Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 9  All

Author Topic: silverspawn's card list  (Read 62780 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3189
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #50 on: October 17, 2014, 05:59:22 am »
0

Quote
considering Transmute handily won the worst card poll, I'm not so sure how wide that conclusion is.  If it weren't for the existence of the forum meme, I doubt there would be much consensus.  I mean Scout is obviously a weak card, but it's not obviously the weakest.  I certainly would take a free Scout over a free Thief on most boards - at minimum it can provide useful ordering ahead of a terminal draw and never helps the opponent.
The Poll ended 61-57 in favor of Transmute, and I voted for Transmute, so if anything it's 60-58, which is basically a tie. But I dare saying that, if we made a new Poll, Scout would win, because people have gotten better at the game, and Transmute is just way stronger than Scout.

I would rather take Scout than Thief on must boards too, but that's not what matters. The powerlevel of a card isn't based on how often it's better than nothing, it's based on how often it's the best card at it's price level. The utility of Thief is negative in the majority of games, which means that, even if Scout only looked at 2 cards, you'd likely take it over thief on the majority of boards (at least early), because the utility of Scout is (almost) never negative. But thief is sometimes really good, and that makes it better than Scout.

Quote
There is no way Adventurer would be fairly priced at $3.  On average, it will be about a terminal Gold, so should probably cost 5.
I disagree, I think it would be very weak at 5$, and fine at 3$. Probably a strong 3$, but I'm not even sure. I think it's worse than Smithy, and 3$ and 4$ is really close, especially for terminal draw, because you don't want to open with two of them anyway.

Quote
Seems this is true to some degree with all times of attacks.  I fail to see how that is a problem - maybe even a plus.
I was more talking about multiple plays in one turn. Whether that's a problem probably depends on the context of the card. Margrave even anti-stacks, though that's not a very popular card. But I'll say that it's bad for cantrips at least, which includes scout.

Quote
In regards to Duchess, I think silverspawn was only complaining about the friendly spy effect. The on-duchy-gain effect is much more relevant, I think.
I wasn't so much complaining about a specific aspect, as I was saying that there's just not enough for me to like it.

While making the list (I'm further in with the actual list than I am with the posts), realized why I was doing the chapter titles. Basically, I dislike cards from the first chapter on their own, which means if a random Kingdom includes one of them, I'd rather play this Kingdom without it, and have a 9-card Kingdom. Cards from Chapter 2 are only bad compared to the average card. So, if there was a Kingdom with Duchess already in it, I'd rather keep it in, because it doesn't hurt, but I like it so much less than other cards, that I'd prefer it if it wasn't in the game, and I'd take the loss of variety in exchange for more fun cards. that's even true for scout, I rather have him than nothing, but I'd prefer Dominion if he wasn't in it. Everything from the next chapter onward, I like having in the game.

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12847
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #51 on: October 17, 2014, 08:10:48 am »
0

I would rather take Scout than Thief on must boards too, but that's not what matters. The powerlevel of a card isn't based on how often it's better than nothing, it's based on how often it's the best card at it's price level. The utility of Thief is negative in the majority of games, which means that, even if Scout only looked at 2 cards, you'd likely take it over thief on the majority of boards (at least early), because the utility of Scout is (almost) never negative. But thief is sometimes really good, and that makes it better than Scout.
I assume that with the "utility of Scout", you mean just the ability, and not the whole thing including the fact that it takes up a card slot in your hand?
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3189
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #52 on: October 17, 2014, 08:36:07 am »
0

I assume that with the "utility of Scout", you mean just the ability, and not the whole thing including the fact that it takes up a card slot in your hand?

I meant what happens if you play it. what's written on the card minus one Action.

theJester

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 107
  • Respect: +88
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #53 on: October 17, 2014, 10:12:23 am »
0

I agree with most of the list, but I'd single out Possession and Cultist.

