Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9  All

Author Topic: silverspawn's card list  (Read 62768 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2587
  • Respect: +2479
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #100 on: October 20, 2014, 11:19:18 am »
0

Quote
WW's power rankings
the one where forager was above fishing village?

No, the possessive there is a typo.  This is a ranking of how powerful the various WWs on this forum are, in terms of who would win in a gauntlet of events, including, but not limited to, a bare-knuckle boxing match, Soduko, Dominion, Twister, and interpretive dance.
And chess.
Logged

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1751
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #101 on: October 20, 2014, 11:22:09 am »
0

You can't have a ranking of all rankings.

You constructivists make me mad. Of course you can.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3188
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #102 on: October 20, 2014, 11:36:38 am »
0

Quote
I'm also surprised you didn't mention Chancellor/Feast/Saboteur. Maybe in the next list?
all three of them, actually.

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11808
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12846
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #103 on: October 20, 2014, 11:58:04 am »
+10

Why do people complain about Goko's Casual Ranking List, they can't all be the best ranking ever.
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

Merudo

  • Ambassador
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 32
  • Respect: +29
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #104 on: October 20, 2014, 08:04:10 pm »
+1

You can't have a ranking of all rankings.

You can have a ranking of all rankings, but not a ranking of all rankings that do not rank themselves.
Logged

ThaddeusB

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 133
  • Respect: +140
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #105 on: October 21, 2014, 12:39:07 am »
0

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.

That thief aids in learning Copper is bad is a good thing.  Of course it could still do that if trashing was optional.  Actually, I think trash optional, gain after trash not optional is probably the most interesting version as that complicates the decision to trash in some cases.

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.
Adding +1 card would make it like a "super Vagrant" (well minus the Curse+Ruins bits) and Vagrant is pretty decent for $2, so maybe it would be OK at $4 then.  I like the idea of Scout - clean up your next hand - it just doesn't quite work of course.  While on the subject, any particular reason it doesn't pick up Curses?  Just not something you thought of, or was the idea not really to clean up your next hand but pull in dull-type cards mostly?

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.

Agreed Adventurer is not a bad card.  I do agree with others that a +1 buy would have made sense and made it viable more often.
Logged

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #106 on: October 21, 2014, 01:58:31 am »
0

I like the idea of Scout - clean up your next hand - it just doesn't quite work of course.  While on the subject, any particular reason it doesn't pick up Curses?  Just not something you thought of, or was the idea not really to clean up your next hand but pull in dull-type cards mostly?

My guess would be some combination of (a) keeping the card text streamlined and (b) Curses are supposed to be bad for you.
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6357
  • Respect: +25671
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #107 on: October 21, 2014, 02:50:02 am »
+1

While on the subject, any particular reason it doesn't pick up Curses?  Just not something you thought of, or was the idea not really to clean up your next hand but pull in dull-type cards mostly?
It just wasn't part of the concept for the card.

In general it is not a good idea to try to satisfy every demand anyone could ever have of a card, until all cards are unplayably complex. It's fine that Scout doesn't get Curses. It has no obligation to get them. It's not making the difference any which way. No regrets there.
Logged

ThaddeusB

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 133
  • Respect: +140
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #108 on: October 21, 2014, 01:18:02 pm »
0

While on the subject, any particular reason it doesn't pick up Curses?  Just not something you thought of, or was the idea not really to clean up your next hand but pull in dull-type cards mostly?
It just wasn't part of the concept for the card.

In general it is not a good idea to try to satisfy every demand anyone could ever have of a card, until all cards are unplayably complex. It's fine that Scout doesn't get Curses. It has no obligation to get them. It's not making the difference any which way. No regrets there.

I guess I was asking what the concept of the card was. I guess since it doesn't pick up curses ( which would only add two words) the idea wasn't "clean up your next hand", but probably "build a deck around dual type cards".
Logged

Tombolo

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 439
  • Respect: +450
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #109 on: October 21, 2014, 09:38:05 pm »
+6

man forget you guys and your meta-rankings, I'm gonna work on ranking the sets by how well-designed the females are per capita accounting for cost of the expansion
Logged
We’ve had a hard day at work, we’ve been looking forward to our Dominion, how can you expect us to play anything else, you ogre.

faust

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3376
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +5142
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #110 on: October 22, 2014, 10:10:58 am »
0

Quote
WW's power rankings
the one where forager was above fishing village?

