Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 48  All

Author Topic: Dominion: Enterprise  (Read 412330 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Nic

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 138
  • Respect: +85
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #200 on: January 17, 2014, 01:22:15 am »
+1

I just updated the image post.

Removed: Tinker
Added: Lodge
Updated: Terrace

Now I just need three more cards and perhaps replacements for some of the off-theme cards.

Have you tried a card with a "You may trash this card" clause and an on-trash effect? That could work pretty well here.
Redistrict?
Logged

manthos88

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 116
  • Respect: +43
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #201 on: January 17, 2014, 07:42:30 am »
+1

I generally like most of your cards. But some of them look a little weird to me.

For example, Jubilee: Why would i want to buy this for $2 (over another $2, perhaps)? Would i want to buy this for $3 or $4?

Domain: It looks to me that when Domain is on the board, you probably want to force a Domain race, because i'm pretty sure that i wouldn't want to give my opponent a 8*8=64 VP lead. So, what's the deal here? Bump up with +Buys and go for the race? Also, this becomes a lot more interesting with Barrister on the board i suppose, which is an OK card i feel.

Committee: This one looks like really strong card. I'm pretty sure it should cost $5.

Wheelwright: Looks very strong, but has a drawback. Gaining a Copper IS something in this set. I'm just not sure whether the drawback is good enough versus the benefit it offers.

Dignitary: This is the most strange of your cards, as i see it. Now, when would i want to buy this? The reaction part looks nice and unique. But is the Action part good enough to compensate? And is it worth it at $4? Yeah, you can draw 2 cards and you can save a dead Action while getting +$1. That's nice. But what can i generally do with this card? I don't think i could ever go for something like Dignitary-BM.

Convocation: Strange filtering mechanism. I'm not sure whether i like it. I also need some clarifications about double-type Victory cards. If i reveal a Great Hall, an Action and a Victory card and opt to put the Great Hall in my hand, do i discard the other 2 cards? Does the order in which i make the choices matter?


I also feel like you should include one more card that can produce Trade Tokens (Craftsman style). Because, it would be better to give those cards with this one-shot theme a chance to use more Trade Tokens for this "cool effect". Also, Craftsman makes good use of the Tokens by itself. Maybe you would want to create another card that can produce Tokens and be more happy to give them to another card. Additionally, this way, there will be more chances that a card that produces Trade Tokens can be appeared in a given Kingdom.

Now, that is merely my opinion. You did the playtesting. You know better.
Logged
Just give me a mega-turn engine and take my soul...

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #202 on: January 17, 2014, 09:20:44 am »
+1

Have you tried a card with a "You may trash this card" clause and an on-trash effect? That could work pretty well here.
Redistrict?

Could you be more specific? I'm not sure how Redistrict could fit this idea. In general, though, this mechanic is something I'm open to having in the set.

For example, Jubilee: Why would i want to buy this for $2 (over another $2, perhaps)? Would i want to buy this for $3 or $4?

It's cheap economy and can be used as a temporary village in a pinch. In some games you need Silver to get off the ground, but would rather not have the Silver in your deck later. Jubilee is especially useful in those games. That being said, it's one of the cards that's had the least playtesting. It may be a dud.

Domain: It looks to me that when Domain is on the board, you probably want to force a Domain race, because i'm pretty sure that i wouldn't want to give my opponent a 8*8=64 VP lead. So, what's the deal here? Bump up with +Buys and go for the race? Also, this becomes a lot more interesting with Barrister on the board i suppose, which is an OK card i feel.

I'm sorry the images don't make this clear, but Domain isn't a Kingdom card. You know how Barrister's setup gives each player a Domain in place of a starting Copper? Those are the only Domains in the game. You have to get them from your opponents.

The reason they don't say "This is not in the Supply" is the same reason Shelters don't; there's never going to be a stack of them sitting on the table that someone might think they could buy.

Committee: This one looks like really strong card. I'm pretty sure it should cost $5.