Way better players than myself have discussed Possession's effectiveness, merits and downsides, so I won't go too deeply into that. But this card ruins what I think is fundamental principle of Dominion for me: build your own deck and combat your opponents with it. Possession instead lets you control the deck your opponent so carefully and painstakingly built - deck you had nothing to do with. This is utterly annoying, and probably the biggest reason why it's almost universally hated.
The other reason is likely many overpowered combos and counters it creates: it nullifies Island, Masq and Ambassador completely; it lets you use your opponent's coin tokens; it makes TFB cards ridiculously powerful (why yes, I'll Salvage this Province for 8$), it combos greatly with TR and KC (and I won't even go into KC-Possession-Scheme).

Cultist is also one of way overpowered cards, IMHO. Consider Laboratory and Witch, both strong $5 cards from base set. Now consider Cultist, which (pseudo)combines their abilities, and then adds on trash benefit. It suffers from the same problem as Rebuild (also rightfully on the list) - it's so powerful that simple BM+Cultist is dominant strategy on many, if not most, boards it appears in (and so is Rebuild or Rebuild+X). This significantly reduces variety and enjoyability in Cultist-containing kingdoms.

I do disagree with your choice of putting Duchess and Masquerade so low on the list, but then again, you probably know that most players don't dislike Masqurade as fervently as you do (or don't dislike it at all).
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12847
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #54 on: October 17, 2014, 10:17:55 am »
0

Cultist is also one of way overpowered cards, IMHO. Consider Laboratory and Witch, both strong $5 cards from base set. Now consider Cultist, which (pseudo)combines their abilities, and then adds on trash benefit. It suffers from the same problem as Rebuild (also rightfully on the list) - it's so powerful that simple BM+Cultist is dominant strategy on many, if not most, boards it appears in (and so is Rebuild or Rebuild+X). This significantly reduces variety and enjoyability in Cultist-containing kingdoms.
BM+Cultist isn't that good if there's a splitter in the kingdom, and even if there isn't and BM+Cultist is the dominant strategy, it's definitely not "simple". You have to know when you want Gold over Cultist, and that depends on everything and very often is a non-trivial decision.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

theJester

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 107
  • Respect: +88
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #55 on: October 17, 2014, 10:33:45 am »
0

BM+Cultist isn't that good if there's a splitter in the kingdom, and even if there isn't and BM+Cultist is the dominant strategy, it's definitely not "simple". You have to know when you want Gold over Cultist, and that depends on everything and very often is a non-trivial decision.

Which is why I said many/most kingdoms, but not all. As for simplicity, I believe that Cultist-BM deck (and BM+X decks in general) where your main concern if whether to buy another Cultist or Gold pale in complexity compared to engine-making or even certain types or slogs, where much more choices are available and room for mistake is way bigger.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12847
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #56 on: October 17, 2014, 11:09:36 am »
0

BM+Cultist isn't that good if there's a splitter in the kingdom, and even if there isn't and BM+Cultist is the dominant strategy, it's definitely not "simple". You have to know when you want Gold over Cultist, and that depends on everything and very often is a non-trivial decision.

Which is why I said many/most kingdoms, but not all. As for simplicity, I believe that Cultist-BM deck (and BM+X decks in general) where your main concern if whether to buy another Cultist or Gold pale in complexity compared to engine-making or even certain types or slogs, where much more choices are available and room for mistake is way bigger.
Building engines is extremely straightforward. Trash your bad cards, gain splitters and +cards and that's it. There are some decisions involved, but they are hardly relevant. The difficult decisions in engine games are choosing between continuing to make your engine stronger, adding a payload into your deck and greening. You also have to do essentially the same choices in Cultist+BM games (where making your engine stronger = buying a Cultist, adding a payload = buying a Gold and greening = greening), but there are more factors involved because of the Ruins, and because you're not going to get into a state where you can buy all of your payload in one turn and end the game in a couple of your next turns, you are also more likely to have to make a decision like that more often than in a typical engine game.

