Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Cards I would ban / errata  (Read 14064 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6357
  • Respect: +25671
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #25 on: September 28, 2017, 04:39:00 pm »
+7

Other collectable card games, both online and physical, regularly issue official bans and erratas. I've never understood why Dominion doesn't do the same, though I'm sure there is an explanation somewhere. If casual players are unaware, disagree with a ban or errata, then no harm done, they can ignore it. For more serious players and tournaments, and online where such changes are easy, I think the game would be much better for some minor changes.
The online game has to match the physical. We can't go into people's houses and change their physical cards, and don't want to generate confusion and arguments when people are used to different versions of a card. And you can always just not play with a card you don't like. So we avoid errata. Dominion 2E adds "you may" to three cards so there's no "are they cheating" issue, Intrigue 2E drops the Masquerade pin, Outpost technically has multiple extra turns from different sources play out differently, and then Possession takes debt into account. While we went through and fixed wordings on cards for all pre-Empires expansions, the other changes were non-functional.

While I did change Possession and Masquerade, the chance of me changing another card for power level reasons is extremely low. If you don't enjoy the power level of a particular card, well, don't play with it, that's my advice. If I somehow end up changing the cards for more expansions ala Dominion and Intrigue (and I sure hope I don't), I will replace cards I think are so strong as to make the game bad, not errata them. Masquerade got by with errata because the change almost never matters.

(1) Possession
I would not do Possession today, it messes with the rules too much.

(2) Tournament
My only issues with Tournament are that it's extremely wordy, and I blew it on Bag of Gold and to a lesser degree Diadem. Tournament makes the better player more likely to win, not less. See: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=2798.msg47781#msg47781

(3) Ill-Gotten Gains
Here for simplicity I wish it were just, $6, worth $2, when-gain hands out Curses.

(4) Cultist
I haven't put in the games to get sick of Cultist. I think I have to buy Cultist but that I don't need to go for chaining them. However I recognize that a lot of people are unhappy with it, and like the suggestion someone made, that you either chain or Ruin, not both.

(5) Sauna / Avanto
It's a promo. The whole concept of promos is awful. Part of it is either wasting time on these cards, or accepting that they won't be as balanced. I don't know if I mind Sauna / Avanto, I enjoyed it when playtesting it, but I know people are singling it out as strong.

Given the number of cards in Dominion now, I think it's pretty good to have only 5 cards that need changing. But why not make the game better if you can?
The way to make the online game better is to let each player ban 5 cards from their games; those cards are never randomly picked (but can be forced into a game), even for rated games. I advocate this feature! I don't need anyone playing with e.g. Tournament who doesn't want to.

IRL just don't play with the cards you don't like. There are always going to be people who don't like whatever card; I can't just make the expansions full of bland unobjectionable things. On your list, Tournament is a stand-out card, a card some people have lots of fun with.
Logged

MikeThicke

  • Herbalist
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
  • Respect: +10
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #26 on: September 28, 2017, 04:42:13 pm »
0

Well, I guess I'd have to have Province as an option.
Logged

JW

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 968
  • Shuffle iT Username: JW
  • Respect: +1781
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #27 on: September 28, 2017, 04:51:05 pm »
0

Well, I guess I'd have to have Province as an option.

I think a fairer rule to you that fits the spirit of the challenge would be something like "you need to buy Cultist three times before you can buy other Kingdom cards on $5+ hands."
Logged

Cave-o-sapien

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 887
  • Respect: +1675
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #28 on: September 28, 2017, 04:55:04 pm »
0

No single card in Dominion can dominate "the meta" like what you see in CCGs.

I think the closest example in Dominion is a card that wasn't mentioned: Rebuild. Some large percentage (90%?) of Kingdoms with Rebuild in it will be Rebuild mirror games with only minor wrinkles.

Rebuild isn't that dominant (though I would still choose to ban it from my games because it makes the game less interesting for me). Here is some useful data compiled by a forum user (not me) on gain rates of cards based on the top 20 players on Goko/Making Fun (as of one snapshot from the Isotropish leaderbboard). I can't recall what the time range of the games played, but it was pre-Adventures. Rebuild is gained in only 67.57% of games it appears in.   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13mQ1humtQbPLY9nbKscR65dV7hbGPdI3AQkNjMHZpeM/pubhtml?gid=495443102&single=true

Some of that may be players trying other strategies because they are more fun than Rebuild, but the vast increase in alt-VP from Empires and the further engine-friendliness with Adventures and 2nd editions of Base and Intrigue means that it's increasingly likely that kingdoms with Rebuild won't be simple Rebuild strategies.