I was originally $5. I'm trying it at $4 and I really hope it works at that cost. I feel like it's significantly more compelling at that price point and that it needs that extra push. I don't think it's quite as strong as it looks, but it's possible that it'll have to cost $5 after more playtesting.

Wheelwright: Looks very strong, but has a drawback. Gaining a Copper IS something in this set. I'm just not sure whether the drawback is good enough versus the benefit it offers.

Could be you're right. The consensus among the playtesters is also that it looks strong. So far it's been OK, I think. Although it gives you the discard filter, there's nothing stopping you from drawing dead cards. You can even draw the ones you just discarded, à la Cellar.

As far as gaining a Copper in hand, I think it's more powerful than many realize, especially early on. If I'm sometimes willing to pay $5 and gain two Coppers for a Gold (Cache), I'm probably willing to gain a Copper to get from $4 to $5.

Dignitary: This is the most strange of your cards, as i see it. Now, when would i want to buy this? The reaction part looks nice and unique. But is the Action part good enough to compensate? And is it worth it at $4? Yeah, you can draw 2 cards and you can save a dead Action while getting +$1. That's nice. But what can i generally do with this card? I don't think i could ever go for something like Dignitary-BM.

Perhaps not. It makes a decent opener, though. And against most Attacks it's a nice Reaction.

Convocation: Strange filtering mechanism. I'm not sure whether i like it. I also need some clarifications about double-type Victory cards. If i reveal a Great Hall, an Action and a Victory card and opt to put the Great Hall in my hand, do i discard the other 2 cards? Does the order in which i make the choices matter?

Man, I made the Convocation wording as clear as I could. You do the instructions one at a time, like any card. First choose an Action card. Presumably you choose the one that isn't Great Hall. Then you choose a Treasure card, but there isn't one. Then you choose a Victory card. Presumably you choose the Great Hall. Then you discard the other Victory card. You could of course do this differently if you prefer to draw the dead Victory card instead of the Action card for some reason.

I also feel like you should include one more card that can produce Trade Tokens (Craftsman style). Because, it would be better to give those cards with this one-shot theme a chance to use more Trade Tokens for this "cool effect". Also, Craftsman makes good use of the Tokens by itself. Maybe you would want to create another card that can produce Tokens and be more happy to give them to another card. Additionally, this way, there will be more chances that a card that produces Trade Tokens can be appeared in a given Kingdom.

I appreciate the thought, but this is pretty much the opposite of what I want to do. Any card that produces Trade tokens has to have a good use for them or it'll just be a dead card on boards without other Trade token cards. I usually play with cards from one or two sets at a time, but for people who play full random, such a card would be a dud in almost every game.

Thanks for the questions and comments!
« Last Edit: January 17, 2014, 09:22:05 am by LastFootnote »
Logged

KingZog3

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3163
  • Respect: +1380
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #203 on: January 17, 2014, 01:51:53 pm »
+2

I don't think Jubilee is a dud. It seems like an ok pickup near he end of the game. Pearl Diver exists, and it's essentially a dud, and Jubilee is far more interesting.
Logged

manthos88

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 116
  • Respect: +43
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #204 on: January 17, 2014, 06:03:23 pm »
+1

Quote
Quote from: manthos88 on Today at 07:42:30 am

    I also feel like you should include one more card that can produce Trade Tokens (Craftsman style). Because, it would be better to give those cards with this one-shot theme a chance to use more Trade Tokens for this "cool effect". Also, Craftsman makes good use of the Tokens by itself. Maybe you would want to create another card that can produce Tokens and be more happy to give them to another card. Additionally, this way, there will be more chances that a card that produces Trade Tokens can be appeared in a given Kingdom.


I appreciate the thought, but this is pretty much the opposite of what I want to do. Any card that produces Trade tokens has to have a good use for them or it'll just be a dead card on boards without other Trade token cards. I usually play with cards from one or two sets at a time, but for people who play full random, such a card would be a dud in almost every game.

Thanks for the questions and comments!


