Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 119 120 [121] 122 123 ... 170  All

Author Topic: Weekly Design Contest Thread  (Read 135604 times)

1 Member and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

mail-mi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1207
  • Shuffle iT Username: mail-mi
  • Come play some Forum Mafia with us!
  • Respect: +1240
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3000 on: August 04, 2019, 03:02:19 am »
+1

I will start judging tomorrow around 4pm forum time, at which point the contest will be closed.
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

NoMoreFun

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1522
  • Respect: +1126
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3001 on: August 04, 2019, 08:08:29 am »
+6

My new entry

« Last Edit: August 04, 2019, 08:34:24 am by NoMoreFun »
Logged

Fly-Eagles-Fly

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 370
  • Respect: +158
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3002 on: August 04, 2019, 04:27:56 pm »
0

Hey guys, I'm back at least for a while. I think I'm still on time for the village contest. It has been a while since I've designed a card or even played dominion other than 1 or 2 games, so I don't really know if this is balanced:
Logged

Fly-Eagles-Fly

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 370
  • Respect: +158
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3003 on: August 04, 2019, 04:28:50 pm »
0

I will start judging tomorrow around 4pm forum time, at which point the contest will be closed.
Just noticed this post, am I in time?
Logged

mail-mi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1207
  • Shuffle iT Username: mail-mi
  • Come play some Forum Mafia with us!
  • Respect: +1240
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3004 on: August 04, 2019, 05:33:26 pm »
0

I will start judging tomorrow around 4pm forum time, at which point the contest will be closed.
Just noticed this post, am I in time?
I'm just starting judging now, so I'll go ahead and count it.
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

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8128
  • Respect: +8899
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3005 on: August 04, 2019, 06:02:32 pm »
0

My new entry



“+2 actions in your action phase” is confusing... not sure what you mean by it.
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

Fly-Eagles-Fly

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 370
  • Respect: +158
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3006 on: August 04, 2019, 06:24:47 pm »
0

My new entry



“+2 actions in your action phase” is confusing... not sure what you mean by it.
I think it means "if you gain, play, or trash this in your action phase +2 actions, if you gain or trash (when would you play it?) outside of your action phase, +1 coffers."
Logged

pst

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 566
  • Respect: +868
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3007 on: August 04, 2019, 06:29:49 pm »
0

I think it means "if you gain, play, or trash this in your action phase +2 actions, if you gain or trash (when would you play it?) outside of your action phase, +1 coffers."

For example with Scepter.
Logged

ConMan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1359
  • Respect: +1624
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3008 on: August 04, 2019, 08:19:49 pm »
+5

Would it work better worded as:

"When you gain, play or trash this, if it is your Action phase: +2 Actions; otherwise, +1 Coffers"
Logged

anordinaryman

  • Thief
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 96
  • Respect: +72
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3009 on: August 04, 2019, 11:39:18 pm »
+1

I've decided Camp is more appropriate at 5


I toyed around with sample kingdoms, and most of the time this plays as far better than a 4 cost card. There are kingdoms where you have beggar, you won't buy this card probably. It depends on the kingdom whether this card is worth buying. But on the kingdoms this card is worth buying (there are actually a lot of them), it turns our this is very powerful for a 4 cost card. Especially since it ostensibly gets better with every single play. A lot of the time, the card ends up as +1card +3 actions with some bonus as the weakest it can be, and even that seems okay at 5.
Logged

mail-mi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1207
  • Shuffle iT Username: mail-mi
  • Come play some Forum Mafia with us!
  • Respect: +1240
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3010 on: August 05, 2019, 04:08:21 am »
+3

Sorry y’all, I was judging this but then my fiancee came over and well I can’t just sit looking at dominion cards at that point. Lots of really good entries in this contest. I’m not very good at providing feedback, but it was hard to pick a winner.



