then insert the Stashes where I want; I'd be able to see where in my deck Sir Robin was, of course.

You can count the cards in your deck anytime (which implies you can look at their backs), so even without Stash, you could always see where Sir Robin is. As he is supposed to have a benefit in return for his not-so-braveness and as knowing where he is is not game-warping, i guess that would be okay.

3880
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Monty Python and the Holy Grail Board
« on: September 12, 2013, 07:25:44 am »
Ah... but I can put it where I want when I shuffle, then? Stash-tastic.

That's a good point.... Nothing in the rules prohibits to "accidentally" shuffle until Sir Robin is wherever you want him to be... :(
I guess you need to shuffle eyes closed or something.

3881
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Monty Python and the Holy Grail Board
« on: September 12, 2013, 06:56:25 am »
Actually playable Sir Robin:



Edit: Different backside with Sir Robin's Chicken crest is for accountability, of course ;)

3882
I really, really don't get where all the love for Mill comes from. The only thing hinterlands-y about this card is at the same time the biggest first player advantage you can imagine. Picture having a 5/2 opening with the first player buying a Mill and tell me you still think it's a good idea.
If player one opens 5/2 (a 1/12 chance of happening), then there's only a 1/2 chance it even affects player 2.  Only 1/6 of that 1/2 chance will actually hit a 5 opening (granted that does really suck).  The other 5/6 of the 1/2 chance that it matters will only change a 4/3 opening to a 3/3 opening, which usually is not a huge difference (especially considering how big of a difference the opening draws often make with things like Mountebank, Chapel, etc.).  If player 2 opens 5/2 and player one 2/5, then that also hits it down to a 2/3 opening (again, really sucks), but that's also only a 1/144 chance of happening.  Actually, this is the worst case, because then player 2 knows (usually) to get a Mill since his opponent opened with $2.  The other case is that player 2 gets 5/2 and player 1 gets 3/4, which reduces player 1's split to 3/3.

The opening discard attack only matters in 1/12 games with Mill in them, and in 5/6 of those 1/12 games (5/72 games total), it only reduces a 3/4 opening to 3/3.  Often times that doesn't make a difference at all, even in those 5/72 games; opening double $3's on a 3/4 split is not uncommon.  It's only 1/72 games where one player can have a 5/2 split crushed to 3/2.

Remember that cards can be tweaked as well.  It would be easy to fix it with "When you gain this during your action phase", or something similar.  Then you also don't have weird things like Swindler making you discard during your own turn (although that would be funny).

I forgot this forum doesn't care about games with more than two players...

If you change it to "during your action phase", Mill itself will usually be the only card that triggers that. Just a few cards can make you gain a 5$ during your action phase, and all of them either make you trash a non-starting card for it or are difficult to get (edit: Or need cost reduction/need opponent to gain Mill/need to save up Coin tokens). So effectively, "when you gain this during your action phase" equals changing Mill's action part to:
"+1 Action. Each other player draws a card. Gain a card costing up to 5$. If it is a Mill, each other player discards down to 3 cards.".
The real difference is that this would at least give it the attack type and make it possible to use reactions against it.

Everything else is just trying to make it a hinterlands fit.

3883
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Homage to the Best Card
« on: September 11, 2013, 04:12:59 pm »
though if they know that you should not reveal them, they should assume you won't reveal them, and so it would be better to leave them on top. Though I suppose there could be situations where you would rather have two tunnels on top of your deck instead of two random cards, and your opponent knows it is such a scenario because they saw your hand from a cutpurse or something.

This discussion should probably be happening inside of a Princess Bride meme.



It it coincidence we are discussing the same movie here as at the very bad card ideas thread?



Thereby emptying the Gold pile for the win! ;)

Why would you reveal them?

I don't know what you mean...?

The player with the Tunnels doesn't have to reveal them to get the Golds, and if it would lose for him, why would he?

Yeah. That's what I meant, sorry. The "them" had an unclear antecedent there.

Ahh. Good point. But those Golds are just... so tempting.

