Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
 91 
 on: Today at 08:30:49 am 
Started by Awaclus - Last post by Chris is me
I feel like this sort of thing might encourage low-percentage riskier play over higher percentage but more conservative play, but hey it's fun.

I address that in the conclusion section of the article. It would be cool if the challenge could be easier so that you could actually beat it without taking unrealistic risks, but then you could also beat it without making the sort of correct decisions that it now forces you to make.

In a way it would almost be better as “play the board five times with the same buy rules each time, average a province pileout in 12 turns” or something. I would say it’s good for a simulator, but it would be prohibitively complex to program a bot for each turn to turn decision.

 92 
 on: Today at 08:27:10 am 
Started by Davio - Last post by Cuzz
Today for the first time ever I had a straight-up $5-$5 opening with no Baker or Borrow in the Kingdom. The only Heirloom was Pouch. What did I buy with my first $5?

 93 
 on: Today at 07:56:18 am 
Started by ehunt - Last post by dominator 123
It makes no sense to redefine the Magic term; it just leaves you communicating poorly with Magic players, all so that you can say something dull about Ruined Market or whatever. You get zilch out of it other than communicating poorly; zilch I say.

"Strictly better" is when one card is always better than another, ignoring stuff like "what if I take control of your thing, now you want the worse thing." In Magic, strictly better/worse cards appear in most sets. In Dominion, I don't make them. Magic initially had some, for a while tried to avoid them, then gave up as it was impossible and hurting the sets. Dominion has a tiny fraction of the cards and isn't trying to sell people stuff they already have.

If you want to talk about how one Dominion card is better than another, say "better" and you will do a better job of communicating.

Now Dominion does have printed cards that are strictly better than others, just going by the printed wording; for example 2E Throne Room is strictly better than 1E. However the idea is that you play the 1E version as the 2E version, leaving them the same.
Well I disagree, because defining "strictly better" to include cost in a Dominion context is completely meaningless because then no card is strictly better than another other than E1/E2 variants.

Simply "better" can't communicate the meaning across. For example most players would say e.g Mountebank is better than Beggar, but of course isn't strictly better because Beggar's abilities are different from Mountebank's.

 94 
 on: Today at 07:51:18 am 
Started by Seprix - Last post by Simon Jester
Dominion getting boring?

Well, ehm, no.

However, I can see a pretty nice expansion theme here. However I myself can't even decide if "Tavern Witch" should let you yourself take the shot whilst you force everyone else to do it, so I'm not sure how it would work out..


 95 
 on: Today at 07:08:20 am 
Started by ehunt - Last post by Donald X.
It makes no sense to redefine the Magic term; it just leaves you communicating poorly with Magic players, all so that you can say something dull about Ruined Market or whatever. You get zilch out of it other than communicating poorly; zilch I say.

"Strictly better" is when one card is always better than another, ignoring stuff like "what if I take control of your thing, now you want the worse thing." In Magic, strictly better/worse cards appear in most sets. In Dominion, I don't make them. Magic initially had some, for a while tried to avoid them, then gave up as it was impossible and hurting the sets. Dominion has a tiny fraction of the cards and isn't trying to sell people stuff they already have.

If you want to talk about how one Dominion card is better than another, say "better" and you will do a better job of communicating.

Now Dominion does have printed cards that are strictly better than others, just going by the printed wording; for example 2E Throne Room is strictly better than 1E. However the idea is that you play the 1E version as the 2E version, leaving them the same.

 96 
 on: Today at 06:51:24 am 
Started by Awaclus - Last post by Awaclus
I feel like this sort of thing might encourage low-percentage riskier play over higher percentage but more conservative play, but hey it's fun.

I address that in the conclusion section of the article. It would be cool if the challenge could be easier so that you could actually beat it without taking unrealistic risks, but then you could also beat it without making the sort of correct decisions that it now forces you to make.

 97 
 on: Today at 06:26:25 am 
Started by Commodore Chuckles - Last post by Awaclus
Also a lot of the Alchemy cards are just bad. Herbalist is bad unless you need the +buy, you practically never buy Transmute or Philosopher's Stone and Golem is too difficult to acquire to be worth its effect most of the time. That's 1/3 of the entire expansion there.

 98 
 on: Today at 06:00:28 am 
Started by faust - Last post by faust
Shepherd is a good Victory sifter that can level up to become nonterminal draw.
I would rather say that Shepherd is a good nonterminal draw card that you might occasionally use as a Victory sifter.

 99 
 on: Today at 05:58:48 am 
Started by faust - Last post by faust
But this bit bugs me considerably:
in order to get started, you want to make sure to always start with a Shepherd in hand. Assuming a 5 card starting hand, that means that 20% of your deck should be Shepherds.
It's simply not true that 20% of your deck being Shepherds means that if you draw 5 cards you're certain one will be a Shepherd. All you're certain of is that you'll average one Shepherd per five cards.
It's true that this isn't formulated clearly. Will fix.

 100 
 on: Today at 05:57:49 am 
Started by faust - Last post by faust
In my limited experience Shepherd is powerful non-terminal draw that takes some time to build up and is more volatile than ordinary draw engines.
If you play a village without having a Smithy it is just a cantrip and if you play a Smithy and draw into a village it is just one extra dead card. If your Shepherds and green don't match they are all dead.

Basically, a lot of the things that apply to Crossroads when it comes to the first Crossroads/green collision also apply to Shepherd/green collision. An important difference is that Shepherd has the Pasture heirloom, and Estates are worth extra VP so long as Pasture is around.
The other important difference is that there is a limit to how many Crossroads you can play in a turn without other support.

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]

Page created in 0.084 seconds with 17 queries.