Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Results!)  (Read 8645 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Roadrunner7671

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1845
  • Shuffle iT Username: Roadrunner7672
  • Forum Mafia Record: 18-33-2
  • Respect: +1337
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Voting!)
« Reply #25 on: July 04, 2016, 11:16:51 am »
0

@Adrian on Collector: Discarding an Estate would help their own Collector, and there are edge cases where they might want to discard a card (Library, Tunnel, Watchtower, Jack of All Trades, they have two terminals and only want one to miss the shuffle)
Logged
Oh God someone delete this before Roadrunner sees it.

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Voting!)
« Reply #26 on: July 04, 2016, 11:20:08 am »
0

@Adrian on Collector: Discarding an Estate would help their own Collector, and there are edge cases where they might want to discard a card (Library, Tunnel, Watchtower, Jack of All Trades, they have two terminals and only want one to miss the shuffle)

Yup, but still a bit edgy. I'd be ok with it, if the rest of the card was more interesting, but I don't think it is atm.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Voting!)
« Reply #27 on: July 04, 2016, 01:37:57 pm »
0

You would want the +1 for trinket if you have no cards in hand or they all cost less than two.

Yeah, but that'll be an edge case. You don't even have an Estate or Silver to reveal? It's a backup prize that isn't necessary for the card to do its thing. It would be like if Smithy gave +$1 whenever it doesn't draw a full 3 cards. Yes, that makes it more powerful, but it's needless extra complexity on the card.
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Voting!)
« Reply #28 on: July 04, 2016, 01:46:43 pm »
0

I understand now that collector is actually a very nice disguised peddler, what a great idea, actually.
Logged

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1010
  • Respect: +1983
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Voting!)
« Reply #29 on: July 04, 2016, 03:21:24 pm »
0

I think Proliferate emptying piles is a concern and might make it need something else (like the extra pile clause is a nice idea), but I think it won't be as bad as people are saying, because it always has to take from differently priced piles.  You could play it 10 times and three pile if you take the same cards every time, but that's not that fast.  Obviously it gets easier with help from the other player and yourself, but I think it might actually be okay as it is.
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Voting!)
« Reply #30 on: July 04, 2016, 03:48:55 pm »
0

I think Proliferate emptying piles is a concern and might make it need something else (like the extra pile clause is a nice idea), but I think it won't be as bad as people are saying, because it always has to take from differently priced piles.  You could play it 10 times and three pile if you take the same cards every time, but that's not that fast.  Obviously it gets easier with help from the other player and yourself, but I think it might actually be okay as it is.

Well, it's no just proliferate, of course, that empties piles, right? You also have regular buys and all that. And, of course, a second player.
Logged

LibraryAdventurer

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1171
  • Shuffle iT Username: LibraryAdventurer
  • Respect: +900
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity
« Reply #31 on: July 04, 2016, 07:06:52 pm »
0

I should've waited longer to vote. I'd kinda like to change my vote after reading more of the discussion.

Quote
Consortium
Types: Action
Cost: $7

+2 Actions

Choose a number up to 8.  Each player may draw until they have that many cards in hand.  Choose a number down to 3.  Each player who drew discards down to that many cards in hand.
I think I've changed my opinion on this one. I like it more now since the draw & discard for other players is optional for them, but if they choose to draw, they also must discard. And if you have a discard attack, you can draw up to 8 without discarding, and then play your discard attack to make everyone else discard. It's potentially very powerful, so I don't think it's overpriced.

Quote
Wealthy Village
Types: Action
Cost: $4

+1 Card
+2 Actions

If this is the first time you've played Wealthy Village this turn, +$1 and +1 VP.
I think an easy fix for this would be "If this if the second time you've played wealthy village this turn..."

spiralstaircase

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 241
  • Respect: +406
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity
« Reply #32 on: July 05, 2016, 04:35:38 am »
+2

I should've waited longer to vote. I'd kinda like to change my vote after reading more of the discussion.