Hey, I only ranked them by design, not by correctness.
Logged
You say the ocean's rising, like I give a shit
You say the whole world's ending, honey it already did

kn1tt3r

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 585
  • Respect: +278
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #111 on: October 23, 2014, 01:40:31 am »
0

While on the subject, any particular reason it doesn't pick up Curses?  Just not something you thought of, or was the idea not really to clean up your next hand but pull in dull-type cards mostly?
It just wasn't part of the concept for the card.

In general it is not a good idea to try to satisfy every demand anyone could ever have of a card, until all cards are unplayably complex. It's fine that Scout doesn't get Curses. It has no obligation to get them. It's not making the difference any which way. No regrets there.

I guess I was asking what the concept of the card was. I guess since it doesn't pick up curses ( which would only add two words) the idea wasn't "clean up your next hand", but probably "build a deck around dual type cards".
Well, he's a scout. He's looking for trails, exploring lands, including Colonies, Provinces, Duchies and even private Estates. He's clearly too focussed on geography to even bother about abstract things like curses.
Logged

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3431
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2706
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #112 on: October 23, 2014, 01:42:59 am »
+5

While on the subject, any particular reason it doesn't pick up Curses?  Just not something you thought of, or was the idea not really to clean up your next hand but pull in dull-type cards mostly?
It just wasn't part of the concept for the card.

In general it is not a good idea to try to satisfy every demand anyone could ever have of a card, until all cards are unplayably complex. It's fine that Scout doesn't get Curses. It has no obligation to get them. It's not making the difference any which way. No regrets there.

I guess I was asking what the concept of the card was. I guess since it doesn't pick up curses ( which would only add two words) the idea wasn't "clean up your next hand", but probably "build a deck around dual type cards".
Well, he's a scout. He's looking for trails, exploring lands, including Colonies, Provinces, Duchies and even private Estates. He's clearly too focussed on geography to even bother about abstract things like curses.

...and Harems?
Logged
If you're wondering what my avatar is, watch this.

Check out my logic puzzle blog!

   Quote from: sudgy on June 31, 2011, 11:47:46 pm

Sidsel

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 121
  • Respect: +174
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's Design Rankings
« Reply #113 on: October 23, 2014, 04:33:18 am »
0

While on the subject, any particular reason it doesn't pick up Curses?  Just not something you thought of, or was the idea not really to clean up your next hand but pull in dull-type cards mostly?
It just wasn't part of the concept for the card.

In general it is not a good idea to try to satisfy every demand anyone could ever have of a card, until all cards are unplayably complex. It's fine that Scout doesn't get Curses. It has no obligation to get them. It's not making the difference any which way. No regrets there.

I guess I was asking what the concept of the card was. I guess since it doesn't pick up curses ( which would only add two words) the idea wasn't "clean up your next hand", but probably "build a deck around dual type cards".
Well, he's a scout. He's looking for trails, exploring lands, including Colonies, Provinces, Duchies and even private Estates. He's clearly too focussed on geography to even bother about abstract things like curses.

...and Harems?

Distracted by the sexy.
Logged

AndrewisFTTW

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1129
  • Respect: +1084
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #114 on: October 23, 2014, 01:49:15 pm »
+7

man forget you guys and your meta-rankings, I'm gonna work on ranking the sets by how well-designed the females are per capita accounting for cost of the expansion

I'll be posting my rankings list of rankings lists soon. Keep a lookout for it!
Logged
Wins: M39, M41, M48, M96, M97, M102, M105
Losses: M40, M43, M45, BM17 (?), RMM13, RMM17, RMM20, NM7, ZM18, M100, M109
MVPs: M97
Mod/Co-Mod: M46, M49, M52, NM10

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7861
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #115 on: October 23, 2014, 01:55:28 pm »
+3

Also work on a ranking of how well people's critiques of other people's rankings are. 
Logged

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #116 on: October 23, 2014, 09:45:48 pm »
+2

man forget you guys and your meta-rankings, I'm gonna work on ranking the sets by how well-designed the females are per capita accounting for cost of the expansion

I'll be posting my rankings list of rankings lists soon. Keep a lookout for it!
Thanks for the heads up. Be prepared to have it trashed, or possibly just discarded. Sorry, I just doubt that I'd topdeck it.
Logged

AndrewisFTTW

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1129
  • Respect: +1084
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #117 on: October 23, 2014, 10:04:13 pm »
+3

man forget you guys and your meta-rankings, I'm gonna work on ranking the sets by how well-designed the females are per capita accounting for cost of the expansion

I'll be posting my rankings list of rankings lists soon. Keep a lookout for it!
Thanks for the heads up. Be prepared to have it trashed, or possibly just discarded. Sorry, I just doubt that I'd topdeck it.

