Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 281 282 [283] 284 285 ... 296  All

Author Topic: Weekly Design Contest Thread  (Read 416157 times)

1 Member and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Xen3k

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 59
  • Respect: +34
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7050 on: September 11, 2020, 06:18:48 pm »
0





Quote
Dandelion Field - $3
1VP
---------
When you gain this, trash up to 2 Copper from play.

When you trash this, gain a card costing up to $2 more than this.




Quote
Dandelion Field - $4
Victory
Worth 1VP per 3 Copper you have in Exile (round down) (max 3VP).
-
When you gain this, Exile up to 3 Copper you have in play.

When you trash this, discard your Exiled Copper. If you discard 6 or more copper this way, gain a Wish.

Ok, here is another crack at being fancy with this card idea. It is now a scaling, cheap VP card that gets rid of Copper pretty nicely. You can later on Trash it for a Wish, but you drop the VP value of all your Dandelion Fields and add the Copper back into your deck. The far simpler version above is there for comparison. Feedback is welcome.
Logged

faust

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2742
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +3828
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7051 on: September 12, 2020, 02:40:11 am »
+2

Worth more dead than alive, that is what Valkyries care about. In the Norse mythology, in the aftermath of a battle they pick up the fallen Warriors and take half of them to Valhalla, Odin’s eternal hall of heroes and the other half to the fields of Freyja, the goddess of fertility.

My submission:



Valkyrie
$4 – Action - Night
Quote
If it’s your Action phase,
gain a card costing up to $4.
Otherwise, trash a card you
have in play.
----------------------------
When you trash this, +1VP
per differently named card
in the trash.
Wow this thing is bonkers bananas overpowered.

Without the trashing bit it's already a Workshop+ that could reasonably cost $4, though the Night ability isn't super amazing without the bottom part.

At its very baseline, the trashing bonus is +2 VP (Valkyrie will always be in the trash and pretty certainly you'll at least trash a Copper with this). the card might work with a straight +2 VP on trashing, I'll say that much. But if there's other trashing? then you'll have Estate in the trash, so that's +3 VP. If there are Shelters, this goes up to +5 VP (i.e. better than Distant Lands - okay, Distant Land you don't need to connect, but the self-gaining on this more than makes up for that - for $4). If there's even as much as Necromancer in the game, this gives at least as much VP as a Province, and won't end up a dead card in your deck. Consider a game with Looters - it will be worth 8 VP. And I've not even considered any trashing attacks so far, which easily push this over to being better than Dominate without putting in any effort.

This is broken. It needs at least an upper limit on the VP, and if you don't want to go with a flat +2 VP, you probably also need to stop the self-gaining.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2020, 05:03:55 am by faust »
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.

segura

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 843
  • Respect: +379
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7052 on: September 12, 2020, 04:39:28 am »
+1

Valkyrie cannot trash Hovel or Overgrown Estate. The card is definitely too good, but not that crazy. I’d simply get rid of the Night type and make it terminal.
The Monastery thingy is not novel anyway and that brings the power level down on a reasonable level. Of course it would then be a more expensive Workshop in Kingdoms without trashers but Fortress is also a more expensive Village in Kingdoms without trashers as well.
Logged

Jonatan Djurachkovitch

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 137
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jonis20004
  • Respect: +73
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7053 on: September 12, 2020, 04:45:54 am »
+2

Maybe you could use something like this: "when you trash this, if there are at least 3 differently named cards in the trash, +3 vp."
Logged

faust

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2742
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +3828
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7054 on: September 12, 2020, 05:05:12 am »
0

Valkyrie cannot trash Hovel or Overgrown Estate.
Hence the "If there's other trashing?" phrase before referring to Shelters.
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.

gambit05

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 268
  • Respect: +161
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7055 on: September 12, 2020, 05:23:06 am »
+1

Valkyrie
$4 – Action - Night
Quote
If it’s your Action phase,
gain a card costing up to $4.
Otherwise, trash a card you
have in play.
----------------------------
When you trash this, +1VP
per differently named card
in the trash.

Wow this thing is bonkers bananas overpowered.

Without the trashing bit it's already a Workshop+ that could reasonably cost $4, though the Night ability isn't super amazing without the bottom part.