You can click "Remove Vote" underneath the results and vote again.
Logged

pst

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 537
  • Respect: +835
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Voting!)
« Reply #33 on: July 06, 2016, 04:40:47 pm »
0

Evidently I voted for something a long time ago, and now I get spam about it again and again.
Will it stop if I find my vote and remove it?
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Voting!)
« Reply #34 on: July 06, 2016, 04:47:13 pm »
+2

It'll stop if you just message Mith 'hey, I am not really interested in participating in this. Could you remove me from the mailing list? Thanks in advance!'
Logged

mith

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 761
  • Shuffle iT Username: mith
  • Respect: +759
    • View Profile
    • MafiaScum.net
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Voting!)
« Reply #35 on: July 06, 2016, 06:01:30 pm »
0

^That. I've removed you.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4788
  • Respect: +5113
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Voting!)
« Reply #36 on: July 07, 2016, 07:15:44 am »
+2

It's no secret Minister is by me, so i'll point this one out to some of you who think it's too weak: They stack. Most importantly, your second Minister can gain another one, and the fourth a Province. The cost reduction isn't something to sneeze at, either. And the penalty is there because it played very, very strong - not because i wanted the penalty. I mean, it's fine if you dislike the card for any reason at all, but from my playtesting experience it's really not weak.

trivialknot

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 641
  • Respect: +972
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Voting!)
« Reply #37 on: July 07, 2016, 08:03:38 am »
0

I knew Minister stacked, although it's hard to believe that it's strong when it requires the support of an engine that can play multiple $6 terminal stop cards.  At that point, lots of cards are strong.  Five gold will nearly get you about as many points as five Ministers, but for some reason people think it's ridiculous to build an engine with gold as payoff.  Ah, but if you've playtested it, I believe you.

I also like to think about how cards would play without an engine.  What if there isn't draw?  What if splitters are missing?  What if there's no buy/gain? What if there's strong junking and/or weak trashing? etc.  These are the situations where I was thinking Minister seemed weak in comparison to Altar.  But I suppose sometimes you want that $5 gainer.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4788
  • Respect: +5113
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Voting!)
« Reply #38 on: July 07, 2016, 08:53:32 am »
+1

I knew Minister stacked, although it's hard to believe that it's strong when it requires the support of an engine that can play multiple $6 terminal stop cards.  At that point, lots of cards are strong.  Five gold will nearly get you about as many points as five Ministers, but for some reason people think it's ridiculous to build an engine with gold as payoff.  Ah, but if you've playtested it, I believe you.

I also like to think about how cards would play without an engine.  What if there isn't draw?  What if splitters are missing?  What if there's no buy/gain? What if there's strong junking and/or weak trashing? etc.  These are the situations where I was thinking Minister seemed weak in comparison to Altar.  But I suppose sometimes you want that $5 gainer.

Well, Minister helps building that engine, so if you go for it without trying to build an engine, i assume you won't get that much out of it. I didn't play 5K games with it, only a few, so my opinion might not be final, either. Everyone should vote for what they like, either way, i just wanted to say that my experience to date didn't match the apparent consensus that it was weak.

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Voting!)
« Reply #39 on: July 07, 2016, 10:09:49 am »
0

Minister seems also great in slogs. Gain Dutchies easily.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Voting!)
« Reply #40 on: July 07, 2016, 01:39:30 pm »
0

It's no secret Minister is by me, so i'll point this one out to some of you who think it's too weak: They stack. Most importantly, your second Minister can gain another one, and the fourth a Province. The cost reduction isn't something to sneeze at, either. And the penalty is there because it played very, very strong - not because i wanted the penalty. I mean, it's fine if you dislike the card for any reason at all, but from my playtesting experience it's really not weak.

I can believe it's strong, but I'm not convinced that a VP penalty is a good fix.

I and probably others don't keep on top of the big fan expansion threads, so I didn't know it was yours. Even though that's public knowledge, it's probably better not to announce it.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4788
  • Respect: +5113
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Voting!)
« Reply #41 on: July 07, 2016, 06:38:33 pm »
0

It's no secret Minister is by me, so i'll point this one out to some of you who think it's too weak: They stack. Most importantly, your second Minister can gain another one, and the fourth a Province. The cost reduction isn't something to sneeze at, either. And the penalty is there because it played very, very strong - not because i wanted the penalty. I mean, it's fine if you dislike the card for any reason at all, but from my playtesting experience it's really not weak.

I can believe it's strong, but I'm not convinced that a VP penalty is a good fix.

I and probably others don't keep on top of the big fan expansion threads, so I didn't know it was yours. Even though that's public knowledge, it's probably better not to announce it.

I understand. My perception was that this would be frequented by the same people who frequent the other fan card threads, so i thought it was public knowledge. I mean, it's available information at the very least. I also think i would have felt a bit dishonest to defend my own card and leaving people think i was just some random guy who supports it. I will refrain from announcing such things (and possibly comment on my own cards at all) in future rounds.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Voting!)
« Reply #42 on: July 07, 2016, 10:29:51 pm »
0

I understand. My perception was that this would be frequented by the same people who frequent the other fan card threads, so i thought it was public knowledge. I mean, it's available information at the very least. I also think i would have felt a bit dishonest to defend my own card and leaving people think i was just some random guy who supports it. I will refrain from announcing such things (and possibly comment on my own cards at all) in future rounds.