They can't all be the... yadda yadda.... blegh.
Logged
Wins: M39, M41, M48, M96, M97, M102, M105
Losses: M40, M43, M45, BM17 (?), RMM13, RMM17, RMM20, NM7, ZM18, M100, M109
MVPs: M97
Mod/Co-Mod: M46, M49, M52, NM10

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3188
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #118 on: October 25, 2014, 10:18:29 am »
+5

I considered making the images smaller for this part, but with the table format, that doesn't actually reduce the overall size. So, we now have large images with little text. sowhateva...

Chapter III: The Middleground (Part 1)


185. Woodcutter
Hey, it's a terminal silver with a buy. It's good if you........................................ really need buys?






184. Feast
Don't get me wrong, Feast doesn't add very much to the game. But it doesn't bother me either. If you don't want a second silver, you can open silver/feast instead, and then you get the fuzz, and the things, and the probabilities, and the 5$'s, but you don't keep the silver. That, and the interaction with KC/Procession can be pretty cute.






183. Swindler
I feel like so much has already been said about Swindler, I don't need to add much. It's strong, unpredictable, high skill, and swingy. Depending on what's important to you, both love, hate, and everything in between is a possible attitude here. One minor thing that I really dislike is how he can turn non-Kingdom cards into curses, like Madmen, or even Prizes.






182. Philosopher's Stone
Just like Familiar, the aspect I dislike most about Philosopher's Stone is it's price. It should cost P2$. It really should. I mean, is there a reason why it shouldn't? Well in any case, just like Familiar, I like the card otherwise. It's certainly weak, but not so much that it becomes a problem. I actually I find myself buying it quite often lately. There is probably a counting issue with large decks, but since I play almost exclusively online, I have no reason to care, so PS gets a lucky pass here.







181. Saboteur
In January 2011, Donald X has stated that Saboteur is the weakest card relative to its cost. While I don't think that's true, it's certainly up there (or down there, all depending on your perspective). And it's not very satisfying and that fuzz... but that doesn't really matter if you understand it, because it's so weak that you only buy it in very specific situations anyway, and then it can be super good. Like, if your opponent thinks he can skip the engine because it has no payload, you can punish him with a KC-Saboteur monster. Seven Province Lead? No problem, I'll just turn all of your Provinces into Estates, and get a point lead with Duchies. It's kind of like Thief here. Aside from that though, buying Saboteur is rarely a good idea.






180. Minion
Minion is similar to Swindler in how there are both plenty of reasons to love and to hate it, but it has a little bit more going for it. Well, for one it can't turn Followers into a curse, but it also combos with a lot of other cards, which tends to be pretty interesting. Something that does bother me though, is how a deck with 5 Minion's isn't actually that good, and I'd often rather do something else, but you have to go for Minions to prevent your opponent from getting all 10. So, you both take half of a thing that works best as a hole, and in the end noone is truly happy.






179. Loan
A nice copper trasher... except when it hits silver. I think I'd like this better if it just dug for a copper. At least the fact that it can skip over Action cards never bothered me, I mean they really manage to miss reshuffles without Loan anyway.






178. Chancellor
Hey, it's a terminal silver that discards your deck. It's good if you........................................ don't have anything else to buy? Actually, that's exactly when it's good. The problem with Chancellor is not that the effect is useless, it's that every other terminal silver is so much stronger.






177. Lookout
Lookout is by far the strongest card in the game. Why is that? Why is this card so ludicrously amazing? Why is it so good? Well, it's all because

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            it's not very good.

Okay, so the problem here is of course that it can force you to trash good cards. And as much as I like cards that reward deck-tracking, I can't pretend like this isn't a problem. Even if you know exactly what's in your draw pile, it's often the right choice to take a small risk, and sometimes you'll pay for that by losing a precious village... or a colony.






176. Margrave
Margrave is an interesting case, because it's not that clear what's even wrong with it. So, first of all, what is it? Well, it's a terminal draw with an attack that anti-stacks upon repeated play, meaning that if you play it once, it attacks, but every consequent play helps your opponent. This is not inherently bad though. I made a comment about how it's bad for Spy that his attack doesn't stack, but Margrave isn't a cantrip, and I think a diminishing attack is fine for a terminal.