I’ve seen a lot of ideas for the “make a card give +2 of something instead of +1” and I think this is the best one I’ve seen yet. It’s only as good as Village if the next card played gives + Cards, but can also be better depending on what the next card is, so it seems like the price is right. A good, fun, balanced card.



It’s simple, I like it. A little bit boring, but seems balanced. I think putting the coin on the first option was the right move.




I remember seeing this card a while ago, and I like it. I think the overpay makes the card a lot stronger because then you don’t need the village as often. I don’t know how often I’d want this over just Vanillage though, because how many times are there differently named cards of the same cost that I want over what I already have in my deck?



I’m not sure if this card is playable. Usually, you want a lot of villages, but having more than 1 of these in play can basically shut you out of the game. Was there a reason you didn’t have “Take 1 debt” instead?




A good attempt at trash-for-+Actions. I think the hunch that this is imbalanced if it can trash/discard victory cards is correct. It makes for some interesting decisions for sure. The on-trash benefit seems tacked on, but then again, so do several other on-trash benefits.



It seems maybe just a little too strong. Smithy variants become +4 Cards, +2 Actions; and Villages become +2 Cards, +4 Actions. I wonder if you’ve playtested it without the gain-to-hand, like Cobbler?



Like you said in your post, looks like Mill, but serves a different purpose. I think limiting the discard to Victory cards is a good idea, but also encourages single-minded pile rushes in Donjon because how often are people going to want to keep their estates around, even if this is the only Village? I think it’s a good design, though.



Making this weaker and putting it at $6 was the right idea, I think. I like the potential for huge money plays with this and a bunch of non-terminals. Seems like a big “winner wins more” card though, because if you’re already getting a bunch of cards in play, you’re doing pretty well for yourself already. You can’t just mindlessly play cards in whatever order with this around, and I like that.



I’m not sure what to think of this card. It’s tricky to use. It also looks a little bit too much like Minion with both options to me as well.



This is too complicated. I also really dislike the rules weirdness of “this is an Attack-Looter but it’s not.” I think the card would be just fine without the Attack and Reaction options.

Slave Merchant
cost $2 - Action
+2 Actions
+1 Buy
+$1
You may play a Treasure.
You may buy a card.

This is strictly better than Villa on-play. Villa has the on-gain madness, but once it’s in your deck it’s worse than this card. This is can also be better than Squire at the same cost as well.

Slum Village (Action - Reaction) [$4]

+1 Card
+2 Actions

———

When an opponent trashes a card, you may discard this from your hand, to gain a copy of that card from the Supply.

I think this is a neat design, but also discourages cool Remodel tricks. No more Remodel Province to Province, or Apprenticing province for 8 cards, unless you want to give your opponent a free province. I think this may work if it said “non-victory card,” but even then it discourages TFB tricks.



I think this is really creative at first glance, but then at second glance, this looks exactly like a Lost Arts that can only put the +1 Action token on a specific set of $2 cards. The set up is a little confusing, does it put a $2 from the Supply, or from outside the game? Still a cool idea though.



Simple, brief, and balanced. I like it. It’s impossible to trigger without some form of extra draw, which means also needing some additional form of draw or having 2 of these and a stop card. I wonder if it’s a little weak as compared to Lost City, but it seems to be at the right price point.



The village that creates other Villages. Can be really useful for when you’re in an action pinch, or for turning your old trashers or cursers into something more useful. Seems balanced at $4 too. I like it.



I really like this card. It seems well priced and well balanced. I don’t have much more to say about it, really.



At first I thought, “discarding an action to get an extra action would suck,” but then I realized you can get more Plantations and discard those to get your extra actions. Seems balanced at $2, and I like the concept.



When this is the only village, this is almost always an overpriced Necropolis, and with other villages I wonder if it would be too easy to trigger. Comparing this to Encampment, I think this is a little too weak.



I think this card is a little too strong. It needs an on-gain penalty (simlar to Lost City) I think. Maybe the penalty only happens if there are no empty supply piles? Getting a lost city for $4 is just too much.