At its very baseline, the trashing bonus is +2 VP (Valkyrie will always be in the trash and pretty certainly you'll at least trash a Copper with this). the card might work with a straight +2 VP on trashing, I'll say that much. But if there's other trashing? then you'll have Estate in the trash, so that's +3 VP. If there are Shelters, this goes up to +5 VP (i.e. better than Distant Lands - okay, Distant Land you don't need to connect, but the self-gaining on this more than makes up for that - for $4). If there's even as much as Necromancer in the game, this gives at least as much VP as a Province, and won't end up a dead card in your deck. Consider a game with Looters - it will be worth 8 VP. And I've not even considered any trashing attacks so far, which easily push this over to being better than Dominate without putting in any effort.

This is broken. It needs at least an upper limit on the VP, and if you don't want to go with a flat +2 VP, you probably also need to stop the self-gaining.

Thank you for the feedback.
When I designed the card, I was unsure whether to give it a cost of $4 or of $5; I decided to go for $4, but immediately after posting I thought $5 would have been better and I think I’ll go for it.
You are right, when Ruins, Shelters, and/or Zombies are present, trashing Valkyrie gives way too many VP tokens. Giving it a fixed +2VP for trashing solves those problems easily, but makes the card less interesting; so I have thought about how to fix the “+1VP/something part”.
If I want to stick to the concepts of the card without clumsy wording, the best solution I came up with is: “…per differently named card in the trash costing $2 or more.”
This eliminates VP scoring through Ruins, Shelters and even Coppers.
What can still produce high VPs are Zombies and trashing attacks, especially Knights, but I can live with just a few official card that makes Valkyrie extraordinary strong. There are enough official cards that shine in situations that are even more likely to happen. The interplay with trashing attacks could even be interesting in a way that Valkyrie can serve as a counter, potentially making those nasty attack cards less desirable.

Valkyrie cannot trash Hovel or Overgrown Estate. The card is definitely too good, but not that crazy. I’d simply get rid of the Night type and make it terminal.
The Monastery thingy is not novel anyway and that brings the power level down on a reasonable level. Of course it would then be a more expensive Workshop in Kingdoms without trashers but Fortress is also a more expensive Village in Kingdoms without trashers as well.

Most Kingdoms would have other trashers and allow trashing those Shelters.
I like the Night type as it separates trashing from gaining and compared to the gaining part, it makes the trashing a bit stronger as it can trash played cards and does not need an Action.

Maybe you could use something like this: "when you trash this, if there are at least 3 differently named cards in the trash, +3 vp."


I have thought about the first part of your suggestion, except it was "2 differently named card". I also thought about "different named cards with at least 2 copies", but I don't think those changes would make the card better in terms of being balanced. I don't like the fixed VP score, as it seems to be less interesting.

The summary of changes I intend to make (for details see above): Card costs $5; I add “…costing $2 or more” at the end.

What do you think about these changes?

Logged

Jonatan Djurachkovitch

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 137
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jonis20004
  • Respect: +73
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7056 on: September 12, 2020, 05:35:53 am »
0

I change my submission because I don't like it. Here's my new submission:
Quote
$4 - Action-Treasure
Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card costing excactly $1 more than it.
-
When you trash this, if it is your action phase: +2 Coffers, otherwise: +2 Villagers.
Logged

gambit05

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 268
  • Respect: +161
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7057 on: September 12, 2020, 05:58:26 am »
+1

I change my submission because I don't like it. Here's my new submission:
Quote
$4 - Action-Treasure
Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card costing excactly $1 more than it.
-
When you trash this, if it is your action phase: +2 Coffers, otherwise: +2 Villagers.

Since you can play it also as a Treasure, this seems to be too strong for that cost, giving the benefit when it is trashed. How about just skip the Treasure part completely? Might look not very interesting after all, but is it interesting as it is?
Logged

segura

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 843
  • Respect: +379
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7058 on: September 12, 2020, 07:50:03 am »
+1

Valkyrie
$4 – Action - Night
Quote
If it’s your Action phase,
gain a card costing up to $4.
Otherwise, trash a card you
have in play.
----------------------------
When you trash this, +1VP
per differently named card
in the trash.

Wow this thing is bonkers bananas overpowered.

Without the trashing bit it's already a Workshop+ that could reasonably cost $4, though the Night ability isn't super amazing without the bottom part.

At its very baseline, the trashing bonus is +2 VP (Valkyrie will always be in the trash and pretty certainly you'll at least trash a Copper with this). the card might work with a straight +2 VP on trashing, I'll say that much. But if there's other trashing? then you'll have Estate in the trash, so that's +3 VP. If there are Shelters, this goes up to +5 VP (i.e. better than Distant Lands - okay, Distant Land you don't need to connect, but the self-gaining on this more than makes up for that - for $4). If there's even as much as Necromancer in the game, this gives at least as much VP as a Province, and won't end up a dead card in your deck. Consider a game with Looters - it will be worth 8 VP. And I've not even considered any trashing attacks so far, which easily push this over to being better than Dominate without putting in any effort.