I don't know how others feel about it, but I'm totally cool with you defending your card (semi-)anonymously, especially if you're also commenting on other entries as well.
Logged

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +192
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Voting!)
« Reply #43 on: July 08, 2016, 05:07:47 am »
0

I knew Minister stacked, although it's hard to believe that it's strong when it requires the support of an engine that can play multiple $6 terminal stop cards.  At that point, lots of cards are strong.
Sure but if there is a Village in the Kingdom and half-way decent 5$ cards Minister seems like an obvious choice in order to first get 5s and then with a second or third Minister and village support 6s/Gold.
Just compare it with Altar. Altar can be a good card even in a moderately thinned deck for the simple reason that it gains 5s.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4788
  • Respect: +5113
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity
« Reply #44 on: July 08, 2016, 09:04:14 am »
+1

Oh man, so i should comment on other cards, too?

Quote
Bronze Worker
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+2 Actions
Discard any number of copper. +1 Card and +$1 per Copper discarded.
This feels like it would be okay for $2, like Cellar. It keeps you the coins of your Coppers at the beginning (but can't discard the Estates nor really uses the action) while giving you an additional action later (without being actually good at sifting at that point). It would be nice, but costing $2 and caring about Copper is a bit un-Prosperity in my book.


Quote
Collector
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action
You may play a Treasure card from your hand.
Draw until you have 4 cards in hand.
Each other player may discard a card.
I don't really like the interaction, because it's useful only if you also go for the card. The concept of playing a Treasure and drawing after that is nice, though. I have seen it before on a card by Co0kieL0rd, so it's probably not as unexpected. Still neat and Prosperity-ish.


Quote
Consortium
Types: Action
Cost: $7
+2 Actions
Choose a number up to 8.  Each player may draw until they have that many cards in hand.  Choose a number down to 3.  Each player who drew discards down to that many cards in hand.
So, you harm yourself that way? Huh, i'm not sure how appropriate the cost is. I wonder whether this is tested. Either way, it's an attack that lacks the attack type, and i really can't say i like that. People always appear to think an attack is less of an attack when it hurts itself, but it only makes it a bad attack. Sorry.


Quote
Desert City
Types: Action
Cost: $5
You may discard an Action card. If you do, +3 Cards, +2 Actions; if you don't, discard a card.
You may discard a Treasure card. If you do, +$3; if you don't, -$2.
You may discard a Victory card. If you do, +2 VP; if you don't, discard a card.
This could be soooo much easier if you make the second option discarding too and reformat a bit:
Discard a card. If it is an Action: +3 Cards, +2 Actions
Discard a card. If it is a Treasure: +$3
Discard a card. If it is a Victory: +2VP
Either way, it has too much going on AND gives you VP without doing anything to progress the game. In fact, it allows you to re-draw that same card the same turn and discard it again for VP. It's not even "monument"-ally weak without the VP option. No fun.


Quote
Divdends
Types: Treasure
Cost: $7
Worth $1
When you play this, gain a Treasure costing less than it, putting it into your hand.
So incredibly strong... It's almost Platinum AND gains Golds. Sure, you don't always want Gold - but that's partly because Gold has an opportunity cost - something this card practically removes. Very Prosperity-ish, though.


Quote
Entourage
Types: Treasure – Victory
Cost: $7
Worth $2
When you play this, choose one: +1 VP; or reveal any number of Victory cards from your hand and +$1 per card revealed.

Worth 1VP
Too much like Plunder in my opinion. Sorry.
Fun fact: "Plunder" in german means "useless stuff".


Quote
Exchequer
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Gain a treasure costing up to $6 to your hand. You may put your deck in your discard pile.
Each other player may gain a Silver on their deck.
Not bad. It has friendly interaction and money, so it's very Prosperity-ish. I'm not sure it's that exciting, though - everything on it has always been there.


Quote
Grand Canal
Types: Action
Cost: $7
+2 Buys
+$2
All cards cost $2 less this turn, but not less than $0.
You may trash a Treasure other than a Copper from your hand. If you don't, trash this.
This feels a bit wonky. As if it could have worked just fine as a $7-Bridge reducing prices by $2, and someone wanted it too have more going on.