I'm not saying that the card should do nothing with the trade tokens. Just that the Trade Tokens on this card have such an effect that it would feel "ok" if you used them for another card instead of this one.


And... just came up with this:


Trademaster:

Cost: $5

Take a Trade Token. You may trash a card from your hand. If you do, choose one: Either spend any number of Trade Tokens and gain a card costing up to the trashed card's cost plus double the number of Trade Tokens spent; or, take a number of Trade Tokens equal to the trashed card's cost (rounded down).


I'm not sure whether you like it. But i just threw it down. Butcher-like remodel, or Bishop-like TfB. Gets very good use out of the Tokens, either by itself, or by handing them to other cards. (Too strong? Probably yes.  ;D)
« Last Edit: January 17, 2014, 06:09:05 pm by manthos88 »
Logged
Just give me a mega-turn engine and take my soul...

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #205 on: January 17, 2014, 08:18:52 pm »
0

I'm not saying that the card should do nothing with the trade tokens. Just that the Trade Tokens on this card have such an effect that it would feel "ok" if you used them for another card instead of this one.


And... just came up with this:


Trademaster:

Cost: $5

Take a Trade Token. You may trash a card from your hand. If you do, choose one: Either spend any number of Trade Tokens and gain a card costing up to the trashed card's cost plus double the number of Trade Tokens spent; or, take a number of Trade Tokens equal to the trashed card's cost (rounded down).


I'm not sure whether you like it. But i just threw it down. Butcher-like remodel, or Bishop-like TfB. Gets very good use out of the Tokens, either by itself, or by handing them to other cards. (Too strong? Probably yes.  ;D)

Again, thanks for the suggestion! But when I decided to create cards that both gained and used Trade tokens when played, my primary goal was to make sure they were sufficiently different from Butcher. Don't get me wrong, I love Butcher. It's one of my favorite Dominion cards. But I don't feel we need another card that does almost the exact same thing. Anyhow, I ended up with Craftsman and I feel that if nothing else, it is sufficiently different from Butcher to be interesting.

Also, Trademaster is almost certainly too many words to fit on a card (at normal font size).  :P
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2006
  • Respect: +2110
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #206 on: January 18, 2014, 02:08:50 am »
0

What did you use to do the card images?
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #207 on: January 18, 2014, 11:19:08 am »
0

What did you use to do the card images?

Back when I first started making cards, lympi directed me to this template on BGG: http://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/57516/adobe-photoshop-cs3-custom-blank-card-template-eng

Since then I have created my own heavily modified version of it. I'll attach it sometime when I'm in front of the appropriate computer, hopefully today. Although I plan to soon modify it further with the Goko image resources.
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 440
  • Respect: +703
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #208 on: January 18, 2014, 12:45:34 pm »
+5

Still love your set, LastFootnote. The Trade tokens are cool. I haven't gotten a chance to play with each card, but I can give you my response to a few.

I've played some games with Clerk. Clerk is probably one of the best $2 cards in the game. It's not Fool's Gold good-- you're not going to lose because you didn't get enough Clerks-- but it's easily better than Hamlet. You used the example of how Vagrant never hurts a deck: That's true, but Vagrant misses a lot more than Clerk and has a much smaller benefit (and especially a less visible benefit).
It is a fun and powerful card at $2, but I encourage increasing Clerk's price up to $3. It would harder to buy but will still be competitive in that price bracket.

Jubilee I'm not such a fan of. +2 Actions is something I want to use repeatedly and Jubilee won't let me do that. There are also very limited instances when I want Silvers to disappear from my deck. It will be cool in the games you can buy Jubilees as one-shot Silvers to enable other Trade token cards, but I'm not sure their sustainable enough.

I've played with Redistrict. This one I really like. Redistrict I think is best for trashing $4 and $5 cards while building which is really cool since few other trash-for-benefits really work that way. Redistrct can be used to grab $5 and $6 cards with $4 and $5 cards respectively and that can be really strong. I especially like the ability to gain a Gold and a $7 or a $7 and a Province in applicable games. The only thing I would question is again, its price. In the cases where I did bust open my Redistricts, I often had only $2 so it often seemed best to immediately replace my Redistrict. If it cost $3, trashing it would be a harder decision. Though, collecting them by Redistricting Estates would be easier... the cost for trash-for-benefit cards are weird.

