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 - Gubump

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 21
26
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Strictly Better
« on: June 17, 2019, 05:13:08 pm »
Something doesn't have to be strictly better in order to have to cost more. Lab isn't strictly better than Woodcutter but it has to cost more.

However, Cathedral is three Labs (and more) and costs the same as Woodcutter.

How? Cathedral has nothing to do with drawing.

27
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Project - card parallels
« on: June 17, 2019, 05:08:14 pm »
Strictly better means more or less the same as always better.

That's not what people normally mean when they say strictly better, though; the number of card pairs where one is truly strictly better than the other becomes infinitesimal if that's your definition. What people normally mean is that card X is strictly better than card Y if card X is better commonly enough that it would be bad game design for both cards to cost the same.

That's why it makes no sense to say that Canal is strictly better than Treasury as a Project but more sense to say that Canal is more often than not or on average better than Treasury as a Project which indicates that Treasury as a Project might have to cost less than $7.

For example, what you've said in italics is what people normally mean by "strictly better."

28
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Strictly Better
« on: June 17, 2019, 04:46:21 pm »
If on the other hand we are simply talking about a very general list of when it is appropriate to use the term "strictly better", then that's just a question of terminology, and not one of listing out different Dominion effects. For example, I recently responded to a fan card in the Weekly Fan Card Contest thread by saying it had an effect that was strictly weaker than another card because it required you to discard. I and the person I was responding to know that technically, discarding a card can be an advantage. But that wasn't relevant; we knew that it's normally a disadvantage; so there's no issue with using the term "strictly better" there.

And that's exactly what I've been arguing about the whole time here and in the argument that started this thread to begin with. What started that argument was my claim that + is strictly worse than reducing costs by , because the latter is normally a bigger advantage, so there shouldn't have been any problem with my statement.

Yeah and I was completely with you on that thread... I think it's fine to use "strictly better" in a casual context meaning "close enough to strictly better that it's bad card design to make it cost the same".

That's also what I meant by "comparatively better" earlier. I see now that I've misunderstood the purpose of this thread, though.

29
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Strictly Better
« on: June 17, 2019, 04:32:38 pm »
If on the other hand we are simply talking about a very general list of when it is appropriate to use the term "strictly better", then that's just a question of terminology, and not one of listing out different Dominion effects. For example, I recently responded to a fan card in the Weekly Fan Card Contest thread by saying it had an effect that was strictly weaker than another card because it required you to discard. I and the person I was responding to know that technically, discarding a card can be an advantage. But that wasn't relevant; we knew that it's normally a disadvantage; so there's no issue with using the term "strictly better" there.

And that's exactly what I've been arguing about the whole time here and in the argument that started this thread to begin with. What started that argument was my claim that + is strictly worse than reducing costs by , because the latter is normally a bigger advantage, so there shouldn't have been any problem with my statement.

30
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Strictly Better
« on: June 17, 2019, 04:03:51 pm »
I think we need a new term for what people often mean (or least what I do) when they say a card is strictly better than another



Well, according to this discussion, a Lost City without its on-gain effect isn't actually strictly better than a Lab and (ignoring the existence of Lost City) therefore doesn't actually need to cost more, but it clearly does.

Something doesn't have to be strictly better in order to have to cost more. Lab isn't strictly better than Woodcutter but it has to cost more.

Yes, but Lab would need to cost regardless of Woodcutter's existence. Before Poacher existed, most people agreed that a pure Peddler would be balanced at , and a pure Peddler would almost certainly be balanced at if Poacher didn't exist. Yet because of Poacher, a pure Peddler cannot exist since it would be strictly worse than Market and comparatively better than Poacher (Tunnels and draw to X might make you want to discard cards).

My point is, if an extreme edge case like Diadem + Storyteller is enough to disqualify a card from being strictly better than another, strictly better doesn't really mean anything because you could disprove a lot of "strictly better/worse" pairs with enough mental gymnastics.