Quote
Heirloom
Types: Treasure
Cost: $3
+1 Buy
If this is the first time you've played Heirloom this turn, each time you spend $4 or more with one buy, cards cost $2 less (but not less than $0) for the rest of the turn.
I like the idea, but not a great fan of the execution. For example, i wouldn't limit it to one Heirloom per turn, and talk about the card's cost instead of what you spend. Overpay isn't relevant enough for a wording to go that distance. I can't really think of a way to fix it up, but if there's a simpler wording, i think it's a cute idea.


Quote
Investor
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action
Discard any number of Treasure cards. For each card discarded, +1 Card and +$1.
This suffers from me having seen two "remove coins for draw"-cards before... If i try to be fair, i think it's okay, but probably a bit weak. I mean, it's like a more restrictive Cellar that gives an additional bonus. On the other hand, Vault is an improved Secret Chamber for $5 and had to be nerfed. I guess this is fine if you can repeatedly discard your money for more cash, as it will make your engine capable of running with little treasure cards - what sucks is if you draw this without other Treasures, as this makes it a stop card. I'd be in favour of making this able to discard other cards or costing less.

Quote
Metropolis
Types: Action
Cost: $7
+1 Card
+2 Actions
Treasure cards other than Copper produce an extra $1 this turn.
I get why you'd exclude Copper here, as getting 4 Coppers in hand early is really easy - especially if you can use some terminal draw with this. The name is also cute. I'm not sure the parts really interact that well, but i guess what you can do is go for Silver and terminal draw, hope to hit $7 as early as possible, and then buy Provinces. I'd have to try it out, though.

Quote
Minister
Types: Action
Cost: $6
All cards cost $1 less this turn, but not less than $0.
You may gain a card costing up to $4. If you do, each other player gets +1 VP.
So this is combines two concepts that are even better in combination and makes up for it with friendly interaction. Also it costs $6, gains expensive stuff and uses VP, (very Prosperity-ish) and cleanly implements the self-Curse concept. I admit it looks a bit "I dunno"-ish, but King's Court doesn't look as strong as it is on first glimpse, either - right? My experience is that it's fun to play and not actually weak.

Other cards later, probably.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity
« Reply #45 on: July 08, 2016, 11:05:52 am »
0

Oh man, so i should comment on other cards, too?

Quote
Bronze Worker
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+2 Actions
Discard any number of copper. +1 Card and +$1 per Copper discarded.
This feels like it would be okay for $2, like Cellar. It keeps you the coins of your Coppers at the beginning (but can't discard the Estates nor really uses the action) while giving you an additional action later (without being actually good at sifting at that point). It would be nice, but costing $2 and caring about Copper is a bit un-Prosperity in my book.


Quote
Collector
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action
You may play a Treasure card from your hand.
Draw until you have 4 cards in hand.
Each other player may discard a card.
I don't really like the interaction, because it's useful only if you also go for the card. The concept of playing a Treasure and drawing after that is nice, though. I have seen it before on a card by Co0kieL0rd, so it's probably not as unexpected. Still neat and Prosperity-ish.


Quote
Consortium
Types: Action
Cost: $7
+2 Actions
Choose a number up to 8.  Each player may draw until they have that many cards in hand.  Choose a number down to 3.  Each player who drew discards down to that many cards in hand.
So, you harm yourself that way? Huh, i'm not sure how appropriate the cost is. I wonder whether this is tested. Either way, it's an attack that lacks the attack type, and i really can't say i like that. People always appear to think an attack is less of an attack when it hurts itself, but it only makes it a bad attack. Sorry.

I'm curious why you think Bronze Worker should cost less. In any case, a Prosperity theme is "cares about Treasure", which includes Copper. See Counting House.

Collector's interaction has other benefits too, even though they're niche.  It just guarantees that it can be useful on a given board, which is more than can be said for stuff like Fortress and Tunnel.

Consortium isn't an attack because it's entirely optional. It's as much an attack as Vault. In my earlier comments, I considered possible reasons why it should cost so much.
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Voting!)
« Reply #46 on: July 08, 2016, 11:11:52 am »
0

If nobody draws cards with consortium, I get to go all the way to 8 cards, easy peasy. That's pretty cool ànd I get two actions? Booyah.

And if other people do, well, that's ok. I'll just say the number that allows me too keep my action cards, and maybe a gold or so. But those coppers and estates and maybe curses; I'll discard, and hope he'll have to discard something useful too.