I've played with Barrister\Domain, but only 2-player games. This one I do not like. Barrister has an interesting sort of mini-game to it in that it becomes practically impossible to hit other players' Domains after the earliest portion of the game, but Domains are just better Coppers in your deck, so stealing them isn't all that great anyway. I do like that one cannot simply trash Domains in Barrister games since Barrister pulls Domains out of the trash regardless of whether it trashed them or not: That's a nice design touch. The big issue I have is that in multiplayer games, I think it is going to be way too swingy. I usually play 3-player games and the opportunity to pick up 9VP from stealing cards from other players (even using an admittedly weak card) is so swingy that I do not appreciate the sound of it. Just the same, it's a very cool idea and well designed card. I'm not going to really knock it, I don't like it much personally.

I've played with Gambler. Gambler is still cool. One of my players says it his favorite custom card. It's so concise and thematic. Regardless of how bad it feels when you have to trash your Gambler, a one-shot Laboratory at $3 is not too shabby.

I've played with Mill Town. I stand by Mill Town being ridiculous in any game one can increase his hand size consistently. I love the card to death, but recommend adding a trashing clause like Horn of Plenty's.

I don't like Refurbish. It is a good and simple way to get the concept to work, but it is so incredibly off theme that I cannot associate it with the rest of your set.

Committee is a decent bit of player interaction, but I'm not a huge fan. I have an extremely similar card that rather than copying or trashing one of 2 cards copies a found card costing from $3 to $6 which I think is more fun since a player can control it with deck manipulation cards. Dropping Duchies on top of the deck explicitly to copy them makes a player feel clever. Still, Committee's trashing is really good at $4, so I wouldn't mind if both my card and your Committee appeared on the same table.

I've played with Craftsman. I keep calling it Carpenter because of the art association. Scott_pilgrim commented that the combo with other Trade token consuming cards is too on the nose, but I disagree. Craftsman can be used to gain Trade tokens, but other cards can also gain Trade tokens to be consumed by Craftsman and the flexibility and choice provided by that is cool, especially since one can tactically respond to the cards drawn.

I've played with Dignitary. I will assure everyone: Its action effect is just about worth $4. The flexibility of it can make it a bear to resolve, but the strength is easily there. I kind of appreciate that its Reaction is weaker than before so I don't have to track the other players' decks as much to prevent them from using it. I don't like that it forces a player with a 6 card hand to trash 2 cards, but it is probably the clearest and simplest wording.

I've played with Floodgate. I kind of agree that it can seem like a waste with $5 since there often isn't much reason to pass cards into a following hand, but the reasons for doing so are there (with King's Courts especially) and it works quite nicely with trash -for-benefit cards at that price.

Terrace is alright. It provides a much needed Village variant with a worthwhile, unique benefit. Have you considered letting it gain 2 Trade tokens instead of only 1? It might make it interact more interestingly with other Trade token cards.

I've played with Vendor and I love it. It is so much better than Enforcer. No complaints with this one.

I've played with Axeman. It is cool. It encourages building around cheaper parts but is pretty slow in itself. I might say it is too wildly better than Saboteur (hitting both hand-size and deck composition), but it does give the player a choice and lets them gain anything costing less to the top of the deck and also can only hit a player once but for Governor/Council Room.

I've played with Barracks/Conscripts, but not with Conscripts in their current form. I hope another card can use Conscripts. I think Conscripts is a pretty poor curser (though I'm surely underestimating the strength of gaining 2 one-shot non-terminal Militia), so I hope your set has another Curser. Maybe one that relies on Trade tokens somehow? I love Barracks either way.

I don't like Convocation very much because it is off-theme and I feel too often practically better than Laboratory. It's a fine card and a good way to do non-terminal draw.