Thanks for that. I suspected my number might be high. I wonder if you control for Shelters if it goes up significantly. In any case, I think the point is pretty well-established: even if you despise Rebuild Mirrors, they are less and less likely to happen for a variety of factors, not the least of which is increasing card pool size.
Logged

josh56

  • Thief
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 91
  • Respect: +60
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #29 on: September 28, 2017, 05:10:26 pm »
0

There are definitely some very strong or overpowered cards in Dominion. But let's not pretend that this is avoidable, even for the best game designers.

About the concrete cards, Possession is not overpowered (it is the most expensive card after Colony) but difficult to understand and arguably unfun for the possessed player. I think that the cards provides a unique form of interaction for the game (you gotta think about counters like greening earlier, taking on some Debt the move before you think you might get Possessed and so on) which more than justifies its existence.
Tournament is only swingy. IGG is not overpowered. Cultist and Sauna-Avanto are definitely overpowered (as are other cards like Scrying Pool and Rebuild) and unlike Possession don't do something particularly unique enough to justify their overpoweredness ... but as DXV has pointed out the simple solution is to not use them.
« Last Edit: September 28, 2017, 05:13:10 pm by josh56 »
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11808
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12846
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #30 on: September 28, 2017, 05:30:10 pm »
0

Well, I guess I'd have to have Province as an option.

I think a fairer rule to you that fits the spirit of the challenge would be something like "you need to buy Cultist three times before you can buy other Kingdom cards on $5+ hands."

I don't think that fits the spirit of the challenge, because that doesn't do very much to prevent him from playing a good strategy on almost any Cultist board.

Instead, I propose a match where he has to go for a strategy that can be reasonably described as "just jam as many Cultists as you can and hope you hit them before your opponent" and I have to do something different (but I can use Cultist as a part of a more complex strategy).
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

JW

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 968
  • Shuffle iT Username: JW
  • Respect: +1781
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #31 on: September 28, 2017, 05:50:24 pm »
+2

Regarding Sauna/Avanto, see game 2 of Dan Brook's match (starts about 32 minutes in) and Donald's comment on it:



Game 2, Dan Brooks opens Hermit / Magpie. He only ends up with one Sauna, buying e.g. Pawn over Sauna. The first time he can get Avanto, he gets Festival instead. He ends up with 1 Sauna 3 Avantos to his opponent's 4 Saunas 2 Avantos. He goes on to win the game, for all the world like the presence of Sauna / Avanto didn't make this a dull luckfest.

I don't think that fits the spirit of the challenge, because that doesn't do very much to prevent him from playing a good strategy on almost any Cultist board.

Instead, I propose a match where he has to go for a strategy that can be reasonably described as "just jam as many Cultists as you can and hope you hit them before your opponent" and I have to do something different (but I can use Cultist as a part of a more complex strategy).

Yeah, on 3/4 he needs to open cards that will let him buy Cultists relatively quickly or else this restriction won't mean much.
Logged

MikeThicke

  • Herbalist
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
  • Respect: +10
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #32 on: September 28, 2017, 06:08:57 pm »
0

Well, I guess I'd have to have Province as an option.

I think a fairer rule to you that fits the spirit of the challenge would be something like "you need to buy Cultist three times before you can buy other Kingdom cards on $5+ hands."

I don't think that fits the spirit of the challenge, because that doesn't do very much to prevent him from playing a good strategy on almost any Cultist board.

Instead, I propose a match where he has to go for a strategy that can be reasonably described as "just jam as many Cultists as you can and hope you hit them before your opponent" and I have to do something different (but I can use Cultist as a part of a more complex strategy).

Seems reasonable. I can't tonight, but maybe on the weekend if you're freed.
Logged

theblankman

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 461
  • Respect: +383
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #33 on: September 28, 2017, 07:24:50 pm »
0

(3) Ill-Gotten Gains
Here for simplicity I wish it were just, $6, worth $2, when-gain hands out Curses.
I wish it said, "This pile doesn't count toward ending the game."  Almost all games I've played where someone gains IGG have ended with IGG, Curse and Duchy empty.  Sometimes it's Estate or alt VP instead of Duchy but that doesn't really change how the game goes.  I think a lot of distaste for IGG comes from how it's basically endgame as soon as that pile gets low.  If there was still time to build your deck after junking, like with other junkers, I'd probably enjoy IGG way more.