I totally get why consortium costs $7.
« Last Edit: July 08, 2016, 11:13:14 am by AdrianHealey »
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4788
  • Respect: +5113
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity
« Reply #47 on: July 08, 2016, 11:47:28 am »
+1

I'm curious why you think Bronze Worker should cost less. In any case, a Prosperity theme is "cares about Treasure", which includes Copper. See Counting House.
I explained that. It's like a Cellar that gives a few additional bucks at the beginning and likely becomes a Necropolis later. That doesn't seem worth $4 to me at all. And if it costs $2, as i think it should, well, all Prosperity cards cost $3 at least. I guess i always thought of Counting House as a bit anti-thematic (Copper doesn't exactly feel "spendy"), but of course that's debatable. Either way, it seems really not good enough at any point to warrant $4 in my opinion. The most relevant case i can think of would be an engine that discards and redraws the same Coppers multiple times, but i honestly am not a fan of "this is good when you drew your deck" designs. Also, when you play it only after drawing your deck, the second action goes to waste yet again.


Collector's interaction has other benefits too, even though they're niche.  It just guarantees that it can be useful on a given board, which is more than can be said for stuff like Fortress and Tunnel.
Fortress is a Village. It's useful on practically every board. Tunnel is worth disproportionally many points compared to Estate and will at the least influence the endgame. That's still not much, but discarding still is a very common mechanic even then.
I mean, i know cards that interact with Collector exist, but the chance that one of them appears with it is next to none. So it's little enough to say what i said, namely that you (in 90% of the cases) will have to go for that same card to get something from it. It feels a bit too... wanted?


Consortium isn't an attack because it's entirely optional. It's as much an attack as Vault. In my earlier comments, I considered possible reasons why it should cost so much.
Huh, right... Consortium only has you discard if you drew... Okay. So, do i go first here to give other players a hint whether they too want to draw? I guess i do. It still feels a bit like a trap you set up for other players. Do i draw when another player plays this so he can't just keep his cards? Don't i risk too much doing that? Should i wait a second for Thomas to draw cards and hope he loses most of his hand while denying Greg the full 8 cards? But what if Greg doesn't discard at all? I'm not sure i like the "screw yourself over because of trying to deny somebody something"-guessing game here, either.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity
« Reply #48 on: July 08, 2016, 12:34:48 pm »
+1

I'm curious why you think Bronze Worker should cost less. In any case, a Prosperity theme is "cares about Treasure", which includes Copper. See Counting House.
I explained that. It's like a Cellar that gives a few additional bucks at the beginning and likely becomes a Necropolis later. That doesn't seem worth $4 to me at all. And if it costs $2, as i think it should, well, all Prosperity cards cost $3 at least. I guess i always thought of Counting House as a bit anti-thematic (Copper doesn't exactly feel "spendy"), but of course that's debatable. Either way, it seems really not good enough at any point to warrant $4 in my opinion. The most relevant case i can think of would be an engine that discards and redraws the same Coppers multiple times, but i honestly am not a fan of "this is good when you drew your deck" designs. Also, when you play it only after drawing your deck, the second action goes to waste yet again.

A few extra bucks is really good though?? I'm just curious about it because the consensus in comments so far is that it's too strong, but you're saying it's weak instead.  It's an interesting perspective that I'm not fully understanding because of how quickly you're putting it down.

When you play it after drawing your deck, how are +actions wasted?  You could still have terminals to play.

Collector's interaction has other benefits too, even though they're niche.  It just guarantees that it can be useful on a given board, which is more than can be said for stuff like Fortress and Tunnel.
Fortress is a Village. It's useful on practically every board. Tunnel is worth disproportionally many points compared to Estate and will at the least influence the endgame. That's still not much, but discarding still is a very common mechanic even then.
I mean, i know cards that interact with Collector exist, but the chance that one of them appears with it is next to none. So it's little enough to say what i said, namely that you (in 90% of the cases) will have to go for that same card to get something from it. It feels a bit too... wanted?

Fortress is a village (always useful) and is untrashable (needs trasher to be useful).  Tunnel is VP (always useful) and has a discard reaction (needs discarder to be useful).  Collector is a handsize-reducer with built-in draw-to-X (always useful) and it lets other players discard a card (needs draw-to-X, Tunnel, Minion, maybe some other things to be useful).

So if you're focusing on the niche part only, Collector has an advantage over both Fortress and Tunnel in that the board automatically contains something that works with it.  If you're going to complain about the niche-ness of Collector's thing, I think you should be even more miffed about Fortress and Tunnel.  Or are you saying that the main part of it isn't impactful enough on its own?  It sounds useful to me.