Maybe Greg was slightly behind and his opponent is a gambler, but Greg managed to pull ahead that last turn. :)

Uuhh... What? It's not like you had a choice to not reveal cards from the top of your deck for Oracle. Or reveal Tunnel from your hand to it. All of this "Why would you reveal them" makes no sense.

You get the gold when you reveal Tunnel as a result of discarding it.  The revealing that takes place with Oracle is separate.  So Oracle reveals two Tunnels, player makes you discard the Tunnels.  You then have the option to reveal each Tunnel for a Gold.

Oh, yeah, that does make sense...
Oops, sorry :P

3884
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Homage to the Best Card
« on: September 11, 2013, 04:05:07 pm »
Thereby emptying the Gold pile for the win! ;)

Why would you reveal them?

I don't know what you mean...?

The player with the Tunnels doesn't have to reveal them to get the Golds, and if it would lose for him, why would he?

Yeah. That's what I meant, sorry. The "them" had an unclear antecedent there.

Ahh. Good point. But those Golds are just... so tempting.

Maybe Greg was slightly behind and his opponent is a gambler, but Greg managed to pull ahead that last turn. :)

Uuhh... What? It's not like you had a choice to not reveal cards from the top of your deck for Oracle. Or reveal Tunnel from your hand to it. All of this "Why would you reveal them" makes no sense.

Edit: Oh yeah, reveal when discard... Sorry.

3885
I really, really don't get where all the love for Mill comes from. The only thing hinterlands-y about this card is at the same time the biggest first player advantage you can imagine. Picture having a 5/2 opening with the first player buying a Mill and tell me you still think it's a good idea.

3886
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Really bad card ideas
« on: September 10, 2013, 05:24:20 pm »
The Princess Bride $8
Action
Watch The Princess Bride.  If you do, you win the game.

The Princess Bride
Action - Attack
Take a Curse and a Gold from the supply and without the other players seeing, set them aside face down. The player to your left chooses one of them, but not before having a long monologue about which card is probably which. He then gains it, while you gain the other card. If both are Curses, trash the card you gained.

3887
Man, I can see why rinkworks burned out after running a contest like this.

Perhaps you could get some volunteers (who are active enough that you could trust them) to run various rounds?

Also i think nobody would be mad if you felt you needed to pause the contest for a week or so... Gives us more time to fix our cards, and after all, you're doing us a favour.

3888
Another edit: Ring Leader should have +2 Cards when you play it. I'm fixing that now.

Ring Leader probably doesn't need a line. See Noble Brigand.

Agreed. No line. It has two on play effects, one of which is also an on buy effect.

I seem to remember that Noble Brigand doesn't have a line because the line wouldn't fit on the card. If it wins and I mock up the card, I may omit the line. For now it stays.

Yes, sure. But only because with a line, Noble Brigand would look like this:

Noble Brigand
+1$
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck, trashes a revealed Silver or Gold that you choose and discards the rest. If he didn't reveal a treasure, he gains a Copper. You gain the trashed cards.
----------
When you buy this, each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck, trashes a revealed Silver or Gold that you choose and discards the rest. If he didn't reveal a treasure, he gains a Copper. You gain the trashed cards.


Ring Leader has to be either:

Ring Leader
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $3
+2 Cards.
When you play or buy this, each player (including you) reveals the top 4 card of his deck, discards one that you choose, and puts the rest back in an order he chooses.

or:

Ring Leader
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $3
+2 Cards.
Each player (including you) reveals the top 4 card of his deck, discards one that you choose, and puts the rest back in an order he chooses.
------------
When you buy this, each player (including you) reveals the top 4 card of his deck, discards one that you choose, and puts the rest back in an order he chooses.


Also: Dark Ages :D

3889
Another edit: Ring Leader should have +2 Cards when you play it. I'm fixing that now.

And so many workshops! Actually workshop itself is a bit Hinterlandsy to me, but whatever.

This caught my attention as well. Donald rejected a one-shot double workshop card because Hinterlands has precious few $4 cards you want several of. Pretty much it's just Silk Road. So all the "Gain a card costing up to $4" submissions don't really fit Hinterlands, in my opinion.

