Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 81 82 [83] 84 85 ... 154  All

Author Topic: Weekly Design Contest Thread  (Read 104697 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Gubump

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 652
  • Respect: +376
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2050 on: May 23, 2019, 05:50:44 pm »
0

In this way, Witch doesn't become stronger.
I disagree. Junkers are rarely ignorable but sometimes they are. In this very situation in which you ignore a junker in a 2P game you would perhaps not do the same in a 4P game as the junk pool is larger. So not getting that Marauder in a 2P game might be fine, you can only get a max. of 10 Ruins. But in a 4P game, if you are the only player without a Marauder, you could end up with 40 Ruins.

This isn't correct, because all the other opponents are getting some of that junk as well. Just look at the math in a game where your opponent buys Witch and you don't:

2 player game: You end up with 10 Curses, your opponent ends up with 0.
3 player game, 1 opponent buys Witch, the other doesn't: You end up with 10 Curses, so does the other opponent.
3 player game, both opponents buy Witch: You end up with 10 Curses, each opponent ends up with 5.

The point is that each time a Witch is played in 3 player games, 2 Curses are given out (from the pool of 20). So you can't end up with all 20, or even more than 10, unless some players are using cards like Moat also.

In fact it's much worse in a 2 player game; where you have 10 Curse cards more than your opponent. In a 3 player game, if both opponents buy Witches, you only end up with 5 Curses more than your opponents.

4 player math works out the same way.
True that, I was wrong. But the junking frequency still increases (doubles from a 2P to a 3P game) which is why junkers (as well as trashers and some Reactions) become stronger with an increasing number of players.

But again, you're using stronger to mean "does more total stuff in the game". Your personal copy of Witch isn't stronger. The collective copies of Witch that all players have are stronger. You don't have a better reason to buy Witch over another card in 4 player than 2 player.

I agree with the first three sentences, but not that last one. In a 2 or 3 player game, I can usually trash my Curses faster than I gain them. In games with more players, I feel more inclined to do unto others before they can do unto me.
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Violet CLM and his Dominion Card Image Generator.

segura

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 316
  • Respect: +119
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2051 on: May 23, 2019, 05:53:01 pm »
0

But again, you're using stronger to mean "does more total stuff in the game". Your personal copy of Witch isn't stronger. The collective copies of Witch that all players have are stronger. You don't have a better reason to buy Witch over another card in 4 player than 2 player.
Dominion is not multiplayer solitaire, the Supply and the decks of the opponents matter as much as your own deck. So if the frequency of incoming junk is double as high in a 3P than in a 2P game it seems obvious that the very thing that causes this havoc is also stronger and that the very thing that helps you deal with that very problem, like a trasher or a Moat variant, also increase in strength relative to the 2P case.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8075
  • Respect: +8865
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2052 on: May 23, 2019, 06:01:08 pm »
0

But again, you're using stronger to mean "does more total stuff in the game". Your personal copy of Witch isn't stronger. The collective copies of Witch that all players have are stronger. You don't have a better reason to buy Witch over another card in 4 player than 2 player.
Dominion is not multiplayer solitaire, the Supply and the decks of the opponents matter as much as your own deck. So if the frequency of incoming junk is double as high in a 3P than in a 2P game it seems obvious that the very thing that causes this havoc is also stronger and that the very thing that helps you deal with that very problem, like a trasher or a Moat variant, also increase in strength relative to the 2P case.

I think this is a good argument that trashing is stronger in a 3 player game with Witch than a 2 player game with Witch. But the net effect of buying a Witch yourself is still actually less in 3 players... if you don't buy a Witch, you end up with 10 Curses. If you do buy a Witch, you end up with about 7. It's only 3 extra, and your opponents only end up with 2 fewer each.

In a 2 player game, the difference between buying Witch or not is whether you want Curses to be split 10-0, or 5-5.
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

segura

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 316
  • Respect: +119
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2053 on: May 23, 2019, 06:10:59 pm »
0

But again, you're using stronger to mean "does more total stuff in the game". Your personal copy of Witch isn't stronger. The collective copies of Witch that all players have are stronger. You don't have a better reason to buy Witch over another card in 4 player than 2 player.
Dominion is not multiplayer solitaire, the Supply and the decks of the opponents matter as much as your own deck. So if the frequency of incoming junk is double as high in a 3P than in a 2P game it seems obvious that the very thing that causes this havoc is also stronger and that the very thing that helps you deal with that very problem, like a trasher or a Moat variant, also increase in strength relative to the 2P case.

