Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 292 293 [294] 295 296  All

Author Topic: Weekly Design Contest Thread  (Read 414363 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

anordinaryman

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 168
  • Respect: +142
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7325 on: October 14, 2020, 05:26:07 pm »
+1



Quote
Combine - Action - $4
Trash two non-Duration cards where each card is in your hand or in play. Gain a card with cost exactly equal to the total cost in $ of the trashed cards.

We got a sort of TFB Version of Trading Post here. It's also sort of like remodel. And it's like a weaker but more flexible Forge. And it's an Action Bonfire. It's sort of like a lot of things. You can choose to trash two cards in play, one card in play and 1 card from your hand, or two from your hand. Say, Combine is in play! You could trash itself and trash an estate in hand to gain a Goons! I wanted to incorporate more in-play trashing in the game. Now this is an Action card, which makes trashing in-play treasures difficult-- unless you manage to play this after you played a treasure in all the ways Dominion now allows (Black Market, Storyteller, Scepter, Cavalry, Villa, ...). You probably can't easily turn Combine into a 5 cost but there are some ways (Ferry, Poor House, Shelters, other cost reduction, ...)

Open to feedback. Especially around wording. I first tried "Trash two cards from either your hand your hand or in play" but this phrasing makes it seem like you can't trash itself an estate from hand together, which I want to allow.

EDIT: Thank you to spheremonk for helping me make this not trash duration cards as that leads to some difficult tracking issues.
« Last Edit: October 15, 2020, 01:26:03 am by anordinaryman »
Logged

D782802859

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 214
  • Respect: +218
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7326 on: October 14, 2020, 05:49:17 pm »
0

Oh, I made a very similar card that I was planning to test before submitting. Back to the drawing board, I guess.
Logged

spineflu

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 679
  • Shuffle iT Username: spineflu
  • +1 Coffers, +1 Respect
  • Respect: +406
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7327 on: October 14, 2020, 06:57:33 pm »
+1


Quote
Import • $5 • Action
Discard a Treasure. If you did, gain two copies of a card costing $4 or less.
double gainer that does the Port thing. If you can't gain two copies (ie, Crumbling Castle, et al), you do as much as you can.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2020, 06:59:22 pm by spineflu »
Logged

spheremonk

  • Ambassador
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 34
  • Respect: +42
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7328 on: October 14, 2020, 09:29:56 pm »
+1




Should this say “non-Duration” to avoid tracking issues? When I trash an Estate from my hand with a Hireling from play to gain a Province, do we want to have to remember the rest of the game that I get an extra card every turn? I believe that's the sort of situation Donald X is trying to clean up going forward.
Logged

anordinaryman

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 168
  • Respect: +142
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7329 on: October 14, 2020, 10:18:59 pm »
0

Oh, I made a very similar card that I was planning to test before submitting. Back to the drawing board, I guess.

For what it's worth, I don't mind you submitting your very similar card. I trust you aren't copying and that you just independently had a similar idea. It'd be fine with me if you submitted it.
Quote
Combine - Action - $4
Trash two cards where each card is in your hand or in play. Gain a card with cost exactly equal to the total cost in $ of the trashed cards.


Should this say “non-Duration” to avoid tracking issues? When I trash an Estate from my hand with a Hireling from play to gain a Province, do we want to have to remember the rest of the game that I get an extra card every turn? I believe that's the sort of situation Donald X is trying to clean up going forward.

Thank you! That's a really good idea!! I'm going to modify the original post.

EDIT: yikes, I deleted the old hosted picture so your comment doesn't make sense anymore, my apologies.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2020, 10:23:37 pm by anordinaryman »
Logged

spheremonk

  • Ambassador
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 34
  • Respect: +42
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7330 on: October 15, 2020, 03:11:40 am »
0

This feels pretty two-ish. It has at least two 2-related elements: there are two cards in the pile and the price is $2. (Unfortunately, they are ONE-shot Smithies, though sometimes two-shot.)

To be clear, this is a pile with 20 cards, and is a mixed pile (like Knights and Ruins), not a split pile (like Castles or Sauna/Avanto) – you shuffle 10 copies of Anvil together with 10 copies of Hammer.