That's one of the many reasons I like Mill so much. It gains $5 cards, and there are a ton of $5 cards in Hinterlands you want a bunch of: Cartographer, Highway, Ill-Gotten Gains, Inn, Margrave, and Stables.

But wasn't on-gain Militia also dropped for being unfun?  I strongly remember reading something like that in a Secret History post, probably one of the more recent post-Guilds posts.

Yes, it was. However, comparing it to such cards in the outtakes, two things make Mill different. First, the card doesn't also attack when you play it, so the attack only happens 10 times max (barring Graverobber, etc.). Second, the on-play effect makes other players draw cards, which may very well balance it out. The main worry I have is that it can really exacerbate first-player advantage in the opening.

I didn't even think of first player advantage before... Imagine your 5/2 opening becomes a 3/2 because somebody else bought a Mill. Absolutely no.  :o
I think without the on-gain it's probably okay, but not a real Hinterlands card - more like Prosperity.

3890
Just playtested Wagon Raider. It was dominating. I think the alternative to the Curse should be less awfull, like "discard a card costing 3$ or more that is not a victory card". Gaining cards your opponents becomes a big deal after a while.

Also playtested Artefact. A double Artefact opening with Big Money after that lost against a Bridge/Oasis engine, but not by much (3 points). Maybe raise the cost to 3$? A 2/5 split is too much of an advantage otherwise, i think.

In what way was Wagon Raider dominating?  The attack is weaker than Sea Hag.  The bottom part only helps when you start buying Provinces, and even then it's just a terminal Silver.  I guess the bottom gets better if you also have +Buy.

Artefact into BM doesn't sound great.  It's strong trashing, which will shine more with engines.  Definitely think optional non-terminal trashing is too strong for $2, even with the delay.  I expect too strong for $3 as well.

Yeah, i wasn't thinking about what i wrote there, or, i was, but i was very tired... "Dominating" was certainly not the rigth word for the card as a whole. The curse choice was dominating, that's what i wanted to say... The other option was just so horrible. I think making it a stronger Cutpurse "discard an action or treasure card" would be better, but i think it doesn't really need the curse option, then.

I was talking nonsense about Artefact, too. Raising the cost does't change anything, except maybe that it's not possible to open Artefact/5$-attack. I think if you want to nerf the card, it should lose one of the options, for example the medium-use option, discard. Trashing is the main benefit it gives, but i wonder if it's necessary to make it a plain "+1 Card, +1 Action, Trash a card" to balance it.

I'll edit that post before more people read that half-sleep nonsense.

3891
Just playtested Wagon Raider. It was dominating. I think the alternative to the Curse should be less awfull, like "discard a card costing 3$ or more that is not a victory card". Gaining cards your opponents becomes a big deal after a while.

Also playtested Artefact. A double Artefact opening with Big Money after that lost against a Bridge/Oasis engine, but not by much (3 points). Maybe raise the cost to 3$? A 2/5 split is too much of an advantage otherwise, i think.


I'm horrible at playtesting, more so when i'm tired.

3892
But wasn't on-gain Militia also dropped for being unfun?  I strongly remember reading something like that in a Secret History post, probably one of the more recent post-Guilds posts.

Yup, i read that too. and i absolutely believe it. I think it was in an article about Noble Brigand.


Quote
Wagon Raider
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $4
Each other player may put a card costing more than $2 from their hand into your discard pile. If he doesn't, he gains a Curse.
While this is in play, when you buy a Gold, you may gain a Province instead.

So, now this has become a Witch with a Thief-bane, and a conditional +2$... Seeing it like this, i think it's... Okay. I guess it's one of the cards that will be at the bottom end of the voting, though it's not actually that bad. I think it's one of those cards that had more thought flow in them than you see.


Now go! Scroll down to your card!

+1 for this alone, even though you didn't tell everyone to vote for my card (which you obviously should have).

3893
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Card artwork
« on: September 09, 2013, 10:20:47 pm »
Other shadows are 10-11 o clock..

In other news, English idioms don't translate well to other languages.

"Five o'clock shadow" refers to beard stubble.  The idea being that on a thickly bearded man, he'll have stubble by the end of the workday after shaving in the morning

I learned something today.