Slogs, on the other hand, are extremely complex to play. Being less complex than a slog is being slower than Usain Bolt — it doesn't necessarily mean you're slower than the average person.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6357
  • Respect: +25672
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #57 on: October 17, 2014, 11:33:00 am »
+3

But that's not relevant, you got a point. If you want, I will edit the thread name and/or the OP. How about "silverspawn's card list" as the name, and

Quote
I will rate all official Kingdom cards by their design.
to
Quote
I will rate all official Kingdom cards by how much I like their design.

would that be okay?
Yes please, hooray, the system works.
Logged

ThaddeusB

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 133
  • Respect: +140
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #58 on: October 17, 2014, 09:05:28 pm »
0

Quote
considering Transmute handily won the worst card poll, I'm not so sure how wide that conclusion is.  If it weren't for the existence of the forum meme, I doubt there would be much consensus.  I mean Scout is obviously a weak card, but it's not obviously the weakest.  I certainly would take a free Scout over a free Thief on most boards - at minimum it can provide useful ordering ahead of a terminal draw and never helps the opponent.
The Poll ended 61-57 in favor of Transmute, and I voted for Transmute, so if anything it's 60-58, which is basically a tie. But I dare saying that, if we made a new Poll, Scout would win, because people have gotten better at the game, and Transmute is just way stronger than Scout.

I would rather take Scout than Thief on must boards too, but that's not what matters. The powerlevel of a card isn't based on how often it's better than nothing, it's based on how often it's the best card at it's price level. The utility of Thief is negative in the majority of games, which means that, even if Scout only looked at 2 cards, you'd likely take it over thief on the majority of boards (at least early), because the utility of Scout is (almost) never negative. But thief is sometimes really good, and that makes it better than Scout.

I was going by the wiki description: "[Transmute] won a plurality of votes in this forum topic asking for the “worst card in Dominion”, garnering almost twice as many nods as the next most-hated cards at the time, Duchess and Thief."  I guess the (then-2-year-old) thread was bumped 6 months or so ao and the voting changed significantly.  That could mean people have gotten better and re-evaluated Scout as you propose, or it could mean the meme has shaped the way people think as I propose. No way to say for sure.   

My objection is too fold: saying Scout is widely considered the weakest card and saying it is obviously the weakest.  The first certainly is not true outside this forum - in games against medicore players on Goko I see Scout bought far more often than Thief, which means people more readily recognize Thief as a weak card.  That does not mean they are right, but it does mean it is not a universal opinion. 

Scout may be the weakest, or it may not.  One way to judge a card is by its best uses, but another way is by its versility.  Most likely, nearly everyone considers both - Masterpiece isn't exactly cited as a power card, yet Masterpiece-Feodum is nearly unbeatable, even by traditional power cards.  So maybe it is really the strongest card in the game?  I think not.  Scout is marginally useful often.  It's main problem is the opportunity cost - at 2 or maybe even 3 it would be a perfectly fine card - there is nothing wrong with the design.  Thief, however, is worse than a wasted slot often and wouldn't be bought for 0 with extra buys.  Since this is a "design" thread, I'd say the card often helps the opponent should be the one lower ranked. (Incidentally, the fix for Thief is simple - make both the trash and the gain optional instead of just the gain.)  The point here is it is debatable which card is the weakest, not that Scout is strong.

Quote
Seems this is true to some degree with all times of attacks.  I fail to see how that is a problem - maybe even a plus.
I was more talking about multiple plays in one turn. Whether that's a problem probably depends on the context of the card. Margrave even anti-stacks, though that's not a very popular card. But I'll say that it's bad for cantrips at least, which includes scout.

Scout anti-synergies with itself is certainly a valid point - not a desirable effect in a non-terminal I'd think.
Logged

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #59 on: October 17, 2014, 10:55:46 pm »
0

I certainly would take a free Scout over a free Thief on most boards

(Mini-puzzle: under what gameplay circumstances would you make this decision?)
Logged

dereeder

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
  • Respect: +45
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #60 on: October 17, 2014, 11:53:52 pm »
+5

I certainly would take a free Scout over a free Thief on most boards

(Mini-puzzle: under what gameplay circumstances would you make this decision?)

