Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Dominion clones  (Read 2608 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

crj

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 814
  • Respect: +919
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion clones
« Reply #75 on: March 22, 2018, 01:37:53 pm »
0

*points*

Edge case!!!!!1!1!!
Logged

Tombolo

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 439
  • Respect: +439
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion clones
« Reply #76 on: March 23, 2018, 06:02:35 pm »
0

Am I the only one who likes Ascension at all more than Star Realms? I can't quite figure out why- might just be because I played Ascension first and they feel kinda same-y.

I wouldn't describe it quite as a deckbuilder (even though it was pitched to me as one) but I've been having a lot of fun lately with Baseball Highlights 2045, which has a deckbuilding/drafting element.  The back and forth interactive feel of the mini-game is quite satisfying.

I own Tanto Cuore and am not particularly proud of that fact.  Never actually played it.
Logged
We’ve had a hard day at work, we’ve been looking forward to our Dominion, how can you expect us to play anything else, you ogre.

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5224
  • Respect: +2682
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion clones
« Reply #77 on: March 25, 2018, 03:24:39 am »
0

Am I the only one who likes Ascension at all more than Star Realms? I can't quite figure out why- might just be because I played Ascension first and they feel kinda same-y.

I wouldn't describe it quite as a deckbuilder (even though it was pitched to me as one) but I've been having a lot of fun lately with Baseball Highlights 2045, which has a deckbuilding/drafting element.  The back and forth interactive feel of the mini-game is quite satisfying.

I own Tanto Cuore and am not particularly proud of that fact.  Never actually played it.

I would be proud if I owned Tanto Cuore and you heard it here.

Star Realms sucks, I can't imagine Ascension is worse.
Logged
Also you probably are an expert if you buy two bureaucrats early.

weesh

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 247
  • MOAR MAGPIES
  • Respect: +338
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion clones
« Reply #78 on: March 25, 2018, 12:18:17 pm »
+4

Star Realms sucks, I can't imagine Ascension is worse.

To answer this, you need to first understand that many of the things that makes Star Realms bad also makes Ascension bad:
1) weak, unreliable trashing, that one person is lucky to get, while the other player is SOL.
2) there are often only 1-2 cards that you can afford, so the strategic choices are unsatisfying.
3) you often just get whatever the strongest card is, because in bulky/weak decks, putting together synergies is tougher and less reliable and less rewarding than you'd hope.

I don't like either, but star realms is:
1) much simpler, easier to teach (both the base rules, and the rules on each card)
2) has much more interaction since you are attacking each other, rather than random monsters, and you are given tools to defend yourself.
3) a shitty turn on SR is "this card doesn't improve my deck much" and a shitty turn on Ascension is "i get points for killing the cultist, but my deck isn't any better"
4) shorter (generally, but ESPECIALLY on your first game)
5) actually kinda nice to look at, and the colors help you identify the cards well

When my friend that likes Star Realms asks me to play I think "i guess"
When my friend that likes Ascension asks me to play, I try to convince him to play something else.
Logged

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2757
  • Respect: +1493
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion clones
« Reply #79 on: March 25, 2018, 10:47:34 pm »
+2

About Ascension, this isn't something that matters, but I found the game's over-the-top card names amusing (in a bad way). For example, "Ascetic of the Lidless Eye", which just draws two cards. The name has more words in it than the card text does...
Logged

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5224
  • Respect: +2682
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion clones
« Reply #80 on: March 26, 2018, 01:02:02 am »
0

How do you decide how to value interaction?  Dominion has some edge case boards/games with truly no interaction at all, bridge mega turn mirrors where not enough tension results over anyone pile and the player who dips into VP does it in a turn that ends the game.  It's a spectrum, and some games get decently close to that, then on the other end sometimes it matters intensely what I pass with Masquerade, or there's this one cool game where I noticed my opponent committed to too many terminals and I can harm myself taking the Port split to make his deck really bad and get 'em.

A lot of these clones don't add any interaction, Arctic Scavengers undeniably has massive amounts of interaction but isn't getting market share for it, and no one wants to give Puzzle Strike any mitigating positive points for its heavy interaction.

I feel like interactivity is something people claim to care about but actually don't.
Logged
Also you probably are an expert if you buy two bureaucrats early.

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3637
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2199
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion clones
« Reply #81 on: March 26, 2018, 07:56:25 am »
0

I feel like interactivity is something people claim to care about but actually don't.

I have that same question towards games that are "innovative". Really, good execution and/or brand power seems to be more important for a game's success on a mass scale than how original the game happens to be.
Logged

weesh

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 247
  • MOAR MAGPIES
  • Respect: +338
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion clones
« Reply #82 on: March 26, 2018, 11:37:04 am »
+1

How do you decide how to value interaction?  Dominion has some edge case boards/games with truly no interaction at all, bridge mega turn mirrors where not enough tension results over anyone pile and the player who dips into VP does it in a turn that ends the game.  It's a spectrum, and some games get decently close to that, then on the other end sometimes it matters intensely what I pass with Masquerade, or there's this one cool game where I noticed my opponent committed to too many terminals and I can harm myself taking the Port split to make his deck really bad and get 'em.

A lot of these clones don't add any interaction, Arctic Scavengers undeniably has massive amounts of interaction but isn't getting market share for it, and no one wants to give Puzzle Strike any mitigating positive points for its heavy interaction.

I feel like interactivity is something people claim to care about but actually don't.

Interaction exists on a continuum, and the target for a strategy game is probably "enough that forms counter strategies against you, and you can form counter-counter strategies against them, etc....but not so much that the game is bogged down by it"

But interaction is probably valued in plateaus.
1) insufficient interaction
2) sufficient interaction
3) excessive interaction

For many people, as long as you aren't on the extreme plateaus, it really isn't going to be something that they notice or care about.  And if the game is amazing on other fronts, completely botching the interaction could be forgivable.

"Tales of the Arabian Nights" is just an incredible game on all counts...except that there is no interactions, and that does tangibly hurt the game.  It's better to think of it as a storytelling activity than a game, since each player's stories are divorced from each other.  And people DO care about this one.  There are several fan rulesets addressing this.

But just because interaction isn't valued as highly as it could be, that doesn't mean that changing the amount of interaction is incapable of improving a game.
For instance, the new version of "Roborally" actively increased the interaction between the players, and the game is WAY better for it.  It already had sufficient interaction, but by increasing the likely hood that robots will be near each other, they improved the best part of the game.

I don't think it's fair to say the Arctic Scavengers interaction is not actually valuable because it isn't flying off the shelves.
It has variety problems that keep it from being an interesting game past the 10th play, but the reason I got to 10+ was because the interaction is wickedly fun. Every single turn has you thinking about your opponent, what they are doing, or what they will do.  The contest at the end of each round is wonderfully exciting. 

Paper dominion exists in a place where it has both too much, and too little interactions.  More soft interaction cards like chariot race would be great, but at the same time, these cards get played and the game grinds to a halt while the next player finishes shuffling their deck and drawing.  And a player with 2 cards left in their deck has to wait to see if their discard pile gets further junked before they complete the shuffle of it for their next turn.

Fortunately, sub-par interaction doesn't have a terribly detrimental effect on a game. 
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]  All
 

Page created in 0.097 seconds with 20 queries.