Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9  All

Author Topic: silverspawn's card list  (Read 62781 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mic Qsenoch

  • 2015 DS Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1709
  • Respect: +4329
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #175 on: October 28, 2014, 10:10:32 pm »
+4

Transmute is worse than everything, so Potion must be worth -$1.
Logged

ThaddeusB

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 133
  • Respect: +140
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #176 on: October 28, 2014, 10:12:37 pm »
0

Quote
I do not understand this obsession with 3P.  Alchemist and Familiar are strong enough that they are rarely skippable even at 3P.  Sure, it is possible for multiple players to go Potion/Silver and one to get an edge by the other missing 3P on the next shuffle.  It is also possible to miss 5 when both players open Silver/Silver.  Do you complain that Laboratory and Witch cost 5?  Indeed, that is even more of an "unfair" price as you can open 5/2 and possibly can a TWO shuffle edge with Witch over Silver\Silver.    The generally accepted rule of thumb is that potion converts to 2-2.5 coins.  At 4-4.5, Alchemist and Familiar would be even more unskippable than they already are.  I'd rather the game not force all (good) players down the same path.
man, it's different. there are reasons why these cards cost 5$. you need to build a deck that hits 5$ early/a lot in order to buy them, and they need to cost 5$ so you can't open with them. And balance is not for powerlevel anyway, it's for fun level.

let's say Alchemist, Familiar, and Stone cost 2$P now. Does this make them considerably stronger? No. It makes them a little bit stronger, but not much, usually when Familiar is good, you just take the risk anyway. Does it change the way you build your deck in any way? Hell no. You just open potion/x anyway. and later, you usually expect to draw potion with 3$ regardless. Does it cause less frustration, because you almost always draw 2$ with your potion, but often not 3$? Yes. So, what's to talk about here?

And if you want to look at powerlevel, Scrying Pool and Apothecary cost 2P$. How does that make sense. If anything, scrying pool should cost 3P$ and Alchemist/Stone 2P$. You see, there is no excuse for the stupid extra coin on these cards.


I don't think it is that much different at all.  If you get 5/2 on a Witch (or Montebank or Cultist)/Chapel board and the opponent doesn't that is a bigger edge than getting Familiar a shuffle faster.  All 3 of those cards not only junk, but help you get back to 5 for more power cards.  People complain about Cultist (because of the stacking not the price), but the other two are not complained about at all even though making them $4 would even the chances of getting them.  (I tend to think Chapel should be a 3 cost card to prevent those massive edges, but OTOH if the board has no power 5s then 5/2 would utterly such with a 3 cost Chapel on the board.  Chapel is very difficult to price fairly, which is probably how it landed at 2.)

Familiar is considered one of the two most powerful Potion cost cards as is.  It is virtually unskippable.  I don't think making it more powerful (i.e. reducing the cost) will make it more balanced.  And yes, balancing power is a key component to balancing fun.  Over and under powered cards aren't much fun - most of the bottom of your list is precisely such cards - because they reduce decision making.  In other words, there IS a reason Familiar costs 3P.  Increasing the chances of both players getting one on the same shuffle is not worth (further) reducing the decision making on openings when Familiar is on the board.

Alchemist is a strictly better Laboratory.  As such, 3P is the most logical choice.  Additionally, it is not as crucial to get the first one as Familiar (and all junkers). 

Philosopher's Stone's usages are more limited.  When its good, it probably doesn't matter much if it costs 2P or 3P (you probably aren't buying it on the first reshuffle).  When it's not, you're skipping it either way.

Apothecary is so subtlety strong that years after its release people are only now starting to form a consensus that it is strong.  Scrying Pool is fantastic often, but also crappy without trashing.  In other words, it is hard to price.  I'm not sure changing the price of either changes much.




Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #177 on: October 28, 2014, 10:13:43 pm »
+5

Right. But if you want to compare these costs anyway, Donald's playtesting suggested that a potion should correspond to a price increase of $4 rather than $2-$2.5, at least in the cases of PS and Vineyard (which also worked at $7 resp. $4 according to the Secret Histories).
In terms of how fast you can get a card in the opening, $P is clearly harder than $4, while $2P and $3P are similar (but a little harder) than $5 - you usually get them on the second shuffle.
There is no amount of $ that P corresponds to. You can look at things in terms of how hard it is to get the cards on various turns, that's reasonable, but "Donald's playtesting suggested that a potion should correspond to etc." is the bunk.