(4) Cultist
I haven't put in the games to get sick of Cultist. I think I have to buy Cultist but that I don't need to go for chaining them. However I recognize that a lot of people are unhappy with it, and like the suggestion someone made, that you either chain or Ruin, not both.
I was at least one of the people to say this, but that was a while ago so I'd be impressed if it's my post you're remembering.  Still glad you like it. 
Logged
it's a shame that full-random is the de facto standard

dedicateddan

  • 2017 Dominion Online Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
  • Shuffle iT Username: dan brooks
  • Respect: +1058
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #34 on: September 28, 2017, 09:17:42 pm »
0

Regarding Sauna/Avanto, see game 2 of Dan Brook's match (starts about 32 minutes in) and Donald's comment on it:

Game 2, Dan Brooks opens Hermit / Magpie. He only ends up with one Sauna, buying e.g. Pawn over Sauna. The first time he can get Avanto, he gets Festival instead. He ends up with 1 Sauna 3 Avantos to his opponent's 4 Saunas 2 Avantos. He goes on to win the game, for all the world like the presence of Sauna / Avanto didn't make this a dull luckfest.

Borrowing from my other post, Sauna just isn't a good dominion card without the "you may play an Avanto from your hand" line of text.

And if you make your opponent buy most of the Saunas, your deck will likely be in good shape to deny most of the Avantos.

Of course, this game I could have ignored Avanto altogether and threatened an Estate pileout with Festival/Hunting Grounds, but I didn't see that until after the game.
Logged

josh56

  • Thief
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 91
  • Respect: +60
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #35 on: September 28, 2017, 09:51:19 pm »
0

Borrowing from my other post, Sauna just isn't a good dominion card without the "you may play an Avanto from your hand" line of text.

And if you make your opponent buy most of the Saunas, your deck will likely be in good shape to deny most of the Avantos.

Of course, this game I could have ignored Avanto altogether and threatened an Estate pileout with Festival/Hunting Grounds, but I didn't see that until after the game.
I totally disagree with this.

Conditional non-mandatory cantrip (multi-)trashing for 4 is already brilliant in and of itself.
A conditional, retroactive village that makes a draw engine run hyper-smoothly is also brillant for 4.
So that's two great effects combined into one card and it is dubious to claim that one effect is stronger than the other.

The notion that you should allow your opponent to get all of the Saunas such that you can make them worthless via snitching away the Avantos with a deck that has a better economy is only valid if there are other trashers and villages in the Kingdom.
Logged

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #36 on: September 28, 2017, 10:44:11 pm »
+2

* In most decks with Cultist, it is functionally a village because Cultist is either your only action, or very close to it.

If your opponent buys Cultist, you're very likely to have multiple Actions other than Cultist.
Logged

Deadlock39

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1722
  • Respect: +1757
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #37 on: September 29, 2017, 09:26:41 am »
+3

I think Sauna would be a reasonably interesting tasker as a pile on its own without the Avanto thing (maybe cheaper). I also think Sauna/Avanto would be a pretty interesting draw/village option without the trashing on Sauna. As is, it is totally fine, but a bit to "does everything" for my taste. There are obviously boards like Dan's where there are good ways to get draw/actions/trashing and you can do something else. Also, the payload is always different, so it doesn't make the game boring in general.

I think in general split piles would gain something from being 6/6 instead off 5/5 it makes for even numbers in 2 and 3 players, and adds another card to improve "make your opponent dig through the whole top half" strategies.

Commodore Chuckles

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1284
  • Shuffle iT Username: Commodore Chuckles
  • Respect: +1971
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #38 on: September 29, 2017, 09:32:07 am »
+1

Conditional non-mandatory cantrip (multi-)trashing for 4 is already brilliant in and of itself.

Not at the beginning of the game. First you have to buy a Silver, then you have to collide the two. There are plenty of other cheap trashers that are faster.

The main thing I dislike about Saunavanto is that there are an odd number of each. If Sauna is the only splitter, then the first player can have a strong advantage. This is a potential problem with all split piles, but it's particularly bad with this one.

I think in general split piles would gain something from being 6/6 instead off 5/5 it makes for even numbers in 2 and 3 players, and adds another card to improve "make your opponent dig through the whole top half" strategies.

Ah, semi-ninja'd. Yes, this would have been a better idea. Come to think of it, I'm a bit surprised Donald didn't do this. This already sort of has precedent in Port. Though the unfairness factor of 10 would be even worse with the Port pile.
« Last Edit: September 29, 2017, 09:36:41 am by Commodore Chuckles »
Logged

dedicateddan

  • 2017 Dominion Online Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
  • Shuffle iT Username: dan brooks
  • Respect: +1058
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #39 on: September 29, 2017, 11:22:15 am »
+3

So there are two primary tactics with Sauna/Avanto:

1. Contest the pile, aiming to win the split

2. Ignore the pile, forcing the Sauna player to pick up 4-5 Sauna and 2-3 Silver before Avantos

Tactic #1 seems to be the most common, although I like playing with #2, when possible

There are a lot of boards where it's not entirely clear to me which is better
Logged

aku_chi

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 622
  • Shuffle iT Username: aku chi
  • Respect: +1435
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #40 on: September 29, 2017, 11:38:01 am »
+4