I think this is a good argument that trashing is stronger in a 3 player game with Witch than a 2 player game with Witch. But the net effect of buying a Witch yourself is still actually less in 3 players... if you don't buy a Witch, you end up with 10 Curses. If you do buy a Witch, you end up with about 7. It's only 3 extra, and your opponents only end up with 2 fewer each.

In a 2 player game, the difference between buying Witch or not is whether you want Curses to be split 10-0, or 5-5.
That's too static, you cannot ignore time. The very fact that 3 instead of 2 player are "fighting" about getting most out of that junk pool, the very fact that you get double the amount of Curses in the same time in a 3P than in a 2P game means that everybody rushes towards junkers (imagine, or play, for the sake of simplicity a Kingdom without trashers) even more so than in a 2P game.

Of course you can argue that junkers and trasher are often enough already super-powerful so them becoming a bit better in a 3P game is quantitatively negligible. But the few 4P junk fest experiences I went through did not feel negligible, the higher junking frequency changed the entire evaluation of the Kingdom.

The higher junking frequency is also why Cultist is so strong.
Logged

Gubump

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 652
  • Respect: +376
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2054 on: May 23, 2019, 06:11:36 pm »
0

But again, you're using stronger to mean "does more total stuff in the game". Your personal copy of Witch isn't stronger. The collective copies of Witch that all players have are stronger. You don't have a better reason to buy Witch over another card in 4 player than 2 player.
Dominion is not multiplayer solitaire, the Supply and the decks of the opponents matter as much as your own deck. So if the frequency of incoming junk is double as high in a 3P than in a 2P game it seems obvious that the very thing that causes this havoc is also stronger and that the very thing that helps you deal with that very problem, like a trasher or a Moat variant, also increase in strength relative to the 2P case.

I think this is a good argument that trashing is stronger in a 3 player game with Witch than a 2 player game with Witch. But the net effect of buying a Witch yourself is still actually less in 3 players... if you don't buy a Witch, you end up with 10 Curses. If you do buy a Witch, you end up with about 7. It's only 3 extra, and your opponents only end up with 2 fewer each.

In a 2 player game, the difference between buying Witch or not is whether you want Curses to be split 10-0, or 5-5.

While I still think that Segura's card is bad design, I'm starting to see his side of this argument. Let's say you don't buy a Witch and everybody else does. In a 3P game, since there are two sources of Curses, the Curses will run out and you'll get 10 Curses twice as quickly as in a 2P game. Because of this, it's more important to buy a Witch earlier if you want to avoid getting 10 Curses. So in a way, with more players, the net effect of buying a Witch is made more impactful in some ways and less impactful in others with the number of players. One could argue either way whether an individual Witch is stronger or weaker with more players.
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Violet CLM and his Dominion Card Image Generator.

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8075
  • Respect: +8865
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2055 on: May 23, 2019, 06:25:00 pm »
0

But again, you're using stronger to mean "does more total stuff in the game". Your personal copy of Witch isn't stronger. The collective copies of Witch that all players have are stronger. You don't have a better reason to buy Witch over another card in 4 player than 2 player.
Dominion is not multiplayer solitaire, the Supply and the decks of the opponents matter as much as your own deck. So if the frequency of incoming junk is double as high in a 3P than in a 2P game it seems obvious that the very thing that causes this havoc is also stronger and that the very thing that helps you deal with that very problem, like a trasher or a Moat variant, also increase in strength relative to the 2P case.

I think this is a good argument that trashing is stronger in a 3 player game with Witch than a 2 player game with Witch. But the net effect of buying a Witch yourself is still actually less in 3 players... if you don't buy a Witch, you end up with 10 Curses. If you do buy a Witch, you end up with about 7. It's only 3 extra, and your opponents only end up with 2 fewer each.