That's not really true.  There isn't an exact amount, but that doesn't mean we can't say anything about what a potion is worth.  In all situations where you have X+Potion, you could have had X+Silver.  Thus, the minimum value of a Potion is 2.  Alchemist is also strictly better than Laboratory, again implying a minimum value of two.  We can't fix an exact upper bound, but its value is clearly not infinite.  If things are even remotely fairly priced, Potion shouldn't be worth more than it costs, so that puts the reasonable max at 4.

Potion costs a bit more than Silver.  Additionally, you can't get one potion from 2 copper (or even 1 gold), so should be more valuable than 1 Silver.   However, Potion costs less than 1 Gold.  If Potion cards are fairly priced (and I believe they are), then 2.5 (>2 and <3) is a reasonable approximation.

We can also express the value of Potion in terms of Scouts.  After careful evaluation, Potion is worth about 1 Scout.  Where you have X+Potion, you could have had X+Scout.  And of course they both cost $4, so they are basically equivalent.  Therefore Familiar costs approximately $3+Scout.  We also know that Scout is quite weak and worth very little, so we can conclude that the cost of Familiar is about $3.

In all seriousness though, I think you missed Donald's point.  Trying to translate Potion cost into coin cost doesn't work because Potions are a different kind of gate on getting those cards. 
Logged

enfynet

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1691
  • Respect: +1162
    • View Profile
    • JD's Custom Clubs
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #178 on: October 28, 2014, 10:14:06 pm »
0

But how do you reconcile the opportunity cost of needing to buy card X before buying card Y? I'd argue that a Potion cost is at minimum $3 more than its non potion counterpart.
Logged
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious."

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12847
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #179 on: October 28, 2014, 10:17:38 pm »
+1

Right. But if you want to compare these costs anyway, Donald's playtesting suggested that a potion should correspond to a price increase of $4 rather than $2-$2.5, at least in the cases of PS and Vineyard (which also worked at $7 resp. $4 according to the Secret Histories).
In terms of how fast you can get a card in the opening, $P is clearly harder than $4, while $2P and $3P are similar (but a little harder) than $5 - you usually get them on the second shuffle.
There is no amount of $ that P corresponds to. You can look at things in terms of how hard it is to get the cards on various turns, that's reasonable, but "Donald's playtesting suggested that a potion should correspond to etc." is the bunk.

That's not really true.  There isn't an exact amount, but that doesn't mean we can't say anything about what a potion is worth.  In all situations where you have X+Potion, you could have had X+Silver.  Thus, the minimum value of a Potion is 2.  Alchemist is also strictly better than Laboratory, again implying a minimum value of two.  We can't fix an exact upper bound, but its value is clearly not infinite.  If things are even remotely fairly priced, Potion shouldn't be worth more than it costs, so that puts the reasonable max at 4.
Dollars are more flexible than Potions. With $2+$4, you can get anything from $0 to $6, but with $2P, you can't buy a Familiar, and you can't buy anything else either. Therefore, Potion is worse than a Treasure card that gives you dollars equal to Potion's "value in dollars", and it's reasonable to assume that it's also cheaper. It's not objectively unreasonable to say that its "value in dollars" should be more than 4.
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

Mic Qsenoch

  • 2015 DS Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1709
  • Respect: +4329
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #180 on: October 28, 2014, 10:19:36 pm »
0

Next time I try to Expand an Alchemist into a Province I will let the computer know it should work because Alchemist is "strictly better" than Lab.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12847
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #181 on: October 28, 2014, 10:20:34 pm »
+4

Next time I try to Expand an Alchemist into a Province I will let the computer know it should work because Alchemist is "strictly better" than Lab.
Next time you try to Apprentice an Alchemist into +5 cards, it actually works!
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

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7861
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #182 on: October 28, 2014, 10:26:47 pm »
0

Next time I try to Expand an Alchemist into a Province I will let the computer know it should work because Alchemist is "strictly better" than Lab.
Next time you try to Apprentice an Alchemist into +5 cards, it actually works!

