Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 13  All

Author Topic: Empires Rulebook  (Read 41480 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7011
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9707
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #125 on: June 07, 2016, 12:06:30 pm »
+1

Sadly not.
Happily so. (Donald reversed the ruling to which you linked.)
OK. I grant that you sound like you know what you're talking about, but is there any evidence the ruling in the Wiki is more recent than the ruling in that thread?

I can confirm that it is.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7369
  • Respect: +8190
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #126 on: June 07, 2016, 12:20:09 pm »
+3

Sadly not.
Happily so. (Donald reversed the ruling to which you linked.)
OK. I grant that you sound like you know what you're talking about, but is there any evidence the ruling in the Wiki is more recent than the ruling in that thread?

Here's the official reversal, from April 2015: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13115.msg487471#msg487471
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

Accatitippi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1145
  • Shuffle iT Username: Accatitippi
  • Silver is underraided
  • Respect: +1769
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #127 on: June 07, 2016, 12:38:11 pm »
+8

Guys, I just realized: no Reaction in empires!
We hadn't had a Reaction-less big set since Seaside.
Logged

ThetaSigma12

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1632
  • Shuffle iT Username: ThetaSigma12
  • Respect: +1706
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #128 on: June 07, 2016, 12:44:54 pm »
+2

Okay! Time for a lengthy post on my thoughts:
Engineer: The on play effect seems fine, I'll probably trash it after a few plays. The 4 debt cost is what intrigues me. It's so small it seems like it is essentially a 4 costing card. My guess is the debt cost is so it can't gain itself. Don't know why that would be too good though. I do appreciate having a wider variety of debt costs. The art seems decent, especially for a first time artist. Interesting that it features a woman, don't know what to think about that. There do need to be more cards with women but I would have put a dude on engineer.

Overlord: BoM 2.0? Never saw that coming. I don't like how it's such a good opener, I do like the interaction with highway and such. I'm glad this skips the clunky wording of BoM. Man, I still don't get BoM's wording. More great art from a new artist! The pics a little low quality but I like the look on his face.

Encampment/Plunder: Encampment seems great. Reminds me of Co0kiel0rd's Building Cranes and Asper's Alley. I.e, a one-shot that returns itself to the supply. I wonder why it sets itself aside instead of going straight to the supply. I appreciate it mentions plunder, that's what I want in split pile, more on that in Patrician and friend. Plunder seems great. My gut tells me it's way better than Harem (And with better art to boot!). I don't like the art on plunder. Encampment is good enough art put plunder has the same problem of fortune, it just doesn't say "Plunder". It needs to focus more on the treasure, not just some gold crap against a dark background.

Patrician/Emporium: I like the simplicity. Even with all the newfangled debt and landmarks and complicated rules you have easy things like forum and emporium. Patrician seems weak, I'd buy vagrant over it. Thanks for having the right wording on this *cough* Envoy *cough*. Emporium seems nice, but I wonder if it's ever worth buying one of these without the VP bonus. This seems like a nice low-key pile. Not an insta-buy (Page, Ambassador), not a niche card (Adventurer, Counting House). Now what I hate: The cards don't have enough synergy. Sure patrician guarantees there will be 5 cards for emporium, and emporium is 5 for patrician, but these would have worked on plies by themselves IMO.


Sacrifice: Great card, not much to say. I like the essential bishoping of estates, and the interaction with ruins. Here's my biggest complaint: What the heck is up with the formatting? There is like a mile of spaces in between the "Action Card" and "+2 Cards, +2 Actions". Why? Doesn't seem consistent with ironworks.

Archive: Great card, I hope we get more 3 turn durations in future expansions. Not much to say, other than it's not Archivist, there's already a fan card named that and it's a pain to rename them.

Charm: Awesome card! I like it better than HoP by far. I thought the +Buy wasn't supposed to be bold though. Wonder which effect would be used more. I'm leaning twords the second but I think the first will be better many times. COMBO: Charm/Tournament/Prince: Solve that age-old problem by letting you get the prince AND the province at the same time! (Yes I know it's not that good) The art/name seems a little confusing. No doubt it will be clearer on the physical card. Charm is a stretch, but hey, we're running out of names.