This seems like it would be good at trashing those 3 estates and then become an expensive Silk Merchant with mandatory trashing through the rest of the game. +Actions just don’t seem valuable enough to be trashing all your good cards with this. Even with the +Buy on Industrial Village, Recruiter seems so much better because you can save those Villagers for later.



This is novel. It’ll take a little more finesse to use this, and you can’t just click on your village over and over. It seems like a good $2 village.



This is also interesting. I feel like Villa already covers the “get more Actions by gaining this” ground, though there could be more ground to cover there. This also effectively costs $3 when purchased, but unlike Villa you have to save the extra $1 you get. All-in-all, I like it but I think I like Villa better.



Seems balanced at $4, I think. Not giving +1 Card really hurts and makes it harder to get + lots of actions, for money and trashing, which makes it more balanced and interesting to use.

Lots of good cards this time, but unfortunately there can only be one winner.

Winner: Neighboring Village, by Aquila It’s the first time I’ve ever seen a card-number-modifier actually look balanced instead of too weak or too strong, and it’s a really creative way of doing it. Congrats!

Runners-up:: Midwife by RTT; Hillside City by Freddy10
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

Aquila

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 223
  • Respect: +211
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3011 on: August 05, 2019, 08:10:08 am »
+1

Ah great, thanks mail-mi for your time in judging everyone's entries! Quite a few good designs this time round.
For now, I suppose it has to be...

Contest #39: a Duration card.
A very open book. But READ THIS: you know why this contest is here, we're seeing 2 new promo Durations come to the game. I will favour designs that could convincingly be promos. Cover new mechanical territory if you can, and don't be afraid of complexity as this isn't going to be a judging factor. The less like similar to any official card, the better. Use other (card shaped) components in your design if you like.
Think of things that will actually add to the game, and avoid the design mistakes of things like Stash.

Anticipated judging time: Monday 12th August 10am forum time.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2019, 10:59:06 am by Aquila »
Logged

spineflu

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 261
  • +1 Post. At the start of your next turn +1 Respect
  • Respect: +102
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3012 on: August 05, 2019, 09:18:48 am »
0

]It’s simple, I like it. A little bit boring, but seems balanced. I think putting the coin on the first option was the right move.
yeah i was thinking villages should be simple. Also it's boring because i seem to kick up a shitstorm every time I think outside of vanilla.



i guess there's power grid fans on this forum so this should be right up your alley. forgive the bad photoshop work, I do much better with physical art.


ft.


a classic spineflu hubris card.
If you really wanna make it fit entirely as a promo card, you could have a punchout coin token on the same cardboard slug as the Market Demand track.

edit history:
v4: Card text for Commodity is changed to read:
Quote
If you have a Commodity in play, increase the Market Demand track one step.

$1 plus $ based on the current position of the Market Demand track.
-
At the start of your next turn, +$1.
When you discard this from play, lower the Market Demand track one step.
-
Setup: In games using this, include the Market Demand track when setting up the Kingdom.

v2: updated first sentence to "If you have an even number of Commodities in play, $2; Otherwise $1." to make it less absurdly scaling.

v1: Commodity - Treasure / Duration - $5
"
+$1 per Commodity you have in play.

+$ based on the current position of the Market Demand track.
-
On your next turn, +$1

When you discard this from play, lower the Market Demand track one step.
-
Setup: In games using this, include the Market Demand track when setting up the Kingdom.
"

Market Demand (Coffers-style mat for tracking Market Demand value)
Setup: Place a coin token on the right-most space of the track. When a card instructs you to lower the track, move the coin token to the next space on the left.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2019, 11:56:11 am by spineflu »
Logged
sometime-maintainer of the Weekly Design Contest trello

segura

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 370
  • Respect: +143
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3013 on: August 05, 2019, 09:48:25 am »
+2

A shot at a Duration with a variable length:


$5
Fishmonger
Action-Duration

+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy

———————
While this is in play, at the start of your turn, +1 Buy and Action cards cost $1 less during your turn (but no less than $0).
This stays in play until any player, including you, has 6 Action cards in play. Set it aside and discard it during Clean-up.