I've played with Exchange. Exchange is awesome. Remodel is cool. Non-terminal Remodel is also cool. Pulling cards into hand with Trade tokens is the icing on the cake. I like this thing as much as Butcher (though Butcher is probably a better card on average).

I've played with Fund. Fund is a really cool one-shot and players always feel clever then they can blow Fund up to pick up a Province and something else or even only two expensive cards. Players don't even feel bad about it since Fund turns into a Silver! I love the new art too.

General is pretty cool. While it is off-theme, it lets you save your own one-shots which there are enough in your set to make it a great interaction. I like Throne Room variants and this one seems like it would be worth the $5 price. I'm pretty excited to try it.

Lodge is somewhat disjointed, but certainly a good card. The set is lacking in much terminal draw without it.

I've played with Investment. Investment is really nice with a $2 cantrip but I think is not viable otherwise. It simply costs too much-- both price and momentum since you don't get to play the card you're setting aside (and playing the card makes it significantly more complex to resolve which I don't appreciate). I like the idea of it giving coins. +$3 would make it almost a no-brainer with a $2 cantrip, but would make it so much more attractive with $3 and $4 cards.

The only game I've played with Wheelwright was the sample game you were testing. I haven't gotten to see it used though since there were no +Actions on that board and no one wanted to play such a simple, boring strategy. It seems like a fine card. The use of the "may gain a Copper" is a pretty comparable marginal benefit to Wheelwright's discard. Despite it being entirely off-theme, I can deal with it.

Have you considered a card that lets you draw by expending Trade tokens? There isn't a Coin token card that does that so I think it would be sufficiently different.

I was actually a bit worried when you said you were expanding the set and working with tokens, but now I don't even know why. I cannot wait to see what else you do with this set!
Logged
Dominion: Avarice 1.1a, my fan expansion with "in-games-using-this" cards and Edicts (updated Oct 18, 2021)

Nic

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 138
  • Respect: +85
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #209 on: January 18, 2014, 07:33:14 pm »
+1

Have you tried a card with a "You may trash this card" clause and an on-trash effect? That could work pretty well here.
Redistrict?
Could you be more specific? I'm not sure how Redistrict could fit this idea. In general, though, this mechanic is something I'm open to having in the set.
Oh, sorry. I thought he was asking for an example. If you're talking about an optional one-shot that also has a 'when you trash this' clause, I don't think there's anything interesting. It would be really tricky to make the one-shot worthwhile without making the card too powerful when paired with strong trashers. You could make a case for writing Feast this way, to remove the unintuitive interaction with Throne Room while making it more appealing on Chapel boards, but that's a topic for the other thread.


I think the Fund could use clearer wording.  It's hard to tell if you get still the $2 from the fund on the turn that you trash it in addition to the silver.

I agree that it would be nice if this were clearer. It does still give you the +$2. It's definitely something I would put in a FAQ, but I'm not sure how I would change the card wording itself. Suggestions are welcome, but I'd rather have a clean, concise wording than a messy one.
It's unambiguous, it's clear to anyone who's played with Counterfeit, and a whole lot less confusing than TR / any one-shot. If it turns out to be an issue, maybe "While this card is in play, you may trash it" makes the order more clear?
 

Gambler is one of my favorite fan cards ever.  I also like General a lot, I love throne room variants in general (no pun intended), and have always wanted a good $5 TR.  General not only fits very well into the set by comboing with one-shots, but it's also still a pretty reasonable $5 TR even on boards without one-shots.

Thanks! General is pretty new, so I hope it works out. Seems like an appropriate $5 cost, right? The main thing I worry about is its complicated interaction with one-shots that draw (Gambler and Vendor). Play General, play Vendor, draw two, trash Vendor, put Vendor on deck. Then play Vendor again, drawing that same Vendor and another card. Then you can play that same Vendor a third time, but this time the General has lost track of it, so you don't topdeck it when it leaves play. If it turns out to be too crazy, I can change General so that it only topdecks the card if you discard it from play, though obviously I want to keep the one-shot interaction if possible.
Yeah, that combo is bonkers. Getting three uses out of every Embargo you play could also be aggravating, and it might run out the tokens too quickly, but I can't think of any other cards you really have to worry about.