This is broken. It needs at least an upper limit on the VP, and if you don't want to go with a flat +2 VP, you probably also need to stop the self-gaining.

Thank you for the feedback.
When I designed the card, I was unsure whether to give it a cost of $4 or of $5; I decided to go for $4, but immediately after posting I thought $5 would have been better and I think I’ll go for it.
You are right, when Ruins, Shelters, and/or Zombies are present, trashing Valkyrie gives way too many VP tokens. Giving it a fixed +2VP for trashing solves those problems easily, but makes the card less interesting; so I have thought about how to fix the “+1VP/something part”.
If I want to stick to the concepts of the card without clumsy wording, the best solution I came up with is: “…per differently named card in the trash costing $2 or more.”
This eliminates VP scoring through Ruins, Shelters and even Coppers.
What can still produce high VPs are Zombies and trashing attacks, especially Knights, but I can live with just a few official card that makes Valkyrie extraordinary strong. There are enough official cards that shine in situations that are even more likely to happen. The interplay with trashing attacks could even be interesting in a way that Valkyrie can serve as a counter, potentially making those nasty attack cards less desirable.

Valkyrie cannot trash Hovel or Overgrown Estate. The card is definitely too good, but not that crazy. I’d simply get rid of the Night type and make it terminal.
The Monastery thingy is not novel anyway and that brings the power level down on a reasonable level. Of course it would then be a more expensive Workshop in Kingdoms without trashers but Fortress is also a more expensive Village in Kingdoms without trashers as well.

Most Kingdoms would have other trashers and allow trashing those Shelters.
I like the Night type as it separates trashing from gaining and compared to the gaining part, it makes the trashing a bit stronger as it can trash played cards and does not need an Action.

Maybe you could use something like this: "when you trash this, if there are at least 3 differently named cards in the trash, +3 vp."


I have thought about the first part of your suggestion, except it was "2 differently named card". I also thought about "different named cards with at least 2 copies", but I don't think those changes would make the card better in terms of being balanced. I don't like the fixed VP score, as it seems to be less interesting.

The summary of changes I intend to make (for details see above): Card costs $5; I add “…costing $2 or more” at the end.

What do you think about these changes?
The VPs are not the issue, the non-terminality and self-trashing ability are.
If you wanna maintain the flavor of the challenge, keeping the ability to get man VPs such that you have an incentive to kill it off is the part that should remain.
Logged

Jonatan Djurachkovitch

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 137
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jonis20004
  • Respect: +73
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7059 on: September 12, 2020, 09:28:51 am »
+1

I change my submission because I don't like it. Here's my new submission:
Quote
$4 - Action-Treasure
Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card costing excactly $1 more than it.
-
When you trash this, if it is your action phase: +2 Coffers, otherwise: +2 Villagers.

Since you can play it also as a Treasure, this seems to be too strong for that cost, giving the benefit when it is trashed. How about just skip the Treasure part completely? Might look not very interesting after all, but is it interesting as it is?
You're right, compared to Remodel it has two benefits:
Non-terminality and the on-trash benefit.
But it has two downsides:
Smaller range and less flexibility.

How about I make it a Stonemason instead?
Quote
$4 - Action-Treasure
Trash a card from your hand. Gain up to two cards costing less than it.
-
When you trash this, if it is your action phase: +2 Coffers, otherwise: +2 Villagers.
Is it more balanced? Should I make the gaining not optional to make estate trashing harder? Is it possible for the on-trash benefit to be on-gain too? I want to keep the treasure type, to make it fit with the name and to justify the "if it is your action phase" clause.

Edit: forgot to include the name. It is supposed to be called "Refinery".
« Last Edit: September 12, 2020, 09:36:08 am by Jonatan Djurachkovitch »
Logged

gambit05

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 268
  • Respect: +161
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7060 on: September 12, 2020, 11:28:44 am »
0


The VPs are not the issue, the non-terminality and self-trashing ability are.
If you wanna maintain the flavor of the challenge, keeping the ability to get man VPs such that you have an incentive to kill it off is the part that should remain.

I think the VPs scoring has to be tamed as faust has pointed out. While a static +2VP would be on the safe side, a variable VP score looks more interesting, though of course is also more challenging - design wise. This is consistent with the idea of the challenge and with my own style, and it seems that you agree.