So there are two primary tactics with Sauna/Avanto:

1. Contest the pile, aiming to win the split

2. Ignore the pile, forcing the Sauna player to pick up 4-5 Sauna and 2-3 Silver before Avantos

Tactic #1 seems to be the most common, although I like playing with #2, when possible

There are a lot of boards where it's not entirely clear to me which is better

Regarding tactic #2: There's nothing stopping you from grabbing Avantos if you could use the terminal draw.  Indeed, you can put your opponent in a tough spot if you grab 3+ Avantos; now their investment in Saunas won't pay off as much.
Logged

Cave-o-sapien

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 887
  • Respect: +1675
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #41 on: September 29, 2017, 12:02:47 pm »
+1

So there are two primary tactics with Sauna/Avanto:

1. Contest the pile, aiming to win the split

2. Ignore the pile, forcing the Sauna player to pick up 4-5 Sauna and 2-3 Silver before Avantos

Tactic #1 seems to be the most common, although I like playing with #2, when possible

There are a lot of boards where it's not entirely clear to me which is better

Agree. I've had success with #2 before, but it's really hard (for me at least) to predict when it will work. You basically have to make that call on Turn 1 or 2, and if you're wrong, you've conceded the pile to them (and probably the game).
Logged

Cave-o-sapien

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 887
  • Respect: +1675
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #42 on: September 29, 2017, 12:14:07 pm »
+1

I think in general split piles would gain something from being 6/6 instead off 5/5 it makes for even numbers in 2 and 3 players, and adds another card to improve "make your opponent dig through the whole top half" strategies.

I think that would make the bottom 6 cards too inaccessible in 2-player games. It might be right for Sauna/Avanto, but I think it's too much for some of the others.

I've long wondered if 2-player Dominion would be improved by having 8-card supply piles as the standard, with the split piles as 4/4. It would be an interesting variant to try.

Relevant quote from 2011:

Quote from: Donald X
You could ask why I didn't lower every pile for 2 players, rather than just victory piles. That's more of a bother and doesn't really get you anything more. And I like that with 2 players I can get more copies of a popular Action card than with 4 players.

I also tested 8-card non-victory piles during development. It's something I could have lived with, but 10 was better. With 8 it becomes harder to get the cards you want with 4 players. In a bad way.

Where I found it on f.ds
Original source
Logged

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8172
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9625
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #43 on: September 29, 2017, 12:54:29 pm »
+1

So there are two primary tactics with Sauna/Avanto:

1. Contest the pile, aiming to win the split

2. Ignore the pile, forcing the Sauna player to pick up 4-5 Sauna and 2-3 Silver before Avantos

Tactic #1 seems to be the most common, although I like playing with #2, when possible

There are a lot of boards where it's not entirely clear to me which is better

Regarding tactic #2: There's nothing stopping you from grabbing Avantos if you could use the terminal draw.  Indeed, you can put your opponent in a tough spot if you grab 3+ Avantos; now their investment in Saunas won't pay off as much.

Exactly.  I've said it before on here that the Avanto split is more important.
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

sorawotobu

  • Spy
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 85
  • Respect: +140
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #44 on: September 29, 2017, 02:46:17 pm »
+1

Exactly.  I've said it before on here that the Avanto split is more important.

This generalization is invalid. Sometimes there are plenty of Villages but no draw and you're going to want to win the Avanto split while getting one or two Saunas for trashing.
Other times, there are no Villages and all the +buy and good payload in general is terminal; in those games getting 3 of the Saunas is usually decisive. Neither is more important in general, it all depends on the rest of board.

Similarly, sometimes you need to rush the pile hard, sometimes you're better off ignoring it entirely. I've won far more games by ignoring Saunas when my opponent went for them than I have by going for Saunas when my opponent ignored it, which probably means the pile is overrated (although still easily in the top 5 best 4$ imo).

The games where the three Saunas just win suck but that requires a board that didn't have a whole lot going on to begin with so the game may not have been great anyways. Most (~3/4) Sauna/Avanto games are not silly rushes and have relevant decision points.
Logged

crj

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1477
  • Respect: +1644
    • View Profile
Re: Cards I would ban / errata
« Reply #45 on: September 29, 2017, 11:10:50 pm »
0

I think in general split piles would gain something from being 6/6 instead off 5/5 it makes for even numbers in 2 and 3 players, and adds another card to improve "make your opponent dig through the whole top half" strategies.
In the specific case of Sauna/Avanto, since it's a promo you could cheaply and easily get a few more of each and play it that way if you liked.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  All
 

Page created in 0.058 seconds with 21 queries.