Consortium isn't an attack because it's entirely optional. It's as much an attack as Vault. In my earlier comments, I considered possible reasons why it should cost so much.
Huh, right... Consortium only has you discard if you drew... Okay. So, do i go first here to give other players a hint whether they too want to draw? I guess i do. It still feels a bit like a trap you set up for other players. Do i draw when another player plays this so he can't just keep his cards? Don't i risk too much doing that? Should i wait a second for Thomas to draw cards and hope he loses most of his hand while denying Greg the full 8 cards? But what if Greg doesn't discard at all? I'm not sure i like the "screw yourself over because of trying to deny somebody something"-guessing game here, either.

I think the official rule is that you start with the current player and go left for simultaneous things like this.  So the Consortium player picks a number and then chooses to draw.  Then every other player gets the same choice.  When it goes all the way around, the Consortium player picks a number and then everybody who drew discards. 

As the other player, you know the upper number and whether the Consortium player drew.  If they did not draw, you can be reasonably sure that the draw will be followed by "discard down to 3" so you can weigh your options accordingly.  Choosing to follow is trickier because you expose yourself to the discard, but it still shouldn't sting that much because it's bounded.  Best 3 of 8 cards is a pretty good deal compared to your starting 5.  I don't think it's really a "screw yourself over" kind of decision.

I guess it's subjective, but I personally think this kind of deep "mind games" kind of non-attack interaction would be fun.

Edit: By the way, in case it wasn't clear, I really appreciate this kind of back-and-forth discussion; I think it's really helpful.  It was more common in past design contests and I've missed it.
« Last Edit: July 08, 2016, 12:48:25 pm by eHalcyon »
Logged

trivialknot

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 641
  • Respect: +972
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 7: Prosperity (Voting!)
« Reply #49 on: July 08, 2016, 02:01:22 pm »
+1

I'm curious why you think Bronze Worker should cost less. In any case, a Prosperity theme is "cares about Treasure", which includes Copper. See Counting House.
I explained that. It's like a Cellar that gives a few additional bucks at the beginning and likely becomes a Necropolis later. That doesn't seem worth $4 to me at all. And if it costs $2, as i think it should, well, all Prosperity cards cost $3 at least. I guess i always thought of Counting House as a bit anti-thematic (Copper doesn't exactly feel "spendy"), but of course that's debatable. Either way, it seems really not good enough at any point to warrant $4 in my opinion. The most relevant case i can think of would be an engine that discards and redraws the same Coppers multiple times, but i honestly am not a fan of "this is good when you drew your deck" designs. Also, when you play it only after drawing your deck, the second action goes to waste yet again.
A cellar that gives a few additional bucks is so good though.  A gold is a copper that gives a few additional bucks.  Bronze Worker only turns into a Necropolis if you don't draw a single copper with it, and if your thinning is that good you can just trash Bronze Worker.  And besides, the presence of Bronze worker should make you consider not thinning out your copper in the first place, since you're just sifting through it anyway.

Collector's interaction has other benefits too, even though they're niche.  It just guarantees that it can be useful on a given board, which is more than can be said for stuff like Fortress and Tunnel.
Fortress is a Village. It's useful on practically every board. Tunnel is worth disproportionally many points compared to Estate and will at the least influence the endgame. That's still not much, but discarding still is a very common mechanic even then.
I mean, i know cards that interact with Collector exist, but the chance that one of them appears with it is next to none. So it's little enough to say what i said, namely that you (in 90% of the cases) will have to go for that same card to get something from it. It feels a bit too... wanted?

Fortress is a village (always useful) and is untrashable (needs trasher to be useful).  Tunnel is VP (always useful) and has a discard reaction (needs discarder to be useful).  Collector is a handsize-reducer with built-in draw-to-X (always useful) and it lets other players discard a card (needs draw-to-X, Tunnel, Minion, maybe some other things to be useful).

So if you're focusing on the niche part only, Collector has an advantage over both Fortress and Tunnel in that the board automatically contains something that works with it.  If you're going to complain about the niche-ness of Collector's thing, I think you should be even more miffed about Fortress and Tunnel.  Or are you saying that the main part of it isn't impactful enough on its own?  It sounds useful to me.
I think the main effect of the interaction on Collector is to make it more worthwhile to contest it.  If your opponent has a stack of Collectors, you can buy a few to help you sift.  It's like the reaction part of Fool's Gold, which grants a consolation prize to the person who lost the split 2/8.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4  All
 

Page created in 0.156 seconds with 20 queries.