The self-trashing ability is a general problem in this challenge for any card proposed by anyone. When you do not have it, then a substantial number of games will be without any trashing (~1/5 I think), and then the part most important for this challenge is useless. On the other hand, most games will have a trasher of any sort, in which case the self-trashing ability isn't a big problem. Best I can think of is to have the trashing possibility, but restrict it as much as possible. One simple way is to trash from hand instead of in play; then you need to have at least 2 copies of Valkyrie in a given turn.

Remains the non-terminality, which also has to be viewed in the context of cost and self-gaining ability. If the card costs $4 it can gain copies, if it costs $5, and has a crippled VP scoring and restricted self-trashing, a terminal Action would be too weak in my opinion. So, why not move everything to the Night:

Valkyrie
$5 – Night
Quote
Choose one: Gain a card costing up
to $4; or trash a card from your hand.
----------------------------
When you trash this, +1VP
per differently named card
in the trash costing $2 or more.
Logged

gambit05

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 268
  • Respect: +161
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7061 on: September 12, 2020, 11:40:53 am »
+1

I change my submission because I don't like it. Here's my new submission:
Quote
$4 - Action-Treasure
Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card costing excactly $1 more than it.
-
When you trash this, if it is your action phase: +2 Coffers, otherwise: +2 Villagers.

Since you can play it also as a Treasure, this seems to be too strong for that cost, giving the benefit when it is trashed. How about just skip the Treasure part completely? Might look not very interesting after all, but is it interesting as it is?
You're right, compared to Remodel it has two benefits:
Non-terminality and the on-trash benefit.
But it has two downsides:
Smaller range and less flexibility.

I compared it with Upgrade (among other cards), which costs $5.

Quote
How about I make it a Stonemason instead?
Quote
$4 - Action-Treasure
Trash a card from your hand. Gain up to two cards costing less than it.
-
When you trash this, if it is your action phase: +2 Coffers, otherwise: +2 Villagers.
Is it more balanced? Should I make the gaining not optional to make estate trashing harder? Is it possible for the on-trash benefit to be on-gain too? I want to keep the treasure type, to make it fit with the name and to justify the "if it is your action phase" clause.

Edit: forgot to include the name. It is supposed to be called "Refinery".

I would make the gaining mandatory. With your wording you can trash anything without negative consequences. This is the second time I see you caring more about the name of a card than about its function.
Logged

faust

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2742
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +3828
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7062 on: September 12, 2020, 12:11:21 pm »
+1


The VPs are not the issue, the non-terminality and self-trashing ability are.
If you wanna maintain the flavor of the challenge, keeping the ability to get man VPs such that you have an incentive to kill it off is the part that should remain.

I think the VPs scoring has to be tamed as faust has pointed out. While a static +2VP would be on the safe side, a variable VP score looks more interesting, though of course is also more challenging - design wise. This is consistent with the idea of the challenge and with my own style, and it seems that you agree.
I think you could scale by something else than differently named card, for instance different type. However that still gets pretty powerful with Shelters and Heirlooms. Maybe different cost? That will usually keep you in an interesting range.
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.

gambit05

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 268
  • Respect: +161
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7063 on: September 12, 2020, 12:20:07 pm »
0


The VPs are not the issue, the non-terminality and self-trashing ability are.
If you wanna maintain the flavor of the challenge, keeping the ability to get man VPs such that you have an incentive to kill it off is the part that should remain.

I think the VPs scoring has to be tamed as faust has pointed out. While a static +2VP would be on the safe side, a variable VP score looks more interesting, though of course is also more challenging - design wise. This is consistent with the idea of the challenge and with my own style, and it seems that you agree.
I think you could scale by something else than differently named card, for instance different type. However that still gets pretty powerful with Shelters and Heirlooms. Maybe different cost? That will usually keep you in an interesting range.

I thought about that and I came up with different types, which I rejected for the reason you mentioned, but "different cost" looks... brilliant at a first glance. That could do it indeed. I think a bit more about it, but I already like the idea. Many thanks.
Logged

Aquila

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 321
  • Respect: +371
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7064 on: September 12, 2020, 03:20:45 pm »
+1

Quote
Curator - Action, $2* cost.
+1 Action
Play any number of differently named Treasures from your hand for + $1 each.
-
This costs $1 more per differently named card you have in play. When you trash this, gain a card costing up to this cost; if it's an Action or Treasure, set it aside, and if you do, play it.
Put simply, an investment card; get it early, and it pays off late. If you don't like the money it gives, change it for what else you need, including Victories (even another Curator, if you need more Actions). In the absence of trashing, there are a couple of other niche uses.
I've been fumbling around with balance tweaks for a while, and thought in the end that different names scale into the late game but conveniently cap so tfb can't go completely crazy.