I don't know whether the wording is clear. The idea is that this should get immediately discarded when somebody has 6 Actions in play.
I am not sure about the parameters. This could be too expensive at $5 and 6 Action is fairly arbitrary; it requires testing to see what the best number of Actions is.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2019, 10:30:46 am by segura »
Logged

spineflu

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 261
  • +1 Post. At the start of your next turn +1 Respect
  • Respect: +102
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3014 on: August 05, 2019, 09:57:49 am »
0

A shot at a Duration with a variable length:


$5
Fishmonger
Action-Duration

+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy

———————
While this is in play, at the start of your turn, +1 Buy and Action cards cost $1 less during your turn (but no less than $0).
This stays in play until any player, including you, has 6 Action cards in play.


I don't know whether the wording is clear. The idea is that this should get immediately discarded when somebody has 6 Actions in play.
I am not sure about the parameters. This could be too expensive at $5 and 6 Action is fairly arbitrary; it requires testing to see what the best number of Actions is.

so
edge case nitpicking but if there were a bunch of treasure-action or night-actions out played in the treasure/night phases, would that still count towards the potential shutdown on this?

less edge case nitpicking but when you play six of these on a turn, are they immediately discarded? or do they wait around until your cleanup phase for that? If they're discarded right away, what stops you from thinning your deck to six or seven of these, autocycling them for infinity buys, then playing three and clearing the copper, silver and estates piles for a game over/victory?

i feel like at $4 you'd want your cantrips to not provide cost reduction AND +Buys, even if they're self-scrapping. Maybe have them provide cost reduction OR buys based on whether there's an even/odd number of cards in play (kinda like that one treasure from nocture whose name is escaping me), like "if there's an odd number of action cards in play, +1 Buy; otherwise, Action cards cost $1 less during your turn (but no less than $0)"?

« Last Edit: August 05, 2019, 09:58:52 am by spineflu »
Logged
sometime-maintainer of the Weekly Design Contest trello

segura

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 370
  • Respect: +143
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3015 on: August 05, 2019, 10:06:06 am »
0

so
edge case nitpicking but if there were a bunch of treasure-action or night-actions out played in the treasure/night phases, would that still count towards the potential shutdown on this?
Yes.

Quote
less edge case nitpicking but when you play six of these on a turn, are they immediately discarded? or do they wait around until your cleanup phase for that? If they're discarded right away, what stops you from thinning your deck to six or seven of these, autocycling them for infinity buys, then playing three and clearing the copper, silver and estates piles for a game over/victory?
The infinite loop cannot arise as you play the card, draw a card and only then, if the condition is fulfilled, discard all your Fishmongers. Furthermore, note that the cost reduction is only active as long as Fishmongers are in play and that Fishmonger only reduces the price of Actions.
But you are right that it is possible to play a copy of Fishmonger several times per turn. This is probably not a big issue as many Buys are of limited use. The problem of discarding the card like all other Durations, during Clean-up, runs into the issue of the cost reduction for Actions still being active.

Quote
i feel like at $4 you'd want your cantrips to not provide cost reduction AND +Buys
That's why I chose an initial price of $5.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2019, 10:07:54 am by segura »
Logged

spineflu

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 261
  • +1 Post. At the start of your next turn +1 Respect
  • Respect: +102
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3016 on: August 05, 2019, 10:07:21 am »
0

so
edge case nitpicking but if there were a bunch of treasure-action or night-actions out played in the treasure/night phases, would that still count towards the potential shutdown on this?
Yes.