31
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Strictly Better
« on: June 17, 2019, 03:44:12 pm »
I think we need a new term for what people often mean (or least what I do) when they say a card is strictly better than another



Well, according to this discussion, a Lost City without its on-gain effect isn't actually strictly better than a Lab and (ignoring the existence of Lost City) therefore doesn't actually need to cost more, but it clearly does.

32
Let's Discuss ... / Re: Let's Discuss Renaissance Cards: Scepter
« on: June 17, 2019, 03:32:47 pm »
Scepter is way weaker than Royal Carriage, but there's some cool stuff it can do that RC can't, and in the occasional game where it's useful or important it can really make the difference. There's a huge combo with Sculptor and any cost reduction for those who want to find it, but even just using it to play more Monuments or Wild Hunts or Bridges can be devastating if you're the person who sees it first.

RC also doesn't have a broken combo with Scholar.

33
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Strictly Better
« on: June 17, 2019, 03:24:52 pm »
I think we need a new term for what people often mean (or least what I do) when they say a card is strictly better than another -- that is, having a similar effect while being better enough of the time that it ought to cost more than that card. For example, Noble Brigand is "comparatively better" (that's the term I'm using now) than Thief, hence part of why Thief isn't in 2E, even though it's definitely not strictly better.

Likewise, cost reduction is comparatively better than +, even though yes, it is not strictly better. (And therefore Bridge is comparatively better than Woodcutter, even though there are situations where one might prefer Woodcutter.)

34
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Strictly Better
« on: June 17, 2019, 03:10:49 pm »
Diadem forces you to convert all your Actions to .
This is not how Diadem works. You don't lose the Actions (which would matter in Villa Kingdoms). So more Actions are always betters than less.

It's because playing Diadem with Storyteller would force you to draw cards per unused Action that you wouldn't always want +Actions. It's the combo of Diadem + Storyteller that makes +Actions not strictly better.

35
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: scolapasta's cards
« on: June 17, 2019, 03:08:18 pm »
So I really like the addition of an Artifact, but I think taking it should have some kind of condition you need to meet or cost to it. All of the official Artifacts do. None of them simply give you the Artifact for playing a card.

Treasurer does.

36
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Strictly Better
« on: June 17, 2019, 11:41:37 am »
If only one card is preventing something from being strictly better, I think you can go ahead and call it strictly better. Otherwise, there would be no such thing as strictly better thanks to Possession.

37
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Project - card parallels
« on: June 16, 2019, 06:59:23 pm »
Not strictly worse, for two reasons: (a) debt-cost cards, and (b) trash-for-benefit cards.

It's close enough to strictly better to be considered strictly better, though. Bridge would be roughly the same strength as Woodcutter otherwise, but that's obviously not the case.
Applying the term "strictly better" for something which is not strictly better in more than just fringe cases is pretty dubious.
Just say something like "most of the times Canal is better the Project version of Key/Treasury" or whatever.

Cards that give +Buy, making cost reduction better than +: 53
Cards that want cards to cost more, making cost reduction worse than +: 9
Cards that cost Debt, making cost reduction worse than +: 9

The cases where cost reduction isn't strictly better than + is more of a fringe case than the cases where it is. 53 / 394 ~= 13%; and since there are 10 Kingdom cards in each game, the average game will have ~1.3 cards that give +Buys, making cost reduction better than +. Not exactly a fringe case. Especially when the cards that make cost reduction worse than + are combined 1/3rd as common as the cards that make cost reduction better.

38
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Project - card parallels
« on: June 15, 2019, 12:58:20 pm »
Not strictly worse, for two reasons: (a) debt-cost cards, and (b) trash-for-benefit cards.

It's close enough to strictly better to be considered strictly better, though. Bridge would be roughly the same strength as Woodcutter otherwise, but that's obviously not the case.

39
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Project - card parallels
« on: June 15, 2019, 11:23:09 am »
Considering Poacher is $4, a +$1 project would be $6 or $7. I'd put it at $6 since $ is much less useful than actions at the start of your turn.