The problems that I do have with it can be summarized in three points:
  • The diminishing attack principle, while not inherently bad, doesn't work here. I can only assume that the idea behind it to encourage players to aim for one play each turn. Which is an okay idea, but because Margrave is so crazy powerful, because there is often no other terminal draw on the board, and because it's so much more important to attack every than not playing it more than once in one turn, this idea really doesn't do much. In reality, it's often the right choice to build an engine with lots of Margraves, and it's almost always the right choice to play Margraves when you have them in hand. The most noticeable consequence is probably that Margrave/BM is more often preferable to a Margrave engine than it's the case for, say, Catacombs, and that's probably not even a good thing.
  • The draw-one-then-discard-down-to-three attack can be viewed from different angles. From an objective angle, it's a weaker variant of the militia attack, with the added penalty of helping your opponent after the first play. But from an emotional angle, especially if you're on the receiving side, the initial attack really feels stronger than militia, because it makes you discard more cards. Likewise, while it's kind of nice to draw and discard a Province upon consequent plays, it feels pretty bad to draw and discard a good card. Even if your deck has exclusively good cards, and doing so doesn't even hurt you, it can still feel like an attack, just because it makes you discard those good cards.
  • It's swingy, and it is so in the exact same way that the discard from Sea Hag is. If you have 3 good cards in hand and your opponent plays a Margrave, which is pretty common, you just cycle through one card randomly. If it's a bad card, cool, if it's a good card, not cool.






175. Alchemist
Alchemist is the last potion card that costs P3$ (they're all pretty far down for some reason), so this is the last time I have to complain about the price. Aside from that though, Alchemist is a cool card. It's pretty neat how it's just a lab with a conditional topdecking ability, but it really gets an entirely new strategic value. Another minor complaint is how it takes ages to topdeck just some of your alchemists when playing online, though that's of course not a design flaw, it's a goko flaw.






174. Royal Seal
A non-terminal silver that lets you topdeck new cards. How excitin'. Well, there is nothing wrong with simple cards. It's just that RS doesn't really add very many difficult decisions to the game, partly because it's really weak. But at least it never did anything to annoy me, so that's good.

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2849
  • Respect: +1559
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #119 on: October 25, 2014, 03:06:04 pm »
+2

I'm liking this part of the list, where the cards have some good parts and bad parts. I'll highlight a couple points below.

Something that does bother me though, is how a deck with 5 Minion's isn't actually that good, and I'd often rather do something else, but you have to go for Minions to prevent your opponent from getting all 10. So, you both take half of a thing that works best as a hole, and in the end noone is truly happy.
This is IMO one of the more annoying things about certain cards in high level 2-player Dominion play: the split problem. As both players become better, they tend to agree more often on the best strategy, resulting in a mirror where they contend for the same pile(s). This sometimes makes an otherwise fun-to-play deck unfun (e.g. Minion, Highway), and with certain cards can lead to huge swings from winning a split (e.g. Duke, Knights).

Non-mirrors though become more fun when both players are good than at lower levels, because it's a better test of the strength of the strategies when both players pilot them well. So it's unfortunate that they become less frequent in high level play.

If I were to try to "fix" this problem in a Dominion variant, one thing to try would be to give each players their own supply piles to buy from. That way, both players can get 10 Minions if they really want to. Obviously this has some big downsides, like removing end-game tactics related to opportunistic 3-piling and split-winning tactics. It still might be more fun overall for some players.

In Dominion itself, it's nice when cards self-limit how many you want so that neither player cares about winning the split. Being terminal helps, even if the card is strong (e.g. Goons, where usually you don't have enough +actions to justify more than 5 of them). Strong non-terminals can do it too if they have anti-self-synergy (e.g. Warehouse, which I'd rank among the best card designs in the game) or diminishing returns (e.g. Apothecary, where you usually have better things to do than buy 6+ of them).

Quote
A nice copper trasher... except when it hits silver. I think I'd like this better if it just dug for a copper. At least the fact that it can skip over Action cards never bothered me, I mean they really manage to miss reshuffles without Loan anyway.
I think of Loan as an example of an anti-lottery: usually you get a small benefit, and rarely you pay a large penalty. (A lottery is where usually you pay a small penalty, and rarely you get a large benefit.) Human beings are naturally predisposed to like lotteries and hate anti-lotteries, even if mathematically the expected value is the same. For that reason, I consider an anti-lottery in a card to be a (small) design flaw, because it makes the card less fun to play. (By the way, missing the shuffle is also an example of an anti-lottery.)

This is just a perception issue, since if players A and B are playing a zero sum game, then a lottery for A is an anti-lottery for B and vice versa. Usually what matters for perception is who opts into the lottery/anti-lottery (e.g. who buys Loan), but not always. For example, with Sea Hag, getting a valuable top card such as Sea Hag discarded is much more visible to the player who discards the card, so it feels like an anti-lottery, even though to the player who played the Sea Hag, it's a lottery.