Edit: name and wording changes.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2020, 04:56:40 pm by Aquila »
Logged

Jonatan Djurachkovitch

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 137
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jonis20004
  • Respect: +73
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7065 on: September 12, 2020, 04:50:04 pm »
0

I change my submission because I don't like it. Here's my new submission:
Quote
$4 - Action-Treasure
Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card costing excactly $1 more than it.
-
When you trash this, if it is your action phase: +2 Coffers, otherwise: +2 Villagers.

Since you can play it also as a Treasure, this seems to be too strong for that cost, giving the benefit when it is trashed. How about just skip the Treasure part completely? Might look not very interesting after all, but is it interesting as it is?
You're right, compared to Remodel it has two benefits:
Non-terminality and the on-trash benefit.
But it has two downsides:
Smaller range and less flexibility.

I compared it with Upgrade (among other cards), which costs $5.

Quote
How about I make it a Stonemason instead?
Quote
$4 - Action-Treasure
Trash a card from your hand. Gain up to two cards costing less than it.
-
When you trash this, if it is your action phase: +2 Coffers, otherwise: +2 Villagers.
Is it more balanced? Should I make the gaining not optional to make estate trashing harder? Is it possible for the on-trash benefit to be on-gain too? I want to keep the treasure type, to make it fit with the name and to justify the "if it is your action phase" clause.

Edit: forgot to include the name. It is supposed to be called "Refinery".

I would make the gaining mandatory. With your wording you can trash anything without negative consequences. This is the second time I see you caring more about the name of a card than about its function.
Well, theme is a part in card design, and it makes cards like Changeling stand out to me. I usually get a functional concept going before I decide on a name. Making the gain mandatory is just copying Stonecutter's on-play ability, which I am okay with. It is better than the "basically Silk Merchant" earlier version of this card. Well then, let's try again.
Quote
Refinery
$4 - Action-Treasure
Trash a card from your hand. Gain two cards each costing less than it.
-
When you gain or trash this, if it is your action phase: +2 Coffers. Otherwise: +2 Villagers.
Logged

gambit05

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 268
  • Respect: +161
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7066 on: September 13, 2020, 09:15:53 am »
+2

I think I have found now a version of Valkyrie that seems quite balanced, avoids much of the craziness we discussed before, and even better has a better flavor than the original version (reply #7049). It pinpoints the duality of the tasks of the mythical Valkyries:



Valkyrie
$5 – Action
Quote
Choose one: Exile a non-Victory
card from the Supply; or trash a
card from your hand.
------------------------------
When you trash this, +1 VP per
differently named card you have
in Exile that has at least one
copy in the trash.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2020, 09:31:02 am by gambit05 »
Logged

Xen3k

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 59
  • Respect: +34
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7067 on: September 13, 2020, 10:03:46 am »
+2











Quote
Dandelion Field -$4
Victory - Reserve
2VP
----------
When you trash this, put it on your Tavern mat. Gain a Wish if you have an odd number of Dandelion Fields on you Tavern mat.

I was still not very happy with my submission, so I now have this. It is purely a VP card that stays in your deck if trashed and rewards you every so often with a Wish when you trash it. The catch is that it does not have any way to trash itself, so it is completely dependent on the rest of the Kingdom. This is probably my last attempt at the competition this week, but I welcome all feedback.
Logged

gambit05

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 268
  • Respect: +161
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7068 on: September 13, 2020, 10:16:04 am »
+1



Quote
Dandelion Field -$4
Victory - Reserve
2VP
----------
When you trash this, put it on your Tavern mat. Gain a Wish if you have an odd number of Dandelion Fields on you Tavern mat.

I was still not very happy with my submission, so I now have this. It is purely a VP card that stays in your deck if trashed and rewards you every so often with a Wish when you trash it. The catch is that it does not have any way to trash itself, so it is completely dependent on the rest of the Kingdom. This is probably my last attempt at the competition this week, but I welcome all feedback.

Just a spontaneous idea I have:

"When you trash this, +2VP. If there is an odd (even?) number of... in the trash, gain a Wish."