Quote
less edge case nitpicking but when you play six of these on a turn, are they immediately discarded? or do they wait around until your cleanup phase for that? If they're discarded right away, what stops you from thinning your deck to six or seven of these, autocycling them for infinity buys, then playing three and clearing the copper, silver and estates piles for a game over/victory?
The infinite loop cannot arise as you play the card, draw a card and only then, if the condition is fulfilled, discard all your Fishmongers. Furthermore, Fishmonger only reduces the price of Actions.

that's why you've got seven - six to play to trigger the discard, one to yeet the discard back to the draw pile.

Additionally, infinity buys can still buy out the copper pile, which in a gardens game or game with Action-Victory cards makes it break, not to mention you can still three pile on actions whenever


Quote
i feel like at $4 you'd want your cantrips to not provide cost reduction AND +Buys
That's why I chose an initial price of $5.

sorry, was going off your first post of it when I was replying.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2019, 10:11:09 am by spineflu »
Logged
sometime-maintainer of the Weekly Design Contest trello

segura

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 370
  • Respect: +143
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3017 on: August 05, 2019, 10:19:13 am »
0

that's why you've got seven - six to play to trigger the discard, one to yeet the discard back to the draw pile.
Sure, you could build a deck of 6 Fishmongers, play them all, then play 5 again. You will have 11 Buys and all Actions will cost $5 less. That's great, you can get a lot of engine components in one turn. But in all the subsequent turns, you will not be able to keep the Fishmongers in play so you will only profit from the extra Buys; they will degenerate into mere Market Squares for $5 (respectively double Market Squares).
I think a more realistic scenario is one in which you will gain less Fishmongers and build up your engine more gradually.

I will consider some alternative in which the card lands in "nirvana" once the 6 Action triggers is fulfilled and only lands in your discard pile during Clean-up. That's a bit messy but it avoids the weird "play a Fishmonger twic or thrice per turn" thingy.

Additionally, infinity buys can still buy out the copper pile, which in a gardens game or game with Action-Victory cards makes it break, not to mention you can still three pile on actions whenever
I already pointed out that you cannot generate infinite Buys: you first play Fishmonger, draw a card and then all the Fishmongers land in your discard pile. If I understand the rules correctly, when you play a card you first execute all the stuff on it from top to bottom before it is "in play".
So you'd need infinite draw power to generate infinite Buys.
Logged

spineflu

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 261
  • +1 Post. At the start of your next turn +1 Respect
  • Respect: +102
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3018 on: August 05, 2019, 10:21:21 am »
0

that's why you've got seven - six to play to trigger the discard, one to yeet the discard back to the draw pile.
Sure, you could build a deck of 6 Fishmongers, play them all, then play 5 again. You will have 11 Buys and all Actions will cost $5 less. That's great, you can get a lot of engine components in one turn. But in all the subsequent turns, you will not be able to keep the Fishmongers in play so you will only profit from the extra Buys; they will degenerate into mere Market Squares for $5 (respectively double Market Squares).
I think a more realistic scenario is one in which you will gain less Fishmongers and build up your engine more gradually.

Bear with me, because I think it's a neat card that deserves to be in the running: You've gotta CYA for your edge cases, not just the nominal uses.
You've got a deck with seven Fishmongers.
You've got a hand  of 5 Fishmongers.
You play one. You draw a Fishmonger.
You play a second. You draw a Fishmonger.
third, fourth, fifth, you don't have deck to draw, but you're racking up buys.
You play a sixth. You don't have deck to draw, but it triggers the discard. You keep your buys. You still have a fishmonger in your hand.

You play the seventh - all the sudden you have deck to draw, from your discard. And seven buys. And you can do it again. And again.