Forum: Yeah, simplicity. Nothing to say about this, it's pretty boring. The whole "Holy Crap, Insta-pie w/highway" thing was shown with Villa, so nothing to say there. More art by Ryan Laukat!

Legionary: Killer attack! This seems like a phenomenal card, a terminal gold is great for $5. Tenatively, this seems better than Maragrave. I'm a huge fan of the art.

Wild Hunt: Ghost card, Yes! I love the name. But NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! It doesn't put cards on top of your deck! The theme is ruined! WHY??????
It seems a bit weak, but smithys are good. The artist really nailed this one.

I'll cover the events and whatnot later.
Logged
If you have a fan card you want to be created, just post about it here! I'd love to take a look at it.

drsteelhammer

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1525
  • Shuffle iT Username: drsteelhammer
  • Respect: +1456
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #129 on: June 07, 2016, 12:49:08 pm »
+13

Okay! Time for a lengthy post on my thoughts:
Engineer: The on play effect seems fine, I'll probably trash it after a few plays. The 4 debt cost is what intrigues me. It's so small it seems like it is essentially a 4 costing card. My guess is the debt cost is so it can't gain itself. Don't know why that would be too good though. I do appreciate having a wider variety of debt costs. The art seems decent, especially for a first time artist. Interesting that it features a woman, don't know what to think about that. There do need to be more cards with women but I would have put a dude on engineer.

That is the reason why there is a woman on it!
Logged
Join the Dominion League!

There is no bad shuffle that can not be surmounted by scorn.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #130 on: June 07, 2016, 01:01:13 pm »
+1

Maybe somebody (wero, obviously) could add citations for rulings to the wiki?

Official Adventures art is missing too... 
Logged

crj

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 991
  • Respect: +1075
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #131 on: June 07, 2016, 01:11:22 pm »
0

Guys, I just realized: no Reaction in empires!
We hadn't had a Reaction-less big set since Seaside.
Actually, I'm a bit surprised that all the Landmarks are green-border. Arguably, ten of the twenty-one should have been blue as they react to things which you do in game rather than affecting final scoring.
Logged

AJD

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2924
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +3702
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #132 on: June 07, 2016, 01:26:40 pm »
0

Encampment/Plunder: Encampment seems great. Reminds me of Co0kiel0rd's Building Cranes and Asper's Alley. I.e, a one-shot that returns itself to the supply. I wonder why it sets itself aside instead of going straight to the supply.

I assume the reason is something like, so you can't just gain it back right away. (This has the interesting side effect that if you get Encampment from the Black Market, it just ends up set aside permanently.)

By the way, here's a lose-track issue that I was surprised not to see mentioned in the Encampment FAQ: Crown Encampment, +2 cards, don't have a Gold or Plunder, +2 more cards, oh goody I drew a Gold, now I want to reveal it. In this case the Encampment still returns to the supply, though, right? If you play an Encampment multiple times, you have to reveal Gold or Plunder each time in order to save it.
Logged

MattTV

  • Chancellor
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 23
  • Respect: +13
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #133 on: June 07, 2016, 01:31:19 pm »
+1

My favorite cards so far would have to be:

Action: Archives-This is probably my new favorite duration card and duration cards happen to be my favorite so maybe I'm biased but this card is amazing. I love the idea of setting aside a mini hand for yourself that you can pull out to use each turn. If you have enough of them you can essentially access your entire deck for 3 turns!! A much more convenient version of haven/native village. This will certainly help the legionary challenge.

Treasure: Capital-this was hard cause I really like charm and obviously fortune, but capital just seems to have that tactician-feel where your like "heck yeah I'm going for it" you can get a mega money turn now and maybe forgo your next turn depending on how you use it, so it's probably my third favorite next to counterfeit and coin of the realm.

Event: Donate- well donate is self-explanatory in the sense that you can build up your deck and then customize it to your liking; throwing out all the baggage.