+ each turn is strictly worse than Canal. Enough worse that I don't think a + project could exist at any price (too strong for , too weak for ).

40
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 13, 2019, 07:24:49 pm »
Tough challenge this week.

Rather than come up with a card that would competes with other cards you may prefer to buy, I decided to try something a little different: a 0 card cost, that doesn't do much (and in fact, will sometimes get in the way), but still might be worth an extra buy.

Rabbits are a one shot "throne room" for tokens.

[Note: it gives +1 card before repeating the effect of the token, in order to also work better with my entry from last week: Worshippers. Feel free to ignore them when evaluating (or not)]



Changelog:
v0.1 - initial

FAQ:
Recommended to use only with Kingdoms having at least one card that gives tokens.
When you trash Rabbits, you repeat the effect of the token, e.g. if you removed a Villager from it's mat, you would get +1 Action (in addition to the Action you got from removing the Villager).

Secret History:
I'm considering making this a base card and having the FAQ say something like, "In games that use Villagers or Coffers [or Worshippers], add this as a base card X% of the time."

Frankly, it's not worded very well. I know what it means due to what you've said outside of the card, but when I first looked at it, I thought "repeat what effect?" It should say "and repeat the token's effect."

41
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 13, 2019, 04:30:07 pm »
Design
Types: Reaction
Cost: P
At the start of each Clean-Up, if 1 or fewer Actions were played this turn, you may trash this from your hand and gain a card costing up to $5P.
When you buy this, +1 Buy.
I think this should be a Treasure.
I must confess that I don't follow your logic train.
Design can be trashed in response to any turn in which 1 or no Actions were played. You can trigger it yourself by not playing Actions or take advantage of another player's turn misfiring (or using an action-lite strategy). How could a Treasure approximate that effect?

I don't think the wording on Design is clear enough. I assumed that it only worked on your turn. I (and probably faust) didn't realize it worked on other player's turns.

I would recommend something along the lines of "At the start of any player's Clean-up phase, if that player played 1 or fewer Actions during their turn..."

42
Patron + Seer

Spam the crap out of both of them, then whenever you play a Seer, you put the revealed Patrons into your hand AND get +1 Coffers for each one!

Patron + Patrol

Similar to Patron + Seer. Patrol is arguably better, since it draws more reliably and reveals more cards. And in Patron games, you probably aren't going to need any other sources of +Actions anyway.

You're aware that Patron consumes an action in addition to giving you a Villager, I hope? You really will likely need another village if you're trying to draw your deck with terminal draw. The Seer thing is a lot better though.

I really have built draw-your-deck engines with lots of terminals and no Villages thanks to Patron. And yes, I am aware that Patrons still consume Actions. I don't know why I said that Patrol is arguably better, though. Patron + Seer is way better.

43
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Contest #33: Pure Reaction card
« on: June 13, 2019, 11:48:43 am »


Clarification: The 2nd reaction is worded the way it is so that you can gain an Action card, Blockade it onto your deck, and then put the Blockade onto that Action's pile.
I like this a lot, a great take on the "hot potatoe" card.
I just worry a b it about bootstrapping the whole thing: you have to pay $4 (or forsake a Workshop variant gain) and once draw into the card to get the whole thing going and nobody might have an incentive to do so (as the pile-blocking might also hurt you).

Perhaps put one Blockade on a random Action Supply pile during setup?

Blockade v1.1 now gains you a Gold and a Silver if you do the second reaction, giving you an incentive to do so.

44
Patron + Seer

Spam the crap out of both of them, then whenever you play a Seer, you put the revealed Patrons into your hand AND get +1 Coffers for each one!

Patron + Patrol

Similar to Patron + Seer. Patrol is arguably better, since it draws more reliably and reveals more cards. And in Patron games, you probably aren't going to need any other sources of +Actions anyway.

45
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Contest #33: Pure Reaction card
« on: June 13, 2019, 12:28:36 am »


Clarification: The 2nd reaction is worded the way it is to clarify that you can gain an Action card, Blockade it onto your deck, and then put the Blockade onto that Action's pile.