In a 2 player game, the difference between buying Witch or not is whether you want Curses to be split 10-0, or 5-5.

While I still think that Segura's card is bad design, I'm starting to see his side of this argument. Let's say you don't buy a Witch and everybody else does. In a 3P game, since there are two sources of Curses, the Curses will run out and you'll get 10 Curses twice as quickly as in a 2P game. Because of this, it's more important to buy a Witch earlier if you want to avoid getting 10 Curses. So in a way, with more players, the net effect of buying a Witch is made more impactful in some ways and less impactful in others with the number of players. One could argue either way whether an individual Witch is stronger or weaker with more players.

You will get the Curses faster whether you buy a Witch or not. You canít change that. The only thing you can change is the total number; and that number can be changed a lot more in 2 player. A 10-0 Curse split is huge, and youíll lose. A 10-5-5 Curse split is not as big of a deal; and even if you buy Witch it only changes to 7-7-6; a smaller change.
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

Commodore Chuckles

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1059
  • Shuffle iT Username: Commodore Chuckles
  • Respect: +1363
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2056 on: May 23, 2019, 06:26:32 pm »
+1



This will get cleaned up at the end of the last opponent's turn because it doesn't do anything during your next turn. I don't know whether that's intentional or not. (I'm pretty sure this is how Durations work but someone can shout at me if I'm wrong.)

Hmm, yes, I believe the rulings on Coin of the Realm called on a Caravan Guard tell us that all players discard in-play cards during all cleanup phases, not only during their own cleanup phase. It should rarely matter at all. In fact, even if it did stay in play, it would never cause you to get a coffer and a debt from your own gains (unless you gain with Vampire after playing this).

On the contrary, it matters a great deal. If it's discarded before your turn starts you can play it every turn instead of every other turn.
Logged

boggreaux

  • Pawn
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2
  • Respect: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2057 on: May 23, 2019, 06:29:33 pm »
0

Updated Submission:


change log:
Replaced When you draw this card from your deck, trash it and gain a Will-O'-Wisp
« Last Edit: May 23, 2019, 08:12:57 pm by boggreaux »
Logged

Gubump

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 652
  • Respect: +376
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2058 on: May 23, 2019, 06:35:41 pm »
+1

Hello,
here is my card submission:

thanks! :D

Isn't "from your deck" redundant? Where else would you draw cards from?
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Violet CLM and his Dominion Card Image Generator.

boggreaux

  • Pawn
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2
  • Respect: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2059 on: May 23, 2019, 06:54:00 pm »
0

Hello,
here is my card submission:

thanks! :D

Isn't "from your deck" redundant? Where else would you draw cards from?

If you're able to retrieve the card from the discard pile, you don't have to trash it.
Logged

Gubump

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 652
  • Respect: +376
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2060 on: May 23, 2019, 06:54:44 pm »
+1

Hello,
here is my card submission:

thanks! :D

Isn't "from your deck" redundant? Where else would you draw cards from?

If you're able to retrieve the card from the discard pile, you don't have to trash it.

That's not drawing.
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Violet CLM and his Dominion Card Image Generator.

hhelibebcnofnena

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 330
  • Respect: +192
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2061 on: May 23, 2019, 08:25:24 pm »
0

Updated Submission:


change log:
Replaced When you draw this card from your deck, trash it and gain a Will-O'-Wisp

This would work online, but not IRL. People are bad at remembering effects that hurt them. I consistently forget when I have debt when playing IRL, and only remember because my opponents remember. There needs to be something to keep you honest, because your opponents can't see what you draw.
Logged
Hydrogen Helium Lithium Beryllium Boron Carbon Nitrogen Oxygen Fluorine Neon Sodium

Gubump

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 652
  • Respect: +376
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2062 on: May 23, 2019, 08:35:14 pm »
0

Updated Submission:


change log:
Replaced When you draw this card from your deck, trash it and gain a Will-O'-Wisp

This would work online, but not IRL. People are bad at remembering effects that hurt them. I consistently forget when I have debt when playing IRL, and only remember because my opponents remember. There needs to be something to keep you honest, because your opponents can't see what you draw.