Landmark: Triumphal Arch-It would have been mountain pass if it activated more than once but the bid only starts with the first province bought. Although I think Triumphal Arch is really cool and feels different in the sense that your not just thinking about how am I going to get x amount cards or silvers etc for gardens or feodum to be of value, your more thinking alright what actions should I get the most of and which other action is going to be the easiest to buy out for some real points. So i like the deeper level of thinking.
Logged

crj

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 991
  • Respect: +1075
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #134 on: June 07, 2016, 01:39:29 pm »
+3

By the way, here's a lose-track issue that I was surprised not to see mentioned in the Encampment FAQ: Crown Encampment, +2 cards, don't have a Gold or Plunder, +2 more cards, oh goody I drew a Gold, now I want to reveal it. In this case the Encampment still returns to the supply, though, right? If you play an Encampment multiple times, you have to reveal Gold or Plunder each time in order to save it.
That doesn't feel precisely like a lose-track issue.

When you play Encampment the first time, you fail to reveal a Gold or Plunder, you set it aside. Second time you play it, either you reveal a Gold or Plunder in which case nothing happens (it stays set aside, destined to return to its pile), or you don't, in which case presumably the second play does lose track because it's already been set aside, but that has no consequence?

Relatedly, I'm assuming a Procession of Encampments gets set aside if you fail to reveal Gold or Plunder on either or both playings, with the trashing losing track. But if you do reveal Gold or Plunder, it doesn't get set aside, so it does get trashed.
Logged

ThetaSigma12

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1632
  • Shuffle iT Username: ThetaSigma12
  • Respect: +1706
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #135 on: June 07, 2016, 01:45:36 pm »
0

Okay! Time for a lengthy post on my thoughts:
Engineer: The on play effect seems fine, I'll probably trash it after a few plays. The 4 debt cost is what intrigues me. It's so small it seems like it is essentially a 4 costing card. My guess is the debt cost is so it can't gain itself. Don't know why that would be too good though. I do appreciate having a wider variety of debt costs. The art seems decent, especially for a first time artist. Interesting that it features a woman, don't know what to think about that. There do need to be more cards with women but I would have put a dude on engineer.

That is the reason why there is a woman on it!
There weren't very many female engineers/inventors in the Roman times. A male would have been more historically accurate, but compared to steward it's not that bad.
Logged
If you have a fan card you want to be created, just post about it here! I'd love to take a look at it.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #136 on: June 07, 2016, 01:49:53 pm »
+7

Okay! Time for a lengthy post on my thoughts:
Engineer: The on play effect seems fine, I'll probably trash it after a few plays. The 4 debt cost is what intrigues me. It's so small it seems like it is essentially a 4 costing card. My guess is the debt cost is so it can't gain itself. Don't know why that would be too good though. I do appreciate having a wider variety of debt costs. The art seems decent, especially for a first time artist. Interesting that it features a woman, don't know what to think about that. There do need to be more cards with women but I would have put a dude on engineer.

That is the reason why there is a woman on it!
There weren't very many female engineers/inventors in the Roman times. A male would have been more historically accurate, but compared to steward it's not that bad.

Not very many means there were some, so it's still accurate?? And the lack thereof might be exaggerated because history books tend to focus on the men and ignore the women.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7011
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9707
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #137 on: June 07, 2016, 02:02:09 pm »
0

Engineer: The art seems decent, especially for a first time artist.

Overlord: More great art from a new artist!

Legionary: I'm a huge fan of the art.

I would be happy if Elisa Cella did all the Dominion art, forever. I'm disappointed there isn't more art from her in Empires!
Logged

SuperHans

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 140
  • Respect: +215
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #138 on: June 07, 2016, 02:08:17 pm »
+6

Okay! Time for a lengthy post on my thoughts:
Engineer: The on play effect seems fine, I'll probably trash it after a few plays. The 4 debt cost is what intrigues me. It's so small it seems like it is essentially a 4 costing card. My guess is the debt cost is so it can't gain itself. Don't know why that would be too good though. I do appreciate having a wider variety of debt costs. The art seems decent, especially for a first time artist. Interesting that it features a woman, don't know what to think about that. There do need to be more cards with women but I would have put a dude on engineer.