QED
Logged

Mic Qsenoch

  • 2015 DS Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1709
  • Respect: +4329
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #183 on: October 28, 2014, 10:28:08 pm »
+3

Next time I try to Expand an Alchemist into a Province I will let the computer know it should work because Alchemist is "strictly better" than Lab.
Next time you try to Apprentice an Alchemist into +5 cards, it actually works!
It should be 5.5 cards! Damn unbalanced game.
Logged

ThaddeusB

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 133
  • Respect: +140
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #184 on: October 28, 2014, 10:30:48 pm »
+1

Right. But if you want to compare these costs anyway, Donald's playtesting suggested that a potion should correspond to a price increase of $4 rather than $2-$2.5, at least in the cases of PS and Vineyard (which also worked at $7 resp. $4 according to the Secret Histories).
In terms of how fast you can get a card in the opening, $P is clearly harder than $4, while $2P and $3P are similar (but a little harder) than $5 - you usually get them on the second shuffle.
There is no amount of $ that P corresponds to. You can look at things in terms of how hard it is to get the cards on various turns, that's reasonable, but "Donald's playtesting suggested that a potion should correspond to etc." is the bunk.

That's not really true.  There isn't an exact amount, but that doesn't mean we can't say anything about what a potion is worth.  In all situations where you have X+Potion, you could have had X+Silver.  Thus, the minimum value of a Potion is 2.  Alchemist is also strictly better than Laboratory, again implying a minimum value of two.  We can't fix an exact upper bound, but its value is clearly not infinite.  If things are even remotely fairly priced, Potion shouldn't be worth more than it costs, so that puts the reasonable max at 4.

Potion costs a bit more than Silver.  Additionally, you can't get one potion from 2 copper (or even 1 gold), so should be more valuable than 1 Silver.   However, Potion costs less than 1 Gold.  If Potion cards are fairly priced (and I believe they are), then 2.5 (>2 and <3) is a reasonable approximation.

We can also express the value of Potion in terms of Scouts.  After careful evaluation, Potion is worth about 1 Scout.  Where you have X+Potion, you could have had X+Scout.  And of course they both cost $4, so they are basically equivalent.  Therefore Familiar costs approximately $3+Scout.  We also know that Scout is quite weak and worth very little, so we can conclude that the cost of Familiar is about $3.

In all seriousness though, I think you missed Donald's point.  Trying to translate Potion cost into coin cost doesn't work because Potions are a different kind of gate on getting those cards.

I understood the point.  I just reject the notion that they are completely incomparable.
Logged

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1751
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #185 on: October 28, 2014, 11:31:59 pm »
+1

...

You are way off in your assessment of Potion cost cards. By no means is Familiar in the top two, and by no means is Scrying Pool crappy without trashing. The top 3 Potion costs is SP, Apothecary and Vineyards. Vineyards is hard to compare, but I am absolutely sure SP and Apothecary are better than Familiar and skippable way less often.

Regarding comparing Potion with $ in cost, it cannot be done because you can get $ from a number of sources, while P can only come from a Potion card. Moreover, your deck starts with $7 and no Potion, so you can buy KC without buying any card producing money, but you cannot buy a Potion-cost card without buying a Potion (and you can only gain one through a small number of tricks like Squire or Jester). That alone is reason enough not to equalize $P with $X for any X. I do agree that $P > $2 for pricing things, though, but that is as far as I am willing to go.
Logged

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1751
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #186 on: October 28, 2014, 11:32:57 pm »
0

Do you really feel like I might feel like that? Man maybe you do. I had just said "enraged" a couple times, so I was being incredibly hilarious. In the future to avoid confusion I will mark such sentences by putting *H after them. *H

Since you are in this kind of mood, I am compiling a comprehensive list of fetishes...
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6357
  • Respect: +25672
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #187 on: October 29, 2014, 12:09:43 am »
+7

There is no amount of $ that P corresponds to. You can look at things in terms of how hard it is to get the cards on various turns, that's reasonable, but "Donald's playtesting suggested that a potion should correspond to etc." is the bunk.

That's not really true.  There isn't an exact amount, but that doesn't mean we can't say anything about what a potion is worth.  In all situations where you have X+Potion, you could have had X+Silver.  Thus, the minimum value of a Potion is 2.  Alchemist is also strictly better than Laboratory, again implying a minimum value of two.  We can't fix an exact upper bound, but its value is clearly not infinite.  If things are even remotely fairly priced, Potion shouldn't be worth more than it costs, so that puts the reasonable max at 4.

Potion costs a bit more than Silver.  Additionally, you can't get one potion from 2 copper (or even 1 gold), so should be more valuable than 1 Silver.   However, Potion costs less than 1 Gold.  If Potion cards are fairly priced (and I believe they are), then 2.5 (>2 and <3) is a reasonable approximation.
What I said was really true. What you said is all nonsense, except the part where you quoted me.