You've possessed your opponent and decide to play swindler for the $2. You swindle your own caravan, but the caravan pile is empty. So your choice is between potion, thief, and scout.
Logged

ehunt

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1528
  • Shuffle iT Username: ehunt
  • Respect: +1855
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #61 on: October 18, 2014, 03:49:40 am »
0

I certainly would take a free Scout over a free Thief on most boards

(Mini-puzzle: under what gameplay circumstances would you make this decision?)

The game is about to end, with two duchies and one province left, your opponent ahead by 2 points. It's her turn, but if you get another turn you're about to reshuffle.

Your opponent king's courts a swindler. The third time, she hits your gold, which she changes to a border village. You choices are duchy, thief, scout, silver, copper, curse, estate.

There are a lot of sixes and sevens in this kingdom. If she can buy a province this turn, then what you choose doesn't matter.  If she can't, and you take a duchy, she will buy the last duchy and win. If you take an estate it is unlikely to help you win and may make you less likely to be able to buy the next province on your next turn. Because of all the harems and nobles in your deck, a scout is more likely to help you than a silver. (Alternatively we can say the silver pile is empty, but this seems unrealistic given that masterpiece and trader can't be on the board.)
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12847
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #62 on: October 18, 2014, 07:25:42 am »
+2

It's main problem is the opportunity cost - at 2 or maybe even 3 it would be a perfectly fine card - there is nothing wrong with the design.  Thief, however, is worse than a wasted slot often and wouldn't be bought for 0 with extra buys.  Since this is a "design" thread, I'd say the card often helps the opponent should be the one lower ranked. (Incidentally, the fix for Thief is simple - make both the trash and the gain optional instead of just the gain.)  The point here is it is debatable which card is the weakest, not that Scout is strong.
No, its main problem is that it literally hurts your deck unless like 30% of it is green cards, which should never be the case, or you really need to know the top card of your deck (and Mystic/Wishing Well combos aren't worth it, because Scout, by being in your hand, negates the effect of getting one extra card), or you have to have a deck that naturally results in all of your green cards being on top of your deck (Apothecary engine).

It's true that in a normal game, Thief hurts you more than Scout does. But the games where Scout hurts you and Thief doesn't are much more common than the games where Thief hurts you and Scout doesn't, and when Thief is actually useful, it's much more useful than Scout is when Scout is useful. It is pointless to look at which card hurts you more in a game where you want to buy neither anyway, unless we just want to find out which card to give your opponent with Swindler.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3189
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #63 on: October 18, 2014, 07:31:26 am »
0

Quote
Quote
Seems this is true to some degree with all times of attacks.  I fail to see how that is a problem - maybe even a plus.
I was more talking about multiple plays in one turn. Whether that's a problem probably depends on the context of the card. Margrave even anti-stacks, though that's not a very popular card. But I'll say that it's bad for cantrips at least, which includes scout.

Scout anti-synergies with itself is certainly a valid point - not a desirable effect in a non-terminal I'd think.

uh, *Spy. I meant spy there, not scout.

Quote
The first certainly is not true outside this forum
okay, probably not. so maybe I think the forum is the most relevant place for this kind of stuff and was talking about the forum by saying "widely" in a totally elitist and inappropriate way  :P

Quote from: Awaclus
and when Thief is actually useful, it's much more useful than Scout is when Scout is useful. It is pointless to look at which card hurts you more in a game where you want to buy neither anyway
yes, that's the point. it's not about which card is better on average, it's about how often the card is good enough for you to buy it.
« Last Edit: October 18, 2014, 07:33:37 am by silverspawn »
Logged

ThaddeusB

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 133
  • Respect: +140
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #64 on: October 18, 2014, 12:29:46 pm »
0

It's main problem is the opportunity cost - at 2 or maybe even 3 it would be a perfectly fine card - there is nothing wrong with the design.  Thief, however, is worse than a wasted slot often and wouldn't be bought for 0 with extra buys.  Since this is a "design" thread, I'd say the card often helps the opponent should be the one lower ranked. (Incidentally, the fix for Thief is simple - make both the trash and the gain optional instead of just the gain.)  The point here is it is debatable which card is the weakest, not that Scout is strong.
No, its main problem is that it literally hurts your deck unless like 30% of it is green cards, which should never be the case, or you really need to know the top card of your deck (and Mystic/Wishing Well combos aren't worth it, because Scout, by being in your hand, negates the effect of getting one extra card), or you have to have a deck that naturally results in all of your green cards being on top of your deck (Apothecary engine).