I agree with the second part, but it should be easy to remember. Its color stands out and you do it immediately when you draw it. Debt doesn't trigger immediately. I fully agree with the no honesty issue, though.
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Violet CLM and his Dominion Card Image Generator.

hhelibebcnofnena

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 330
  • Respect: +192
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2063 on: May 23, 2019, 10:02:30 pm »
+1

Updated Submission:


change log:
Replaced When you draw this card from your deck, trash it and gain a Will-O'-Wisp

This would work online, but not IRL. People are bad at remembering effects that hurt them. I consistently forget when I have debt when playing IRL, and only remember because my opponents remember. There needs to be something to keep you honest, because your opponents can't see what you draw.

I agree with the second part, but it should be easy to remember. Its color stands out and you do it immediately when you draw it. Debt doesn't trigger immediately. I fully agree with the no honesty issue, though.

Never doubt the ability of humans to forget. It's pretty impressive. Just because something is easy to remember doesn't mean people will remember it all the time. When was the last time you walked into a room and forgotten why? I'd be very impressed if anyone here could truthfully say it was more than two months ago.
Logged
Hydrogen Helium Lithium Beryllium Boron Carbon Nitrogen Oxygen Fluorine Neon Sodium

majiponi

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 516
  • Respect: +419
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2064 on: May 23, 2019, 11:18:56 pm »
+1

Monoculture:


I don't think this should have the Debt icons at the top corners. The top corners are only for how much the Treasure is worth.
I disagree. Potion features a Potion on the top so what we actually see on the top is what a Treasure card produces.
This very card produces 5 Coins as well as a variable amount of Debt so it is not bad to show all parts of production on the top (unlike with Capital you also get the Debt immediately).

But why does Ducat not say +1 Coffers in the corners then?

Debt and coffers are tokens, not treasures. So it made sense to remove the ? Debt on the top. The card submission has been updated with clearer language and a different cost:


This won't work properly.This only counts Durations or a copy of this.
Logged

Kudasai

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 433
  • Respect: +230
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2065 on: May 23, 2019, 11:39:57 pm »
0

Monoculture:


I don't think this should have the Debt icons at the top corners. The top corners are only for how much the Treasure is worth.
I disagree. Potion features a Potion on the top so what we actually see on the top is what a Treasure card produces.
This very card produces 5 Coins as well as a variable amount of Debt so it is not bad to show all parts of production on the top (unlike with Capital you also get the Debt immediately).

But why does Ducat not say +1 Coffers in the corners then?

Debt and coffers are tokens, not treasures. So it made sense to remove the ? Debt on the top. The card submission has been updated with clearer language and a different cost:


This won't work properly.This only counts Durations or a copy of this.

The check should happen "At the end of your Buy phase" or "At the start of your Clean-up". The latter if you want to count Night cards.
Logged

herw

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 122
  • Shuffle iT Username: Dominion-online: herw (basic account) and Herwig (Gold)
  • Respect: +47
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2066 on: May 24, 2019, 12:34:29 am »
0

I receive the impression, that some cards are a joint project, which is not the sense of this challenge? Shouldn't be the discussion after judgement?
« Last Edit: May 24, 2019, 12:39:51 am by herw »
Logged

Gubump

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 652
  • Respect: +376
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2067 on: May 24, 2019, 12:39:37 am »
0

Updated Submission:


change log:
Replaced When you draw this card from your deck, trash it and gain a Will-O'-Wisp

This would work online, but not IRL. People are bad at remembering effects that hurt them. I consistently forget when I have debt when playing IRL, and only remember because my opponents remember. There needs to be something to keep you honest, because your opponents can't see what you draw.

I agree with the second part, but it should be easy to remember. Its color stands out and you do it immediately when you draw it. Debt doesn't trigger immediately. I fully agree with the no honesty issue, though.

Never doubt the ability of humans to forget. It's pretty impressive. Just because something is easy to remember doesn't mean people will remember it all the time. When was the last time you walked into a room and forgotten why? I'd be very impressed if anyone here could truthfully say it was more than two months ago.

This would be more like forgetting what you were doing even if you had a bright neon sign right in front of you telling you what you came in to the room for.
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Violet CLM and his Dominion Card Image Generator.