Sometimes, someone will come along and say, "So, how much does +1 Action cost you, how much does +1 Card." They make a chart and then can tell how much hypothetical cards would cost, yeeha. That is what you have here, and as it happens, it doesn't work at all. Money isn't linear in Dominion - $4 isn't twice as expensive as $2, $2+P isn't $2 more than P. It's just built into how the system works; you don't lose $ when you spend it, you start with a certain amount. The basic $ amounts aren't linear, but Potions are even less linear. There's no $ amount you can put on $3+P that accounts for you having to buy a Potion, for you now having a Potion in your deck that you don't want or really want. Your perspective is just so far removed from reality.
Logged

ThaddeusB

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 133
  • Respect: +140
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #188 on: October 29, 2014, 12:26:06 am »
0

...

You are way off in your assessment of Potion cost cards. By no means is Familiar in the top two, and by no means is Scrying Pool crappy without trashing. The top 3 Potion costs is SP, Apothecary and Vineyards. Vineyards is hard to compare, but I am absolutely sure SP and Apothecary are better than Familiar and skippable way less often.

Regarding comparing Potion with $ in cost, it cannot be done because you can get $ from a number of sources, while P can only come from a Potion card. Moreover, your deck starts with $7 and no Potion, so you can buy KC without buying any card producing money, but you cannot buy a Potion-cost card without buying a Potion (and you can only gain one through a small number of tricks like Squire or Jester). That alone is reason enough not to equalize $P with $X for any X. I do agree that $P > $2 for pricing things, though, but that is as far as I am willing to go.

According to the community ranks (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=11893.0), Familiar is #2 relative to cost (after being #1 for years).  Number one is Scrying Pool.  I wasn't trying to say it was crappy without trashing, just that it's value varies greatly, making it harder to fix a value.  If the argument is that SP should cost 3P, I could buy that.  I cannot buy into Familiar should cost 2P though, which was the actual argument made.
Logged

Holger

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 736
  • Respect: +458
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #189 on: October 29, 2014, 06:50:14 am »
0

Right. But if you want to compare these costs anyway, Donald's playtesting suggested that a potion should correspond to a price increase of $4 rather than $2-$2.5, at least in the cases of PS and Vineyard (which also worked at $7 resp. $4 according to the Secret Histories).
In terms of how fast you can get a card in the opening, $P is clearly harder than $4, while $2P and $3P are similar (but a little harder) than $5 - you usually get them on the second shuffle.
There is no amount of $ that P corresponds to. You can look at things in terms of how hard it is to get the cards on various turns, that's reasonable, but "Donald's playtesting suggested that a potion should correspond to etc." is the bunk.

Sorry if I over-interpreted what you wrote. Of course Potion and $ cannot actually be translated into each other. What I was trying to say is that a card costing $x+P may also work if it cost $4+x instead, interpolating from your Secret History comments that Vineyard could also have cost $4, and PS $7. Certainly this correspondence does not hold for all potion cost cards (prices are not linear, after all), it's only a rough and inexact "first-order" comparison of cards at incomparable price points.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2014, 06:52:32 am by Holger »
Logged

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1856
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #190 on: October 29, 2014, 04:50:35 pm »
+6

According to the community ranks (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=11893.0), Familiar is #2 relative to cost (after being #1 for years).  Number one is Scrying Pool.  I wasn't trying to say it was crappy without trashing, just that it's value varies greatly, making it harder to fix a value.  If the argument is that SP should cost 3P, I could buy that.  I cannot buy into Familiar should cost 2P though, which was the actual argument made.

Why would you want SP to cost $3P? That would be so much more swingy. The problem of missing $3P isn't just limited to the first reshuffle - every time you draw your Potion in hand, you have a chance of missing $3P if your deck infrastructure isn't well-built, and if that happens to one player but not the other, then the player who misses $3P begins to fall behind on subsequent shuffles.

For example, if my opponent misses $3P on an Alchemist board but I don't, he's not simply down 1 Alchemist. His deck cycling will be slower than mine, he's less likely to draw Potion with Alchemist for the top-decking effect, and he's less likely to hit $3P again.