The fix for this is either some sort of alternate substate of "in-play" (turn them sideways?) where they can only be discarded when they're in the alternate state, i think. On the turn they're played, they'd need to go from in-play (normal) to the alternate state, and only then be discarded as there'd be six or more in play.
Logged
sometime-maintainer of the Weekly Design Contest trello

segura

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 370
  • Respect: +143
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3019 on: August 05, 2019, 10:27:47 am »
+1

that's why you've got seven - six to play to trigger the discard, one to yeet the discard back to the draw pile.
Sure, you could build a deck of 6 Fishmongers, play them all, then play 5 again. You will have 11 Buys and all Actions will cost $5 less. That's great, you can get a lot of engine components in one turn. But in all the subsequent turns, you will not be able to keep the Fishmongers in play so you will only profit from the extra Buys; they will degenerate into mere Market Squares for $5 (respectively double Market Squares).
I think a more realistic scenario is one in which you will gain less Fishmongers and build up your engine more gradually.

Bear with me, because I think it's a neat card that deserves to be in the running: You've gotta CYA for your edge cases, not just the nominal uses.
You've got a deck with seven Fishmongers.
You've got a hand  of 5 Fishmongers.
You play one. You draw a Fishmonger.
You play a second. You draw a Fishmonger.
third, fourth, fifth, you don't have deck to draw, but you're racking up buys.
You play a sixth. You don't have deck to draw, but it triggers the discard. You keep your buys. You still have a fishmonger in your hand.

You play the seventh - all the sudden you have deck to draw, from your discard. And seven buys. And you can do it again. And again.


The fix for this is either some sort of alternate substate of "in-play" (turn them sideways?) where they can only be discarded when they're in the alternate state, i think. On the turn they're played, they'd need to go from in-play (normal) to the alternate state, and only then be discarded as there'd be six or more in play.
Thanks, you are right and I changed the wording.


Quote from: Aquila
It’s simple, I like it. A little bit boring, but seems balanced. I think putting the coin on the first option was the right move.
yeah i was thinking villages should be simple. Also it's boring because i seem to kick up a shitstorm every time I think outside of vanilla.

i guess there's power grid fans on this forum so this should be right up your alley. forgive the bad photoshop work, I do much better with physical art.


+


a classic spineflu hubris card.
I like this. It is a bit wording- / material-intense for what it does but the notion of a Treasure that becomes weaker with limited plays is cool as it (often/always?) creates a run and later everybody wants to trash their Commodities.
Although if you run 2 copies, playing them alternatingly, they are still partly-delayed Golds (2 this turn, 1 next turn) if demand is down to zero. So perhaps the card is a bit too good?
« Last Edit: August 05, 2019, 10:30:11 am by segura »
Logged

spineflu

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 261
  • +1 Post. At the start of your next turn +1 Respect
  • Respect: +102
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3020 on: August 05, 2019, 10:37:32 am »
0

that's why you've got seven - six to play to trigger the discard, one to yeet the discard back to the draw pile.
Sure, you could build a deck of 6 Fishmongers, play them all, then play 5 again. You will have 11 Buys and all Actions will cost $5 less. That's great, you can get a lot of engine components in one turn. But in all the subsequent turns, you will not be able to keep the Fishmongers in play so you will only profit from the extra Buys; they will degenerate into mere Market Squares for $5 (respectively double Market Squares).
I think a more realistic scenario is one in which you will gain less Fishmongers and build up your engine more gradually.

Bear with me, because I think it's a neat card that deserves to be in the running: You've gotta CYA for your edge cases, not just the nominal uses.
You've got a deck with seven Fishmongers.
You've got a hand  of 5 Fishmongers.
You play one. You draw a Fishmonger.
You play a second. You draw a Fishmonger.
third, fourth, fifth, you don't have deck to draw, but you're racking up buys.
You play a sixth. You don't have deck to draw, but it triggers the discard. You keep your buys. You still have a fishmonger in your hand.

You play the seventh - all the sudden you have deck to draw, from your discard. And seven buys. And you can do it again. And again.


The fix for this is either some sort of alternate substate of "in-play" (turn them sideways?) where they can only be discarded when they're in the alternate state, i think. On the turn they're played, they'd need to go from in-play (normal) to the alternate state, and only then be discarded as there'd be six or more in play.
Thanks, you are right and I changed the wording.