EDIT

Off the top of my head, I can't think of ideal examples of lotteries in Dominion. Treasure Map and Tunnel are both kinda close, although in both cases, if you play a good strategy including either of these cards, you're more likely to succeed than to not, so it comes out more like an anti-lottery at high levels of play. Venture is a better example: usually hits a Copper (not bad, but basically a $5 Silver), but occasionally something better (yay, a Gold-or-more for $5).

As a non-Dominion example, Hearthstone's Webspinner is a decent example of a lottery. Getting a good card from Webspinner is far more visible to the player who receives it than the opponent, because its identity is hidden until played later, and by that point the opponent may not realize that the card came from Webspinner. Even the most garbage-y cards from Webspinner aren't too disastrous, since at worst it's just dead in your hand for a while.
« Last Edit: October 25, 2014, 03:34:17 pm by blueblimp »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #120 on: October 25, 2014, 05:22:37 pm »
+1

If I were to try to "fix" this problem in a Dominion variant, one thing to try would be to give each players their own supply piles to buy from. That way, both players can get 10 Minions if they really want to. Obviously this has some big downsides, like removing end-game tactics related to opportunistic 3-piling and split-winning tactics. It still might be more fun overall for some players.

How about this for a gameplay variant:

Select 9+x kingdom cards, where x is the number of players.  In reverse player order, each player chooses one pile that becomes exclusively theirs to use.

Probably works better for fewer players.  The danger is when there is just one key card, which may create a first player disadvantage for being last to pick.  But this variant could be very interesting for hand-designed kingdoms.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3188
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #121 on: October 25, 2014, 06:24:01 pm »
+2

Quote
Probably works better for fewer players.  The danger is when there is just one key card, which may create a first player disadvantage for being last to pick.  But this variant could be very interesting for hand-designed kingdoms.
you will all suffocate in green cards as only I get to use scout. muahaha

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2587
  • Respect: +2479
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #122 on: October 25, 2014, 06:31:25 pm »
0

If I were to try to "fix" this problem in a Dominion variant, one thing to try would be to give each players their own supply piles to buy from. That way, both players can get 10 Minions if they really want to. Obviously this has some big downsides, like removing end-game tactics related to opportunistic 3-piling and split-winning tactics. It still might be more fun overall for some players.

How about this for a gameplay variant:

Select 9+x kingdom cards, where x is the number of players.  In reverse player order, each player chooses one pile that becomes exclusively theirs to use.

Probably works better for fewer players.  The danger is when there is just one key card, which may create a first player disadvantage for being last to pick.  But this variant could be very interesting for hand-designed kingdoms.
Pretty sure that I'll almost always want to be last player. Even in a deck where I want lots of different cards, I probably really need one of them. It also leads to boring games. There was an engine, but then one player took chapel and the other took village. Oh well, no more engine for anyone.
« Last Edit: October 25, 2014, 06:33:40 pm by liopoil »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #123 on: October 25, 2014, 07:41:43 pm »
0

If I were to try to "fix" this problem in a Dominion variant, one thing to try would be to give each players their own supply piles to buy from. That way, both players can get 10 Minions if they really want to. Obviously this has some big downsides, like removing end-game tactics related to opportunistic 3-piling and split-winning tactics. It still might be more fun overall for some players.

How about this for a gameplay variant:

Select 9+x kingdom cards, where x is the number of players.  In reverse player order, each player chooses one pile that becomes exclusively theirs to use.

Probably works better for fewer players.  The danger is when there is just one key card, which may create a first player disadvantage for being last to pick.  But this variant could be very interesting for hand-designed kingdoms.
Pretty sure that I'll almost always want to be last player. Even in a deck where I want lots of different cards, I probably really need one of them. It also leads to boring games. There was an engine, but then one player took chapel and the other took village. Oh well, no more engine for anyone.

Yeah, quite possible.  But it might be neat for hand-designed kingdoms.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11808
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12846
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #124 on: October 25, 2014, 08:21:35 pm »
0

As long as the remaining 9 cards are enough to do something interesting with any of the potential exclusive cards, it shouldn't be a problem. Also, when you design the kingdom, you could make some cards unavailable for being chosen as an exclusive card.
« Last Edit: October 25, 2014, 08:25:57 pm by Awaclus »
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
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9  All
 

Page created in 0.073 seconds with 21 queries.