It's true that in a normal game, Thief hurts you more than Scout does. But the games where Scout hurts you and Thief doesn't are much more common than the games where Thief hurts you and Scout doesn't, and when Thief is actually useful, it's much more useful than Scout is when Scout is useful. It is pointless to look at which card hurts you more in a game where you want to buy neither anyway, unless we just want to find out which card to give your opponent with Swindler.

No, it would certainly be less than 25% green to hurt you.  25% would be break even if it had no other effects, but like I said reordering can also be useful.  Games where you have 25% green or 20% green and desire reordering aren't that uncommon...  If it didn't cost 4, Scout would be useful in most games with Alt VP.  However, at 4 you'll be picking up more VP rather than Scout usually.  If it cost 2, you could pick it up with 7 and 2 buys in a Duke game or 6 and 2 buys in a Gardens game, for example.

Thief is only useful in IGG games and can sometimes work against thinned decks w/o virtual coin.   I don't think it is a higher % of games, although yes probably better in its best uses than Scout in its best uses.  It also takes an action. Maybe it is more powerful on average, maybe it isn't.  However, as a design question, I think a card that is weak and more often than not helps the opponent is worse than a card that is simply very weak.

And yes, I would buy Scout (maybe 2% of the time) more often than Thief (1%).
« Last Edit: October 18, 2014, 01:07:36 pm by ThaddeusB »
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6357
  • Respect: +25672
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #65 on: October 18, 2014, 01:12:32 pm »
+11

Thief is only useful in IGG games and can sometimes work against thinned decks w/o virtual coin.   I don't think it is a higher % of games, although yes probably better in its best uses than Scout in its best uses.  It also takes an action. Maybe it is more powerful on average, maybe it isn't.  However, as a design question, I think a card that is weak and more often than not helps the opponent is worse than a card that is simply very weak.
This is an experienced-player perspective though. I mean the whole business of judging weakness.

Thief as you may know is one of the "pillars" of providing game variety in the main set - Chapel, Thief, Witch, Gardens. They send the game in different directions.

In one conversation with Richard Garfield I was lamenting how thief didn't hold up its end. Richard felt otherwise; he thought there was significant value in, first we think, yeeha, steal your treasures, then we notice, hey I don't mind when you take my coppers, how good can that be, and then at least we realize it's bad. Now I think it's fair to argue, and I personally argue, that, okay sure fine, but the card that fills this role of providing gameplay via this learning experience can be something that ends up in a better place for long-term players. People initially overrate say Moat, but it doesn't end up an utter dud at the end of it. Anyway the point is, a card can provide value, not just despite being weak, but specifically because of it. And I am just presenting that argument because I know about it; I personally think you should nevertheless do better than Thief.

I think I most often see Thief used in multiplayer Gardens games, followed by Colony games with copper-trashing. For sure it is not useful very often. In the early days, I mostly used Thief to scare people away from buying Gold. It was like a card that said "opponents can't buy Gold." I wouldn't actually play it and probably was planning on Remodel-ing it eventually, but it still did something for me. Sir Martin cited Thief as a card he liked (in online games) because of how it changed the game, even when no-one was buying it. His opponent would sometimes be worrying about that Thief. So there is at least a ghost of its intended effect.

Scout gets used the most in all-Intrigue games. There I often wouldn't mind a Scout, I just don't have time to get it. If you have an Ironworks then one turn it will be like, oh yeah, Ironworks a Scout. I don't think costing $2 goes far enough; it wants to be different functionally. Adventurer by contrast is a card I'd often be happy to have, if only I had time to get it. When they Swindle a card into Thief, it's like getting a Curse; when they give you a Scout, well that hurt but it will produce some marginal benefit. When they give you an Adventurer, man, the only thing you are worried about is having enough actions, and when you draw it with other terminals, Adventurer may end up being what you play.