I view Potion cards as being designed in two ways: they limit the player to obtaining to 1, maybe 2 copies of the card per shuffle, or they discourage the player from aiming for them until his deck infrastructure is built (Golem, Possession). Cards that cost $3P are too expensive for the former category and too cheap for the latter category.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2014, 04:52:16 pm by dondon151 »
Logged

ThaddeusB

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 133
  • Respect: +140
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #191 on: October 29, 2014, 10:02:16 pm »
+1

If the argument is that SP should cost 3P, I could buy that.  I cannot buy into Familiar should cost 2P though, which was the actual argument made.

Why would you want SP to cost $3P? That would be so much more swingy. The problem of missing $3P isn't just limited to the first reshuffle - every time you draw your Potion in hand, you have a chance of missing $3P if your deck infrastructure isn't well-built, and if that happens to one player but not the other, then the player who misses $3P begins to fall behind on subsequent shuffles.

For example, if my opponent misses $3P on an Alchemist board but I don't, he's not simply down 1 Alchemist. His deck cycling will be slower than mine, he's less likely to draw Potion with Alchemist for the top-decking effect, and he's less likely to hit $3P again.

Because I view cards being balanced in terms of cost as being more important than equal access.  If cards are too cheap, it becomes a no-brainer to go for them and everything game turns into a mirror - and many cards will rarely be bought (instead of just a few as it is).  I mean, a mirror is fine some of the time, but I don't want it every game.    If cards are balanced in terms of price, there are more interesting situations.  I believe the potion cost cards are pretty balanced as is.  That is all I was trying to say with the potion value discussion. 

If equal access was the only concern, every card would cost 3.  Getting 5/2 with a power 5 is a big edge.  Getting 3P with a power 3P card is a big edge.  I'm fine with that.  Overall, the game is more interesting for having the possibility of opening 5, and its more interesting if potion card costs are sometimes skippable.  They should be strong enough that you usually want them, despite the opportunity cost, but not so strong that its a no-brainer to go for them 100% of the time.  I think the game achieves that.
Logged

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1856
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #192 on: October 30, 2014, 10:41:42 pm »
+1

If equal access was the only concern, every card would cost 3.

No, it wouldn't. This is an unfair misrepresentation of my point. King's Court costs $7 and it's usually a must-buy. Goons costs $6 and it's usually a must-buy. These cards are expensive, but they encourage the player to build his deck such that he can consistently hit these values. This is not the case with cards with Potion in the cost, because the only way to consistently draw more than $2P is to trash out cards that don't produce $ or draw the entire deck.

Balancing Potion-cost cards "in terms of cost" is bogus, anyway, for reasons already stated by numerous users. Why shouldn't Familiar cost $2P? If every Potion-cost card cost $1 less (barring the ones that already cost $0P), no one would complain about Familiar costing $2P, because it would still be more expensive than Apothecary, SP, and University.
Logged

ThaddeusB

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 133
  • Respect: +140
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #193 on: October 30, 2014, 11:10:57 pm »
+1

If equal access was the only concern, every card would cost 3.

No, it wouldn't. This is an unfair misrepresentation of my point. King's Court costs $7 and it's usually a must-buy. Goons costs $6 and it's usually a must-buy. These cards are expensive, but they encourage the player to build his deck such that he can consistently hit these values. This is not the case with cards with Potion in the cost, because the only way to consistently draw more than $2P is to trash out cards that don't produce $ or draw the entire deck.

Balancing Potion-cost cards "in terms of cost" is bogus, anyway, for reasons already stated by numerous users. Why shouldn't Familiar cost $2P? If every Potion-cost card cost $1 less (barring the ones that already cost $0P), no one would complain about Familiar costing $2P, because it would still be more expensive than Apothecary, SP, and University.

No, you have totally misrepresented (or misunderstood) my point.  To me, if Familiar is unskippable at 2P 95% of the time and at 3P just 80% of the time, then 3P is the better price.  It has absolutely nothing to do with whether another card costs less.  There is a HUGE difference between "usually a must buy" and "always a must buy".  If a card is a must buy essentially 100% of the time, there is no strategic choice to make, and to me that makes the game less fun.  I am perfectly wiling to accept that sometimes someone will get a large edge from early luck in exchange for interesting opening decisions more often. 