That is the reason why there is a woman on it!
There weren't very many female engineers/inventors in the Roman times. A male would have been more historically accurate, but compared to steward it's not that bad.

Not very many means there were some, so it's still accurate?? And the lack thereof might be exaggerated because history books tend to focus on the men and ignore the women.
If we ever get a kingdom card named King, I hope it depicts a woman.
Logged

Chris is me

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2568
  • Shuffle iT Username: Chris is me
  • What do you want me to say?
  • Respect: +3199
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #139 on: June 07, 2016, 02:10:09 pm »
+21

Okay! Time for a lengthy post on my thoughts:
Engineer: The on play effect seems fine, I'll probably trash it after a few plays. The 4 debt cost is what intrigues me. It's so small it seems like it is essentially a 4 costing card. My guess is the debt cost is so it can't gain itself. Don't know why that would be too good though. I do appreciate having a wider variety of debt costs. The art seems decent, especially for a first time artist. Interesting that it features a woman, don't know what to think about that. There do need to be more cards with women but I would have put a dude on engineer.

That is the reason why there is a woman on it!
There weren't very many female engineers/inventors in the Roman times. A male would have been more historically accurate, but compared to steward it's not that bad.

Dominion isn't history though. There certainly weren't any Enchantresses or Ghost Ships or Scrying Pools or real Alchemists in historical times; so why not make the world a little better and more equal rather than constraining ourselves to the sexism of the past?

That people see the word "Engineer" and think "male" is more than enough reason to not do that, really. That gender conception exists TODAY.
Logged
Twitch channel: http://www.twitch.tv/chrisisme2791

bug me on discord

they/them

crlundy

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 238
  • Shuffle iT Username: crlundy
  • Respect: +264
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #140 on: June 07, 2016, 02:36:32 pm »
+1

Wow, this is the first set with no blank cards, right? Making use of every last card.
Logged

pacovf

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3359
  • Multiediting poster
  • Respect: +3695
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #141 on: June 07, 2016, 02:52:48 pm »
+4

Okay! Time for a lengthy post on my thoughts:
Engineer: The on play effect seems fine, I'll probably trash it after a few plays. The 4 debt cost is what intrigues me. It's so small it seems like it is essentially a 4 costing card. My guess is the debt cost is so it can't gain itself. Don't know why that would be too good though. I do appreciate having a wider variety of debt costs. The art seems decent, especially for a first time artist. Interesting that it features a woman, don't know what to think about that. There do need to be more cards with women but I would have put a dude on engineer.

That is the reason why there is a woman on it!
There weren't very many female engineers/inventors in the Roman times. A male would have been more historically accurate, but compared to steward it's not that bad.

Dominion isn't history though. There certainly weren't any Enchantresses or Ghost Ships or Scrying Pools or real Alchemists in historical times; so why not make the world a little better and more equal rather than constraining ourselves to the sexism of the past?

That people see the word "Engineer" and Dthink "male" is more than enough reason to not do that, really. That gender conception exists TODAY.

We've had this discussion before! Many times! It always ends about the way you expect these discussions to end! Bring it to RSP if you want to keep discussing it! Please!

Was that enough exclamation marks!
Logged
pacovf has a neopets account.  It has 999 hours logged.  All his neopets are named "Jessica".  I guess that must be his ex.

Beyond Awesome

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2921
  • Shuffle iT Username: Beyond Awesome
  • Respect: +2429
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #142 on: June 07, 2016, 03:11:38 pm »
+2

One thing I've noticed is that it feels like the Villages are harder to pull off vs. DA and Adventures.

Encampment returns to the pile a lot of times, Bustling Village is the bottom card of a split pile, Villa does not draw a card, and Crown is a TR variant which tend to take more work to get going if it is the only village on the board, oh, and City Quarter cost 8 debt which is pricey. I guess we also have Sacrifice, but man, if that were the only source of Village on the board, that would probably be a hard engine to pull off.