Version History:
v1.0: Original version.
v1.1: Added Gold + Silver gaining as an incentive to put Blockades onto Action piles.

46
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 12, 2019, 03:50:34 pm »
I will post an image and name later, but for now:

Cost: 5

When you draw this, you may reveal this and set it aside. If you do, +2 Cards and return this to your hand.

I figure it's basically just a Reaction version of Lab, so it should cost 5. It's not identical, though. There are situations where it's worse and situations where it's better.

"When you draw this" triggers have been discussed before; the issue is accountability... by the time you have drawn it; it's in your hand, mixed with the other cards. How do you show if it was a card you just drew, or one that was always in your hand? Also, when is it worse than Lab?

It can't be Throned, and it makes Militia-like attacks hit you harder if the reaction was one of the initial 5 cards you drew for the next turn.

47
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 12, 2019, 03:28:56 pm »
A very simple idea; one that I think may have even been discussed many years ago. Also, basically my first fan card ever.



Acts a lot like Gold. But neither strictly better nor strictly worse. It can protect you from junking attacks, and it combos well with Remodel and Workshop variants. But the "exactly" bit makes it tricky; 3 Silvers and a Gold can get you a Province; not so with 3 Silvers and a Buried Loot. Same with wanting to buy a cost card with and a Gold vs and a Buried Loot.

You can get a Province with 3 Silvers and a Buried Loot; just buy a Duchy and react with Buried Loot to gain a Province instead of a Duchy. You don't have to spend all of your money. Similarly, to get a -cost with and a Buried Loot, just buy an Estate and react with Buried Loot.

The only situation in which Buried Loot is not strictly better than a Gold is when you want a card that costs , , or . I think Buried Loot has to cost .

48
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 10, 2019, 09:03:08 pm »
Reflection
Event - $10
Trash any number of Coppers from your hand. +3VP per Copper trashed this way.

I think it's going to be pretty rare to be able to trash any Coppers with this, unless you're either drawing your deck or in a Platinum/Colony game.

49
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 10, 2019, 05:24:57 pm »
Here's my submission to a Chapel competitor - Sustainable Living! Why bother with Chapelling cards when you could feel just as sanctimonious by reusing your pork rinds, reducing your taxes on the peasants, recycling your cycles; you get the idea...

Basically this card is both an early- and endgame card. The debt part allows this event to be more powerful than Bonfire and encourages early trashing. But the endgame is where this card shines as it will disrupt the usual province/duchy dance tempo. Sure, $20 is expensive to buy two provinces, but trashing $20 worth and gaining the last two in the pile? That could be a gamechanger.

Naturally, drawers and strategic gainers such a Artisan can help you reach that $20 in your hand. And how can you reduce your opponents' chances of hitting $20? Discard attacks and junkers hurt more than regular games.



Sustainable Living -
Event - $3 2D
-
(Once per turn)
Trash up to five cards in your hand. If their total cost is $20 or more, gain two provinces.

I would argue that this would make Chapel even more desirable. Chapel will let you get cheap cards out of your deck more easily than this, since it's cheaper and you only need to buy it once. (Not to mention that you can't trash your Coppers if you need to play them to use the trasher.) Chapel can quickly remove the cheap cards from your deck so you can more easily use this event to gain Provinces quickly.

50
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Kudasai's Random Dominion Cards
« on: June 08, 2019, 10:10:55 pm »
A card that didn't make the cut for this weeks competition. Base-line testing shows this is fairly balanced, but ultimately I wanted to submit something with more pop. The idea is you want a little bit of trashing to play these more often, but not enough so that you don't get the VP tokens. Otherwise, you're paying $6 for what is a $4.5 value.



Any thoughts are appreciated!

It seems way too easy to get the +VP to just cost . It seems like you'd be getting the VP more often than not, unlike with Gardener, which doesn't give and only costs less.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 21

Page created in 0.116 seconds with 18 queries.