Also i kinda like your idea of the cards going to limbo rather than your discard pile, and only going from limbo to the discard pile at the start of your cleanup. Makes for some kind of subtle niche situations where your opponent scrapping your fishmongers can cause them to miss the shuffle if you have a big enough turn.

Quote
Quote from: Aquila
It’s simple, I like it. A little bit boring, but seems balanced. I think putting the coin on the first option was the right move.
yeah i was thinking villages should be simple. Also it's boring because i seem to kick up a shitstorm every time I think outside of vanilla.

i guess there's power grid fans on this forum so this should be right up your alley. forgive the bad photoshop work, I do much better with physical art.


+


a classic spineflu hubris card.
I like this. It is a bit wording- / material-intense for what it does but the notion of a Treasure that becomes weaker with limited plays is cool as it (often/always?) creates a run and later everybody wants to trash their Commodities.
Although if you run 2 copies, playing them alternatingly, they are still partly-delayed Golds (2 this turn, 1 next turn) if demand is down to zero. So perhaps the card is a bit too good?

hm. yeah. Maybe swap that first line for "if you have an even number of Commodities in play, $2; otherwise $1".
edit: also the first is only a partly-delayed silver - when you play it, you've only got one Commodity in play. So one is (1+MD, 1), the next is (2+MD, 1), etc
« Last Edit: August 05, 2019, 10:43:34 am by spineflu »
Logged
sometime-maintainer of the Weekly Design Contest trello

anordinaryman

  • Thief
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 96
  • Respect: +72
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3021 on: August 05, 2019, 11:32:28 am »
0

I think in the fiancé business you may have missed my submission, which was Camp.
I made the exact same mistake last time I judged so I totally understand.

I would appreciate your thoughts on it and if it would have been a runner up, had you seen it.
Logged

grep

  • Navigator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 79
  • Respect: +43
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3022 on: August 05, 2019, 11:41:40 am »
+2


Sacred Fire
$3. Action - Duration
+$2; you may trash a card.
-
At the start of each of your turns, you may trash a card for +$1.
If you don't, discard this from play and gain a Curse.
(This stays in play)

Probably the wording is not ideal - the idea is to have a Cathedral that can be stopped at the cost of two dead cards. You still can burn the received Curse to reinstate the fire after desecration.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8128
  • Respect: +8899
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3023 on: August 05, 2019, 12:14:17 pm »
+1


Sacred Fire
$3. Action - Duration
+$2; you may trash a card.
-
At the start of each of your turns, you may trash a card for +$1.
If you don't, discard this from play and gain a Curse.
(This stays in play)

Probably the wording is not ideal - the idea is to have a Cathedral that can be stopped at the cost of two dead cards. You still can burn the received Curse to reinstate the fire after desecration.

While it's hard to compare a card that you have to buy, then draw, then play; to a project that you only have to buy... isn't this just a stronger Cathedral in every way; with Cathedral already being a super strong must-buy "card"?
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

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 370
  • Respect: +143
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3024 on: August 05, 2019, 12:46:40 pm »
0


Sacred Fire
$3. Action - Duration
+$2; you may trash a card.
-
At the start of each of your turns, you may trash a card for +$1.
If you don't, discard this from play and gain a Curse.
(This stays in play)

Probably the wording is not ideal - the idea is to have a Cathedral that can be stopped at the cost of two dead cards. You still can burn the received Curse to reinstate the fire after desecration.

While it's hard to compare a card that you have to buy, then draw, then play; to a project that you only have to buy... isn't this just a stronger Cathedral in every way; with Cathedral already being a super strong must-buy "card"?
Indeed. This is to Junk Dealer what Hireling is to Laboratory. And then some (decent effect on play, can stop itself).
Sure, you want to trash as early as possible whereas increasing your draw power can start a bit later. So this is just a rough comparison but I think it nonetheless reveals that the card is too good / too automatic.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 119 120 [121] 122 123 ... 170  All
 

Page created in 0.107 seconds with 20 queries.