In the end the game is better, for the people playing it, if to them the cards are all options. A small number of cards can be intentionally narrow, and that's good too, because it's extra fun to win with a card you normally can't win with. But most cards want to be useful enough that you consider them. And that mostly means trying to get the cards to be roughly as powerful. But we can consider, who are these people playing? For a typical player, Loan is a bigger dud than Scout; they see a reason not to play Loan, whereas Scout is all upside.
Logged

Gherald

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 676
  • Awe: +35
  • Respect: +1397
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #66 on: October 18, 2014, 01:46:31 pm »
+2

I really, really hate [Possession]. I can't really overstate how much I hate it. Every other dominion card - hell, even every fanmade card - is exponentially better than Possession in my book. This card does not need to exist.
In these rankings a really under-appreciated aspect of Possession and Masquerade's design is how much variety they add to the game.

You wouldn't want Dominion to have a lot of cards that are too similar to Possession and Masquerade in how they change the game, that would be unwelcome.  But these cards are well balanced and were obviously very well playtested for how much variety they add, and that should be welcome design.  It's fine to not be excited whenever they show up on the board and for them to be among your least favorite cards to play, but that does not make them poorly designed. What they do to the game is deliberate, intentional, and Dominion is better for having them.
Quote
That said, I still hate [Masquerade], and the reason for that is that pass mechanic is not designed to hurt your opponent, so when it does, it feels unjustified and unfair quite similar to possession. They are my cards. Not yours. *sigh*
There are strategic decisions to be made about not overtrashing junk when Masquerades are in play.

As sometimes said around these parts, "you make your own shuffle luck".  In that same spirit, you make your own Masquerade-passing luck.
Logged
My opponent has more loot than me

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3189
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #67 on: October 18, 2014, 02:18:56 pm »
+1

Quote
In these rankings a really under-appreciated aspect of Possession and Masquerade's design is how much variety they add to the game.
Well, maybe I do underappreciate it, but the variety of Possession just isn't doing much for me. Same goes for the strategic depth that comes from additional decisions, like not trashing all of your junk. They absolutely exist, but I don't care about them/don't like them. It's not unusual that I leave copper in my deck because of Masquerade, but that's not an aspect I can appreciate.

To clarify: if I made an "objective" list (i.e. as objective as I can be), it would look different, but not that different. To be more specific, of the cards that are in the first two posts, Rebuild, Spy, Scout, Adventurer, Talisman, and Cultist would probably still be really low. Masquerade would be high, Scrying Pool, probably lower half, but not near the bottomm,  Familiar somewhere near the middlle. Possession, I'm not sure, I'd have to think a lot about that one. Pirate Ship is difficult, because I don't know much about 3p games. Is it op there? Is it okay there? I don't know. Thief, again the multiplayer problem, and I may or may not have considered the stuff from Donald's last post, because he has talked about it before, somewhere. Pearl Diver, I don't really know, probably low. I think these are all from my list. Chancellor would be low, Loan would be, Lookout would be. A bunch of other cards who are confusing, but there really aren't many. I'd have to go through a card list for that. I don't know if all of that comes close to what Donald thinks, maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. This was just to give an idea about my opinions about actual design quality.

Really, what you should take this list for is one perspective, the perspective of someone who plays a lot, usually all random, with all cards, and only 2player. Players with a similar perspective will probably have similar opinions, except for by bias on a few single cards like Masquerade, which is really just bias. Or not. We are only like 13 cards in anyway.

Gherald

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 676
  • Awe: +35
  • Respect: +1397
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #68 on: October 18, 2014, 02:49:29 pm »
+1

Well you may not like those two and I'm often not excited to see Possession either, but there is no "design" reason to not like them. You just don't like what they do.  (I actually like Masquerade, because I think to myself that I can probably play it with more skill than my opponent)

Other cards have design issues.  For example, almost everyone can agree that:

Rebuild should have no action, and either return victory cards to the supply or topdeck the gained card.