I don't like Floodgate, though I'm not quite sure why.  It makes sense that the way to do a "one-shot" victory card is to give it an on-gain effect, but for some reason I don't really like it.  If you leave everything else as is though, I feel like it should cost $3 and not $4.  The thing is, if I buy it with $4 to set stuff aside, and that stuff would have given me at least $1, why didn't I just buy Duchy?  So I'm sure you've playtested it and found that to not be an issue, but I'm at least interested to hear your comments on it.  It's at least nice for stopping terminal collision.

Generally, if other players don't buy a card, I change or scrap it. A few cards that are still in the OP died for that reason. Floodgate is probably the card my playtesters buy the least that I refuse to scrap. It's one of my favorite cards and I think it has a lot of value for advanced players, but that value is subtle. The cool thing about it is how many different tricks it can do, not all of which are obvious.

* You can save unspent coin for the next turn. Why would you do that instead of buying a Duchy? Maybe you'll afford a Province next turn. Especially nice if you have $7 to spend.
* You can salvage dead Action cards. Say you play a Smithy and draw a Village and a Smithy. Man, put those into your next hand.
* You can make Victory cards miss the reshuffle. Whenever you have fewer than 5 cards in your deck during your Buy phase (like when you've drawn your deck), you can leave Floodgate itself and up to 4 other cards out of your deck.

And that's not to mention any card-specific combos. Think about how it interacts with various gainers (Workshop, Mill Town) trash-for-benefit cards (Develop, Exchange), and discard-for-benefit cards (Cellar, Lodge).
I liked Floodgate okay when I looked at the cards yesterday, and I thought it was an unobjectionable filler card. Now I'm really warming up to it. If you have $4 to spend, you can get a mini-Tactician exactly when you need it most, with cards that you choose, but at the cost of some extra green in your deck. Very interesting.


Investment is really cool, and you probably don't need me to tell you this, but you should playtest it A LOT.  Of course it's fine if there are some boards where it's dead and others where it's nuts, but it potentially seems like the kind of card that would either be dead on way too many boards, or nuts on way too many boards.  If it turns out to be too weak I think just giving it +$x and +1 buy on play would help "make up" for having gone out of your way to get it.  If it turns out to be too strong it will be very hard to fix.

If I need to buff it, my top two ideas at this point are reducing its cost to $4 and/or making you play the Action card before setting it aside.
I like that second one much more. It saves you a lot of AP, and makes it viable on a lot more boards. Of course, if Investment turns out to be terribroken as is, that might not be a good thing.  :(
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #210 on: January 19, 2014, 10:33:53 am »
+4

Ah, Fragasnap, would that I had more +1s to give you. Thanks again for playtesting my cards.

I've played some games with Clerk. Clerk is probably one of the best $2 cards in the game. It's not Fool's Gold good-- you're not going to lose because you didn't get enough Clerks-- but it's easily better than Hamlet. You used the example of how Vagrant never hurts a deck: That's true, but Vagrant misses a lot more than Clerk and has a much smaller benefit (and especially a less visible benefit).
It is a fun and powerful card at $2, but I encourage increasing Clerk's price up to $3. It would harder to buy but will still be competitive in that price bracket.

Well, as Donald has said, if you can price a card lower without breaking it, do so. That's not to say that Clerk isn't too powerful for $2. Maybe it is. I'm having a heck of a time coming up with good $2 cards, though. I agree that it could cost $3. If I come up with some more good $2 cards and I need a $3 card OR if Clerk at $2 eventually proves to be too crazy, I will bump it to $3. It sounds like it hasn't yet led to degenerate games for either of us, though, so I could be happy with it just being a higher-end $2 card.