3894
It's funny, i've read several opinions about my card now. At least one was saying it was too weak, at least another one it was too strong. Personally, i didn't go into this contest without playtesting, and have come to believe it is neither.

3895
Watching WW's video, I realised I might have parsed Courier (A) incorrectly, and I'm pretty confident WW parsed it incorrectly. In retrospect it should be: "Gain a card costing ($1 per card discarded)" while I interpreted it as "(Gain a card costing $1) per card discarded." Either way needs a wording tweak, but I'm gonna have to reconsider it now...

Gain all the Poor Houses!



Y u no image?

3896
Quote
Chapterhouse
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. +$1. Draw until you have 6 cards in hand. Discard 2 cards.

When you buy this, each other player draws a card. When you gain this, each other player with at least 4 cards in hand discards a card.

The above the line ability is clever. I don’t so much care for the on-buy/on-gain abilities.

This is the exact opposite thought I had.  I find below-the-line to be clever, while the top is quite boring to me.  Why do you think the top is clever?  I may be missing something.

The top is a sifter, fitting Hinterlands pretty well. A bit like Oasis, just with a variable amount of cards. The fact that the number of cards changes makes it interesting and strategic. I'm not so much a fan of the lower part, either.

Edit: Ninja'd.

3897
Perhaps happens Artefact is discarded rather than gained to avoid triggering on-gain effects after the game ends?

I think that's another good reason. Imagine Feodum and revealing Trader at the end. Or revealing Trader at all, anytime. I mean, where is the card going to be after that? Will it just stay set aside for the rest of the game? That would quickly become confusing when several Artefacts were bought. Also, as mentioned, possessing a player at his reshuffle will steal all his Artefacts. Or reveal a Watchtower several turns after buying the card. Or playing a Village, then a Haggler, then a Library, having to gain a Copper... I think just discarding the card works so much better.

And it's not like you can't gain it at all. I imagine buying a Stonemason for 4$, remodeling a Copper or playing Workshops/Ironworks would work nicely with Artefact. Actually, those interactions are pretty thematic, too.

3898
My card was Aqueduct (B). It was an awful idea to put it in a Prosperity contest, and what i learned was not to participate if i'm not happy with the card, myself. I didn't have another Prosperity card, though, and was sure Aqueduct was nice enough. Seems many people hated the no-attack clause (which made, as playtesting showed, a very strong 5$ a mediocre 5$), and by now i decided to remove it. So... Progress.

By the way, i voted for cards i liked, not so much considering whether they were fit for the set. Considering mine was one of few cards that didn't fit, that probably made no difference... I didn't vote for Aqueduct, myself, and now i wonder who did.

Also i considered voting for Silk Merchant, then decided against it and regretted it soon after. :(

What i noticed too was that because there are so many cards to look through, you can't possible read and consider carefully enough.

3899
Quote
Fence
Types: Action
Cost: $5
While this is in play, when you gain a card, gain a card costing exactly $1 more than it.

This is broken, as it will allow you to gain a whole pile of $5s and the Border Village pile. It is also odd because it has no "Action effect".

Whoa, totally missed this bug with Border Village.  Easy fix is "when you BUY a card".

It doesn't even need Border Village for that. You gain a card, react to that gaining - by what? By gaining. What stops you to react to that, too?

Quote
Pyramid
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action. +$1. +1 Card per Pyramid you have in play. Discard one card per Pyramid you have in play.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When you buy this, gain an extra copy of it.
It’s a hand size reducer that get better (buy sifting more) in multiples; that isn’t going to work out well.

Not a handsize reducer, but an Oasis.

3900
At the request of the author, I have changed Artefact's wording back such that when you buy it, it will eventually make its way into your discard pile without you actually ever gaining it.

Weird... I can't think of an interaction where that even matters.  I guess you can't Trader it away.  You can't Watchtower it.  Anything else?

Possession?

Edit: Oh, and Haggler. But definitely Possession, where the possessor may steal all your Artefacts.

Pages: 1 ... 154 155 [156] 157 158 ... 183

Page created in 0.138 seconds with 18 queries.