Scrying Pool shouldn't be an attack

Scout should be a cantrip, or discard like cartographer

Pearl Diver should dive before drawing

Thief needs the ability to ignore coppers

Spy should cost $3, or spy before drawing

Adventurer needs an action at that price
Logged
My opponent has more loot than me

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3189
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #69 on: October 18, 2014, 03:02:01 pm »
0

Well you may not like those two and I'm often not excited to see Possession either, but there is no "design" reason to not like them. You just don't like what they do.

What a card does is it's design. I guess you could argue about syntax here, but where's the point for that. If I don't like an aspect of a card, I don't like this aspect of its design. Since I decided to not try the objective approach (I considered that too), it seems silly to differentiate between pure bias, and partially applicable design flaws that more people will agree on, like, say, scrying pool. I just do how much I like them, and try to explain why that is.

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6357
  • Respect: +25672
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #70 on: October 18, 2014, 03:06:54 pm »
+3

Well you may not like those two and I'm often not excited to see Possession either, but there is no "design" reason to not like them. You just don't like what they do.  (I actually like Masquerade, because I think to myself that I can probably play it with more skill than my opponent)

Spy should cost $3, or spy before drawing
Possession is unreasonably complex; that's a design issue for sure. The FAQ mostly just says "yes, really," but it's a gigantic FAQ. It has a "would" ability; arguably the game should have avoided having any of those (the other of course is Trader).

Your fixes for Spy don't fix the main issue for me, that it's too slow to resolve. That can be fixed by removing the choice (Rabble) or making it the player's choice (Cartographer, Duchess).
Logged

Gherald

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 676
  • Awe: +35
  • Respect: +1397
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #71 on: October 18, 2014, 03:27:27 pm »
0

Silverspawn, I guess I figure the term "design" has a more specific meaning and sophisticated connotation than what you're appropriating it for.

Design refers to the intent behind the card and how it relates to other cards, not just the trivial "if a card has this aspect, that aspect was designed"

By the way, I'm not sure I understand why silverspawn and DXV think Spy's effect is so terrible to resolve.  Is anyone complaining about Oracle? Granted Oracle isn't the greatest thing ever but people seem to find it fine

Spy just feels weak and not worth it, like by playing it you're making the game tedious for no good reason.  If it self-sifted I think people would respect it more and everything would be okay, just like Oracle
« Last Edit: October 18, 2014, 04:53:01 pm by Gherald »
Logged
My opponent has more loot than me

pacovf

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3499
  • Multiediting poster
  • Respect: +3838
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #72 on: October 18, 2014, 04:52:41 pm »
+2

By the way, I'm not sure I understand why silverspawn and DXV think Spy's effect is so terrible to resolve.  Is anyone complaining about Oracle? Granted Oracle isn't the greatest thing ever but people seem to find it fine

Oracle is terminal draw, spy is a cantrip. It's important for cantrips to be quick to resolve, because you tend to buy/play them more often.
Logged
pacovf has a neopets account.  It has 999 hours logged.  All his neopets are named "Jessica".  I guess that must be his ex.

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3189
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #73 on: October 18, 2014, 05:07:17 pm »
+1

By the way, I'm not sure I understand why silverspawn and DXV think Spy's effect is so terrible to resolve.  Is anyone complaining about Oracle? Granted Oracle isn't the greatest thing ever but people seem to find it fine

Oracle is terminal draw, spy is a cantrip. It's important for cantrips to be quick to resolve, because you tend to buy/play them more often.

yes. I will certainly go into detail about that once I get to these cards. I think Rabble does it perfectly, but oracle is really good too. Being terminal is good, and it also doesn't get as tedious because the decision isn't always trivial with two cards instead of one.

Maybe it's still tedious in 3+ player. but the only thing that bothers me in 2player is that you have to choose the order.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #74 on: October 18, 2014, 06:05:36 pm »
0

Design refers to the intent behind the card and how it relates to other cards, not just the trivial "if a card has this aspect, that aspect was designed"

Even with the secret histories, we can't be sure what the intent was behind the design of each card.  And probably some cards had intent along the lines of, "that might be cool, why not?" or "I guess this pretty much has to exist".
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 9  All
 

Page created in 0.157 seconds with 21 queries.