              
Logged

D782802859

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 214
  • Respect: +218
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7331 on: October 16, 2020, 10:11:05 am »
+5



The original version was a two shot gold, which morphed into a big treasure payload that needs to be played a couple times to do anything.
Logged

anordinaryman

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 168
  • Respect: +142
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7332 on: October 16, 2020, 11:42:16 am »
0

This feels pretty two-ish. It has at least two 2-related elements: there are two cards in the pile and the price is $2. (Unfortunately, they are ONE-shot Smithies, though sometimes two-shot.)

To be clear, this is a pile with 20 cards, and is a mixed pile (like Knights and Ruins), not a split pile (like Castles or Sauna/Avanto) – you shuffle 10 copies of Anvil together with 10 copies of Hammer.


              
Interesting!
I feel like the shuffled nature of those two piles make it difficult to incorporate into a strategy. You normally get your smithy's fairly early on, and you're likely to buy this and just have them trash themselves. I don't think the low price is worth such a drawback. Unless I am swimming in +Buys, I would rather build my draw engine with moats. I think you can make this more enticing by providing some sort of benefit +1$ or something. This might have to make it cost 3 though. Or perhaps it has a on-trash clause ("when you trash this +$2" for example), so now you might choose to self-trash a card, and it makes it less devastating when they don't line up. As written right now, your engine can snowball away from you. You get unlucky on one shuffle, and all the sudden your engine is gone, and that doesn't seem that fun. Adding some other benefit would help with this feeling.



The original version was a two shot gold, which morphed into a big treasure payload that needs to be played a couple times to do anything.

I love this concept! I think it would be better with a +Buy you always get. Your first one is essentially a confusion for two whole shuffles. You get a second one and now it turns the other activated wine cask into a confusion for one shuffle. That's a pretty steep price to play. If wine Cask always gave a +Buy I still think it would be balanced, and it would still provide some benefit on those initial plays. And it makes sense for it to provide a +Buy so you have something to do with all that money (Stockpile, Capital, and Fortune act similarly)
Logged

silverspawn

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4543
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +2185
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7333 on: October 16, 2020, 02:06:59 pm »
0

The thing about Cask is that it becomes better the more of them you have. At first, you need to play 2 casks to activate one Shiny thing (where shiny thing is the thing in between gold and plat), then you need to play 2 casks to activate 2 shiny things, then 3, and so on. The cost of activation stays constant, but the payoff increases.

If you give it a buy, the correct play will be to buy the entire pile most of the time. If not, probably still that if you have buys from somewhere else. I share the reaction that the concept is very elegant, but I'm not sure it'll actually be fun to use.
Logged

D782802859

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 214
  • Respect: +218
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7334 on: October 16, 2020, 02:10:55 pm »
0

You gain tokens with each Cask gained, so if you gain two Casks, it takes 4 plays to activate two shiny things. The cost of activation very much increases.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4543
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +2185
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7335 on: October 16, 2020, 02:39:38 pm »
0

You gain tokens with each Cask gained, so if you gain two Casks, it takes 4 plays to activate two shiny things. The cost of activation very much increases.

I understood how it worked, but in trying to explain the point better, I realized that I don't think it is true, anyway. Nvm. Good card.
Logged

Gubump

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 783
  • Respect: +525
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7336 on: October 16, 2020, 03:08:48 pm »
+1

You gain tokens with each Cask gained, so if you gain two Casks, it takes 4 plays to activate two shiny things. The cost of activation very much increases.

You can then play Casks twice as quickly, though, which means that you still get rid of all your Fermentation tokens in roughly the same amount of time.
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Violet CLM and his Dominion Card Image Generator.

spheremonk

  • Ambassador
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 34
  • Respect: +42
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7337 on: October 16, 2020, 03:59:40 pm »
+1

              
Interesting!
I feel like the shuffled nature of those two piles make it difficult to incorporate into a strategy. You normally get your smithy's fairly early on, and you're likely to buy this and just have them trash themselves. I don't think the low price is worth such a drawback. Unless I am swimming in +Buys, I would rather build my draw engine with moats. I think you can make this more enticing by providing some sort of benefit +1$ or something. This might have to make it cost 3 though. Or perhaps it has a on-trash clause ("when you trash this +$2" for example), so now you might choose to self-trash a card, and it makes it less devastating when they don't line up. As written right now, your engine can snowball away from you. You get unlucky on one shuffle, and all the sudden your engine is gone, and that doesn't seem that fun. Adding some other benefit would help with this feeling.