Jubilee I'm not such a fan of. +2 Actions is something I want to use repeatedly and Jubilee won't let me do that. There are also very limited instances when I want Silvers to disappear from my deck. It will be cool in the games you can buy Jubilees as one-shot Silvers to enable other Trade token cards, but I'm not sure their sustainable enough.

Sure, that's a good call. Jubilee hasn't had that much testing yet. I'm hoping it's worthwhile as a supplemental village/Silver in a deck that already has some other villages/Silvers. But that may not be interesting enough to justify the card. I'm only counting it as half a village as far as set composition goes. Mill Town (1) + Terrace (1) + Jubilee (0.5) + General (0.5) = 3.

I've played with Redistrict. This one I really like. Redistrict I think is best for trashing $4 and $5 cards while building which is really cool since few other trash-for-benefits really work that way. Redistrct can be used to grab $5 and $6 cards with $4 and $5 cards respectively and that can be really strong. I especially like the ability to gain a Gold and a $7 or a $7 and a Province in applicable games. The only thing I would question is again, its price. In the cases where I did bust open my Redistricts, I often had only $2 so it often seemed best to immediately replace my Redistrict. If it cost $3, trashing it would be a harder decision. Though, collecting them by Redistricting Estates would be easier... the cost for trash-for-benefit cards are weird.

It's not…ideal when you trash a Redistrict only to buy another one. But on the other hand, I don't think it's that rare for one-shots. It's not that uncommon to play and then immediately buy a Feast/Island/Pillage/etc.. And yeah, the cost of trah-for-benefit cards are weird, and the cost of one-shot trash-for-benefit cards are even weirder. As I've detailed earlier in the thread, I really don't want to cost Redistrict at $3 because then you can use it as a Remodel for Estates just by running out the Redistrict pile. Play Redistrict, trash Estate, gain Redistrict, trash the Redistrict you played, gain $4 card. It could cost $4, but honestly I think it might be stronger at that price. At $2, it's at least impractical to try a "Turbo Redistrict" strategy.

I've played with Barrister\Domain, but only 2-player games. This one I do not like. Barrister has an interesting sort of mini-game to it in that it becomes practically impossible to hit other players' Domains after the earliest portion of the game, but Domains are just better Coppers in your deck, so stealing them isn't all that great anyway. I do like that one cannot simply trash Domains in Barrister games since Barrister pulls Domains out of the trash regardless of whether it trashed them or not: That's a nice design touch. The big issue I have is that in multiplayer games, I think it is going to be way too swingy. I usually play 3-player games and the opportunity to pick up 9VP from stealing cards from other players (even using an admittedly weak card) is so swingy that I do not appreciate the sound of it. Just the same, it's a very cool idea and well designed card. I'm not going to really knock it, I don't like it much personally.

Well, I definitely think it warrants more testing, especially in 3 and 4-player games. I'm not sure it's going to be all that common in such games for one person to end up with all of the Domains. The more someone has, the easier it is to steal one. I really like the idea of a card that you can only get from other players and I think Domain is probably the most elegant way to do it. I'm starting to really like LibraryAdventurer's suggestion of raising Domain's cost, though. I think it may make Domains more desirable (for their TfB uses) and make them matter in more games. At first I was thinking $4, but that's probably too much swinginess in terms of whether you line up your opening TfB card with your Domain, especially Redistrict. $2 is dull; just another Estate-cost card in your starting deck. Probably I'll try it at $3.

I've played with Mill Town. I stand by Mill Town being ridiculous in any game one can increase his hand size consistently. I love the card to death, but recommend adding a trashing clause like Horn of Plenty's.

You could still be right about that. It will be nice if it doesn't need that clause, but it may very well be necessary. I haven't tested Mill Town all that much lately, so I have no new data on its ridiculousness.

Committee is a decent bit of player interaction, but I'm not a huge fan. I have an extremely similar card that rather than copying or trashing one of 2 cards copies a found card costing from $3 to $6 which I think is more fun since a player can control it with deck manipulation cards. Dropping Duchies on top of the deck explicitly to copy them makes a player feel clever. Still, Committee's trashing is really good at $4, so I wouldn't mind if both my card and your Committee appeared on the same table.