The trashing in this expansion seems pretty strong though.
Logged

DLloyd09

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 50
  • Respect: +46
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #143 on: June 07, 2016, 03:32:25 pm »
0

Wow, this is the first set with no blank cards, right? Making use of every last card.

Alchemy, Cornucopia, and Dark Ages also had no blanks.
Logged

dbclick

  • Alchemist
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 36
  • Shuffle iT Username: dbclick
  • Respect: +52
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #144 on: June 07, 2016, 04:29:56 pm »
0

Attempted a proxy game with Mountain Pass and Tax and this question came up (as it could have changed the outcome):

If the first Province gained is is on the same turn that triggers the end condition (e.g. 3 pile), does the Mountain Pass bidding still happen or not? (the base rules say to end the game, but the Mountain Pass says to do the bidding after that turn - which rule overrules?)
Logged

crlundy

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 238
  • Shuffle iT Username: crlundy
  • Respect: +264
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #145 on: June 07, 2016, 04:34:45 pm »
+2

Wow, this is the first set with no blank cards, right? Making use of every last card.

Alchemy, Cornucopia, and Dark Ages also had no blanks.
Well, it's not the first falsehood I've ever posted here. All sweet sets.
Logged

Deadlock39

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1722
  • Respect: +1742
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #146 on: June 07, 2016, 04:38:22 pm »
+1

Attempted a proxy game with Mountain Pass and Tax and this question came up (as it could have changed the outcome):

If the first Province gained is is on the same turn that triggers the end condition (e.g. 3 pile), does the Mountain Pass bidding still happen or not? (the base rules say to end the game, but the Mountain Pass says to do the bidding after that turn - which rule overrules?)

Someone asked if Donate would still happen if you bought it when piling out the game, and Donald said no. Also, if you pile out the game in the process of trashing cards to Donate (e.g. Hunting Grounds or Catacombs), the end condition is not checked until the end of the next turn, so the game continues until at least then.

Donald X.

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5137
  • Respect: +21063
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #147 on: June 07, 2016, 04:48:24 pm »
+1

I'm guessing that an earlier version of Aqueduct put tokens on every Treasure pile, like Defiled Shrine puts tokens on most Action piles.

Bingo.
Also this wording is simpler.

eHalcyon is talking about the FAQ, not the wording on the card.
I see. The FAQ answers a real question that wouldn't matter with existing cards (and I wouldn't expect more VP tokens any time soon); I try to prune those these days but it's technically correct, Futurama quote.
Logged

Donald X.

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5137
  • Respect: +21063
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #148 on: June 07, 2016, 04:50:34 pm »
+1

I'm not sure I get how D(et)onate works. "After your turn", that means after discarding everything from play, right? But is it before or after drawing 5 cards? And how do you "shuffle your hand into your deck", when everything is already in your hand?
It happens after clean-up; you already have a hand of 5 cards for next turn (that you won't keep because you Donated). "Shuffle your hand into your deck," with no deck, means your shuffled hand becomes your deck.
Logged

dbclick

  • Alchemist
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 36
  • Shuffle iT Username: dbclick
  • Respect: +52
    • View Profile
Re: Empires Rulebook
« Reply #149 on: June 07, 2016, 04:58:28 pm »
0

Attempted a proxy game with Mountain Pass and Tax and this question came up (as it could have changed the outcome):

If the first Province gained is is on the same turn that triggers the end condition (e.g. 3 pile), does the Mountain Pass bidding still happen or not? (the base rules say to end the game, but the Mountain Pass says to do the bidding after that turn - which rule overrules?)

Someone asked if Donate would still happen if you bought it when piling out the game, and Donald said no. Also, if you pile out the game in the process of trashing cards to Donate (e.g. Hunting Grounds or Catacombs), the end condition is not checked until the end of the next turn, so the game continues until at least then.

Makes sense. Posted it on the wiki.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 13  All
 

Page created in 0.2 seconds with 20 queries.