This avoids the use of the Tavern mat, gives the same amount of VP and is more interactive (though also more competitive), and probably more difficult to get the precious Wishes. I like "even" more than "odd".
Logged

grrgrrgrr

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 162
  • Respect: +183
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7069 on: September 13, 2020, 10:31:28 am »
0

Not entirely sure if this is allowed, but here is mu idea.

Logged

faust

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2742
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +3828
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7070 on: September 13, 2020, 10:39:43 am »
+5



Quote
Marshland - $4+
Victory

Worth 1 VP per copy of this in the trash.
-
When you buy this, you may overpay for it, to trash a copy of this from the supply per $1 you overpaid.

There are 1.5 times as many copies of this in the supply as for a regular Victory card, i.e. 12 for 2 players and 18 for 3-4 players.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2020, 01:55:12 am by faust »
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.

Xen3k

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 59
  • Respect: +34
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7071 on: September 13, 2020, 10:52:14 am »
+1



Quote
Dandelion Field -$4
Victory - Reserve
2VP
----------
When you trash this, put it on your Tavern mat. Gain a Wish if you have an odd number of Dandelion Fields on you Tavern mat.

I was still not very happy with my submission, so I now have this. It is purely a VP card that stays in your deck if trashed and rewards you every so often with a Wish when you trash it. The catch is that it does not have any way to trash itself, so it is completely dependent on the rest of the Kingdom. This is probably my last attempt at the competition this week, but I welcome all feedback.

Just a spontaneous idea I have:

"When you trash this, +2VP. If there is an odd (even?) number of... in the trash, gain a Wish."

This avoids the use of the Tavern mat, gives the same amount of VP and is more interactive (though also more competitive), and probably more difficult to get the precious Wishes. I like "even" more than "odd".



Like this?

I would be concerned that their would be even less of an incentive to purchase them if their is a chance you cannot get the reward of a Wish. I personally do not mind the Tavern mat and like the potential interactions with other cards that care for you to have it still in your deck. I do agree that rewarding an even number is more interesting as it requires you to commit.



Quote
Dandelion Field
Victory - Reserve
2VP
----------------
When you trash this, put it on your Tavern mat. If you have an even number of Dandelion Fields on your Tavern mat, gain a Wish

I am going to stick with the Reserve version, but will be taking your very good advise and changing it to even numbers giving the reward to make it take a bit more time. Thanks for the feedback!
Logged

Marpharos

  • Scout
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 40
  • Respect: +40
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7072 on: September 13, 2020, 05:38:19 pm »
0

Here's my submission. It had to cost $2 to be exempt from many trash attacks.



Attendant
Action
$2
Quote
You may discard up to 3 non-Action and non-Treasure cards. If you did, choose 1 per card discarded: +1 Card, or +1 Buy, or +$1.
-
When you trash this, +2 Actions.
Logged

Xen3k

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 59
  • Respect: +34
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7073 on: September 13, 2020, 05:54:47 pm »
+2

Here's my submission. It had to cost $2 to be exempt from many trash attacks.



Attendant
Action
$2
Quote
You may discard up to 3 non-Action and non-Treasure cards. If you did, choose 1 per card discarded: +1 Card, or +1 Buy, or +$1.
-
When you trash this, +2 Actions.

At first glance it seems kinda weak. The limitations on what you can discard may be a bit excessive, and it would feel real bad to get this in a hand full of copper. Just comparing the top part to Herbalist it seems weak. I think if it was non-terminal it would be decent, but it would not compare well to Warehouse.

The on-trash effect is pretty cool. If it gave Villagers you would not have to be concerned about trashing attacks, but just the plus actions are nice when using a trash-for-gain effect.

Hope that helps.
Logged

gambit05

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 268
  • Respect: +161
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7074 on: September 14, 2020, 10:23:31 am »
0



Quote
Marshland - $4+
Victory

Worth 1 VP per copy of this in the trash.
-
When you buy this, you may overpay for it, to trash a copy of this from the supply per $1 you overpaid.

There are 1.5 times as many copies of this in the supply as for a regular Victory card, i.e. 12 for 2 players and 18 for 3-4 players.

This looks interesting, but I am not sure I understand the card.
Since this is a large pile, I assume that you expect that this will be massively bought. But isn't the best strategy, after one player overpaid and trashed copies of Marshland, that other players just buy it for the regular cost? I can't see the benefit for the overpaying player, but I am sure I miss something as I often do.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 281 282 [283] 284 285 ... 296  All
 

Page created in 0.101 seconds with 21 queries.