Thanks for your thoughts – I appreciate your taking the time. You make good point about what makes this a difficult card to build a reliable engine around in most circumstances. I'm guessing we disagree though about what makes a well-designed, well-balance card. A $2 card not solving all of your problems is not problematic as I see it. Under most circumstances, you wouldn’t want to build an engine around a one-shot Lab (Experiment) or even a one-shot Lost City (Encampment), but that doesn’t mean they’re not a useful pickup in many circumstances, or that they are not well designed. The same is true for a one-shot Smithy. Actually, I would argue it would be bad if you COULD easily build a reliable engine around a $2 Smithy in most situations. And then, sometimes, Workers Village, Squire, Hamlet, or similar +Action/+Buy-rich situations arise, where if you plan well, you can build a fairly solid engine around Anvil/Hammer.

The history of this card is that it started out as a regular 10-card pile of Anvils, where you would reveal an Anvil from your hand or return the Anvil you played to its pile. This was too easy to build an engine around. It had the problem of not really being balanced at any price. The addition of a second card, Hammer, shakes up the dynamic and makes it balanced at $2.

Essentially, I went through the same thoughts as you did in the development stage, and agree with the substance of what you’ve written. We simply disagree on our conclusions. For now, I will leave the card as is. Thanks again for your thoughts.     
Logged

chronostrike

  • Swindler
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17
  • Respect: +35
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7338 on: October 18, 2020, 10:43:15 am »
0


Quote
Extortionist • $5
Action - Attack
The player to your left chooses one of the following for you:
+2 cards, and each other player gains <1>; or +$2, and each other player with 4 or more cards in hand discards a card
In the spirit of Torturer, this attack lets your opponent decide how hard he wants to get hit.  The weaker attack is paired with the stronger benefit.

EDIT: This card is bad; don't judge it.  Replacement below.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2020, 08:04:20 pm by chronostrike »
Logged

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1059
  • Respect: +2047
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7339 on: October 18, 2020, 11:21:32 am »
+3

Quote
Extortionist • $5
Action - Attack
The player to your left chooses one of the following for you:
+2 cards, and each other player gains <1>; or +$2, and each other player with 4 or more cards in hand discards a card
In the spirit of Torturer, this attack lets your opponent decide how hard he wants to get hit.  The weaker attack is paired with the stronger benefit.

Isn't this strictly worse than Militia?
Logged

chronostrike

  • Swindler
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17
  • Respect: +35
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7340 on: October 18, 2020, 11:30:15 am »
0

Quote
Extortionist • $5
Action - Attack
The player to your left chooses one of the following for you:
+2 cards, and each other player gains <1>; or +$2, and each other player with 4 or more cards in hand discards a card
In the spirit of Torturer, this attack lets your opponent decide how hard he wants to get hit.  The weaker attack is paired with the stronger benefit.

Isn't this strictly worse than Militia?
Yes, yes it is.  I need to reconsider this card.

I think it may not qualify for the contest if I use my first idea, because then it would be +3 cards/+$3 to be more in line with Torturer's power.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4543
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +2185
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7341 on: October 18, 2020, 12:55:28 pm »
0

Isn't this strictly worse than Militia?

Not strictly, since you may want to discard 2 cards.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 8869
  • Respect: +9651
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7342 on: October 18, 2020, 01:52:14 pm »
+3

Isn't this strictly worse than Militia?

Not strictly, since you may want to discard 2 cards.

Sure "strictly' can be used in the most literal sense... Witch isn't strictly better than Ruined Library ignoring cost, because your opponent might want that Curse to make their Gardens better, and because drawing 2 cards instead of 1 could cause an unwanted reshuffle.

But "strictly" is also used in a more general sense that includes things like "+3 cards" is strictly better than "+2 cards". And "each opponent discards 2 cards" is strictly better than "each opponent discards 1 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

alion8me

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 122
  • Shuffle iT Username: alion8me
  • Respect: +129
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7343 on: October 19, 2020, 11:59:00 am »
+1

24 Hours Remaining for Contest Entries

I've been a bit busy lately, sorry for the delay. Tomorrow after the submission deadline ends I'll start judging; hopefully I'll be able to finish the same day but there are a lot of entries so it's possible I won't have results until sometime on Wednesday.
Logged

scolapasta

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 393
  • Respect: +387
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7344 on: October 19, 2020, 01:26:28 pm »
0

Here's mine (previously entered for a different contest, but then retracted):



Quote
Colosseum - Project - $2

During your turns, Events cost $1 less (but not less than $0).
-
Setup: Add two additional events. These can only be bought if you have bought Coliseum.