Gubump

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 652
  • Respect: +376
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2068 on: May 24, 2019, 12:43:42 am »
0

Monoculture:


I don't think this should have the Debt icons at the top corners. The top corners are only for how much the Treasure is worth.
I disagree. Potion features a Potion on the top so what we actually see on the top is what a Treasure card produces.
This very card produces 5 Coins as well as a variable amount of Debt so it is not bad to show all parts of production on the top (unlike with Capital you also get the Debt immediately).

But why does Ducat not say +1 Coffers in the corners then?

Debt and coffers are tokens, not treasures. So it made sense to remove the ? Debt on the top. The card submission has been updated with clearer language and a different cost:


This won't work properly.This only counts Durations or a copy of this.

The check should happen "At the end of your Buy phase" or "At the start of your Clean-up". The latter if you want to count Night cards.

Option 1: Cards are discarded from play in any order. You discard Monoculture last so that only Monocultures are in play when you discard it from play.

Option 2: Cards are discarded from play all at once. Since these discards are all concurrent, you resolve discarding each card in any order... effectively the same as option 1.

You want Walled Village wording: "At the start of Clean-up, take <1> per differently named card you have in play, and then you may pay off <>."
« Last Edit: May 24, 2019, 12:45:54 am by Gubump »
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Violet CLM and his Dominion Card Image Generator.

NoMoreFun

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1511
  • Respect: +1109
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2069 on: May 24, 2019, 01:24:43 am »
+1

« Last Edit: May 25, 2019, 12:08:01 pm by NoMoreFun »
Logged

King Leon

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 455
  • Respect: +360
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2070 on: May 24, 2019, 02:06:46 am »
0

Updated Submission:


change log:
Replaced When you draw this card from your deck, trash it and gain a Will-O'-Wisp

This is actually abusable with Envoy, Wishing Well or Mystic. It is also very harmful in multiplayer. For example, if you are player 4, you start turn 2 with 3 Curses (You can still buy  Flashing Lights in most cases, though.)

With Travelling Fair or Poach the first player advantage drastically increases.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2019, 02:12:07 am by King Leon »
Logged

segura

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 316
  • Respect: +119
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2071 on: May 24, 2019, 02:13:54 am »
0

Updated Submission:


change log:
Replaced When you draw this card from your deck, trash it and gain a Will-O'-Wisp
If you want this to be able to hand out more than 10 Curses in multiplayer, you could use exchange instead of trash.
Logged

segura

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 316
  • Respect: +119
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2072 on: May 24, 2019, 02:18:46 am »
0



This will get cleaned up at the end of the last opponent's turn because it doesn't do anything during your next turn. I don't know whether that's intentional or not. (I'm pretty sure this is how Durations work but someone can shout at me if I'm wrong.)
Yeah, "until your next turn" is ambiguous. I guess I should reword it into "until the end of your next turn", then it gets discarded normally.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2019, 02:22:43 am by segura »
Logged

mail-mi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1202
  • Shuffle iT Username: mail-mi
  • Come play some Forum Mafia with us!
  • Respect: +1236
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2073 on: May 24, 2019, 02:36:26 am »
0



Here's my attempt at a balanced debt attack that won't leave anyone swimming in debt.
Logged
I currently imagine mail-mi wearing a dark trenchcoat and a bowler hat, hunched over a bit, toothpick in his mouth, holding a gun in his pocket.  One bead of sweat trickling down his nose.

'And what is it that ye shall hope for? Behold I say unto you that ye shall have hope through the atonement of Christ and the power of his resurrection, to be raised unto life eternal, and this because of your faith in him according to the promise." - Moroni 7:41, the Book of Mormon

faust

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2563
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +3537
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2074 on: May 24, 2019, 02:42:35 am »
+1



Quote
Banker
Action - $2

Play a non-Duration Action card costing up to $6 from the supply, leaving it there. Take debt equal to its cost in coin.
Logged
Since the number of points is within a constant factor of the number of city quarters, in the long run we can get (4 - ε) ↑↑ n points in n turns for any ε > 0.
Pages: 1 ... 81 82 [83] 84 85 ... 154  All
 

Page created in 0.23 seconds with 21 queries.