The possibility of 5/2 openings sometimes creates a huge edge for one player, if the openings are different (not always for the 5/2 guy, of course).  3P cost cards can sometimes create a huge edge for one player.  Both are OK in my book.  A 4 cost Witch wouldn't be much fun though, as it would be a no-brainer opener nearly 100%.  Likewise, a 2P Familiar would make Potion/x a no-brainer opener nearly 100%.  If 3P is a bad price (and I don't agree it is), 4P would be preferable to 2P in my opinion.  (Also there is very little difference between 1P and 2P; making all Potion cards cost 1 less would greatly distort power levels from where they are now.)

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 #194 on: October 30, 2014, 11:13:01 pm »
0

As it stands now, the chance of missing $3P rewards the player who skips potion, since they don't have to worry about not hitting $3P before the second reshuffle. I wouldn't say that's worth the possibility of missing $3P in the mirror. I wouldn't mind if Familiar costed $2P instead.

Thaddeus makes some good points though.
« Last Edit: October 30, 2014, 11:14:24 pm by markusin »
Logged

Beyond Awesome

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2941
  • Shuffle iT Username: Beyond Awesome
  • Respect: +2466
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #195 on: October 30, 2014, 11:36:28 pm »
+1

I just played a Familiar game where I got $2P three times in a row. So, yah, it should cost $2P.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #196 on: October 30, 2014, 11:45:29 pm »
+1

If equal access was the only concern, every card would cost 3.

No, it wouldn't. This is an unfair misrepresentation of my point. King's Court costs $7 and it's usually a must-buy. Goons costs $6 and it's usually a must-buy. These cards are expensive, but they encourage the player to build his deck such that he can consistently hit these values. This is not the case with cards with Potion in the cost, because the only way to consistently draw more than $2P is to trash out cards that don't produce $ or draw the entire deck.

Balancing Potion-cost cards "in terms of cost" is bogus, anyway, for reasons already stated by numerous users. Why shouldn't Familiar cost $2P? If every Potion-cost card cost $1 less (barring the ones that already cost $0P), no one would complain about Familiar costing $2P, because it would still be more expensive than Apothecary, SP, and University.

No, you have totally misrepresented (or misunderstood) my point.  To me, if Familiar is unskippable at 2P 95% of the time and at 3P just 80% of the time, then 3P is the better price.  It has absolutely nothing to do with whether another card costs less.  There is a HUGE difference between "usually a must buy" and "always a must buy".  If a card is a must buy essentially 100% of the time, there is no strategic choice to make, and to me that makes the game less fun.  I am perfectly wiling to accept that sometimes someone will get a large edge from early luck in exchange for interesting opening decisions more often. 

The possibility of 5/2 openings sometimes creates a huge edge for one player, if the openings are different (not always for the 5/2 guy, of course).  3P cost cards can sometimes create a huge edge for one player.  Both are OK in my book.  A 4 cost Witch wouldn't be much fun though, as it would be a no-brainer opener nearly 100%.  Likewise, a 2P Familiar would make Potion/x a no-brainer opener nearly 100%.  If 3P is a bad price (and I don't agree it is), 4P would be preferable to 2P in my opinion.  (Also there is very little difference between 1P and 2P; making all Potion cards cost 1 less would greatly distort power levels from where they are now.)

I don't necessarily agree that Familiar should cost $2P, but I don't think your argument has merit.  I don't believe the chance of missing $3P is usually a factor when skipping Familiar.  It's board dependent.  I'd skip Familiar at $2P just as often as I do now based mostly on the cost of opening Potion at all.  If the board has strong trashing or another Curser, it's often not worth the tempo loss of opening with Potion and having it in your deck.  The considerations would be the same even if Familiar had a lower cost.
Logged

AndrewisFTTW

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1129
  • Respect: +1084
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #197 on: October 31, 2014, 12:14:29 am »
+5

I just played a Familiar game where I got $2P three times in a row. So, yah, it should cost $2P.

I just played a game where I hit $7 three times in a row.* Does that mean Provinces should cost $7?

*The game may or may not have actually happened but the point remains the same.
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 #198 on: October 31, 2014, 12:17:27 am »
0

I just played a Familiar game where I got $2P three times in a row. So, yah, it should cost $2P.

QED
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7861
    • View Profile
Re: silverspawn's card list
« Reply #199 on: October 31, 2014, 12:28:13 am »
+2

Guys, Familiar and Alchemist cannot cost $2P, because then we have to conclude that P = $3--$3.5, which contradicts the known fact that P = $2--$2.5.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9  All
 

Page created in 0.069 seconds with 21 queries.