People have questioned $2 Projects, so maybe it should be $3? Whether you want to buy this will really depend on whether the events are worthwhile, and then it's a timing decision, so I wanted to allow a 5/2 player the opportunity, if they wanted it.

(I should probably move the "These can only be bought if you have bought Coliseum." concept to above the line, but that won't change how it plays.)

Feedback always welcome.
Logged
Feel free to join us at scolapasta's cards for discussion on any of my custom cards.

LittleFish

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 289
  • Respect: +104
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7345 on: October 19, 2020, 02:26:01 pm »
0

Here's mine (previously entered for a different contest, but then retracted):



Quote
Colosseum - Project - $2

During your turns, Events cost $1 less (but not less than $0).
-
Setup: Add two additional events. These can only be bought if you have bought Coliseum.

People have questioned $2 Projects, so maybe it should be $3? Whether you want to buy this will really depend on whether the events are worthwhile, and then it's a timing decision, so I wanted to allow a 5/2 player the opportunity, if they wanted it.

(I should probably move the "These can only be bought if you have bought Coliseum." concept to above the line, but that won't change how it plays.)

Feedback always welcome.
"On your turns, you may buy the set aside events" would fit nicely
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 411
  • Respect: +617
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7346 on: October 19, 2020, 05:10:13 pm »
0


Quote
Sycophants
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Card, +1 Action. If the total cost in coins of cards you have in play is from... $10 to $19: +2 Actions. $20 to $29: +2 Cards. $30 to $39: +1 Buy and +$2.
Sycophants do different work for you depending on how wealthy you appear to be.  They go from cantrip, to Bustling Village, to activated Menagerie, to Grand Market.  Without cost-reduction shenanigans, you can play 4 as "+3 Cards and +1 Action" and 3 as Grand Markets, or the opposite.  It costs $3 so it does less to activate itself if you're just pile-driving it: Do something else, will ya?
Obviously combos with expensive cantrips like Market, Baker, Bazaar, and Laboratory.

HISTORY
Changed threshold values to make adding easier.  Added upper threshold to Grand Market function.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2020, 12:28:38 pm by Fragasnap »
Logged
Dominion: Greed 1.0, my fan expansion with "in-games-using-this" cards

chronostrike

  • Swindler
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17
  • Respect: +35
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7347 on: October 19, 2020, 08:07:06 pm »
+2


Quote
Monk • $2
Action - Reaction
+2 cards
---
Whenever you trash a card, you may play this from your hand.
Perhaps this should be some kind of dog.
Logged

LibraryAdventurer

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1459
  • Shuffle iT Username: LibraryAdventurer
  • Respect: +1158
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7348 on: October 19, 2020, 08:21:33 pm »
+1

Quote
Monk • $2
Action - Reaction
+2 cards
---
Whenever you trash a card, you may play this from your hand.
Perhaps this should be some kind of dog.
Yeah. I made a card that I never posted (at least I don't remember posting it) exactly the same as that called Junkyard Stray.

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 8869
  • Respect: +9651
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7349 on: October 19, 2020, 08:22:46 pm »
+2


Quote
Sycophants
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Card, +1 Action. If the total cost in coins of cards you have in play is... From $10 to $22: +2 Actions. From $23 to $32: +2 Cards. At least $33: +1 Buy and +$2.
Sycophants do different work for you depending on how wealthy you appear to be.  They go from cantrip, to Bustling Village, to activated Menagerie, to Grand Market.  Without cost-reduction shenanigans, you can play 4 as "+3 Cards and +1 Action."  It costs $3 so it does less to activate itself if you're just pile-driving it: Do something else, will ya?
Obviously combos with expensive cantrips like Market, Baker, Bazaar, and Laboratory.

Crazy good with Peddler and Treasury.

I feel like this will be annoying to resolve... you basically have to do a bunch of adding every time you play one of these.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2020, 08:23:58 pm by GendoIkari »
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
Pages: 1 ... 292 293 [294] 295 296  All
 

Page created in 0.092 seconds with 21 queries.