Committee's first version was actually closer to your card, but with the player interaction instead of the cost restriction. It was "Reveal the top 5 cards of your deck. The player to your left names a card. Gain a copy of a revealed card that isn't the named card. Discard the revealed cards." For $5. I found that way too often, you'd be revealing a bunch of dreck and one good card. So it sucked unless your deck was already awesome. It went through a bunch of iterations. Long story short, it's currently as you see it. I think you can still get value out of deck manipulation with Committee. Hopefully you'll like it more if you try it out.

So far I like it a lot in the playtests it's had. It can be powerful, but you need to manage your deck carefully. One of my playtesters bought a few in a game with Haven. He got some early trashing in, but then kept revealing Haven and another card. I kept choosing Haven, so he kept gaining them. Man, you only want so many Havens.

Terrace is alright. It provides a much needed Village variant with a worthwhile, unique benefit. Have you considered letting it gain 2 Trade tokens instead of only 1? It might make it interact more interestingly with other Trade token cards.

I actually recently had a game with Terrace and Tinker (no longer pictured), where it was way too easy to rack up Trade tokens just by gaining Terraces (with Ironworks). Now I've already swapped out Tinker, so maybe that particular issue is already fixed. But my point is that when you want Terrace as a village, you probably want a bunch of them, in which case you're racking up quite a few Trade tokens automatically. And although I haven't yet playtested the new version of Terrace (with the flat +5 Cards), I think its token ability is on the weak side compared to some other Trade token cards. So I think even at one token per Terrace, you're getting that interaction pretty frequently. At two, I fear it would get crazy pretty quickly.

That's not to say that I couldn't have some other card that got you two tokens when you gained it. It would probably have to be a less spammable card, though. There's not much opportunity cost for stocking up on Terraces in most games.

I've played with Vendor and I love it. It is so much better than Enforcer. No complaints with this one.

Thanks, I strongly agree. Enforcer had been around forever, but I finally had a 4-player game where it was just obviously too obnoxious.

I've played with Investment. Investment is really nice with a $2 cantrip but I think is not viable otherwise. It simply costs too much-- both price and momentum since you don't get to play the card you're setting aside (and playing the card makes it significantly more complex to resolve which I don't appreciate). I like the idea of it giving coins. +$3 would make it almost a no-brainer with a $2 cantrip, but would make it so much more attractive with $3 and $4 cards.

I'm going to try it at a lower cost, I think. $4 is obviously a candidate, but I don't think you want to open with it or buy a bunch of them, so honestly I could try it at $3 or $2. If it's still needs a boost at a lower cost, I'll give it +$X or some other bonus.

Have you considered a card that lets you draw by expending Trade tokens? There isn't a Coin token card that does that so I think it would be sufficiently different.

I'm glad you asked this question. I've been deliberately avoiding doing Trade tokens for +Cards because of the large potential for disappointment. Mostly when you spend Trade tokens, I want you to know ahead of time what you're going to get. Jubliee --> it doesn't get trashed. Exchange --> gained card goes into your hand. Lodge --> +$X where you know what X is going to be. Terrace is the odd one out, but the idea is that you'll use it when you draw Terrace with no other Actions to use it with. It's likely that you'll like your new hand better. Anyhow, if a card let you draw cards by spending a Trade token and you drew a bunch of crap or dead Actions, you'd feel like you wasted your Trade token, and that's something I want to avoid. The closest I had was this:

Quote
Types: Action
Cost: $4
You may spend a Trade token. If you didn't, discard 2 cards. +4 Cards.

But I didn't way a bunch of terminal discard-then-draw in the set, and I like Wheelwright better.

I don't like Refurbish. It is a good and simple way to get the concept to work, but it is so incredibly off theme that I cannot associate it with the rest of your set.

I don't like Convocation very much because it is off-theme and I feel too often practically better than Laboratory. It's a fine card and a good way to do non-terminal draw.

Well, I understand that you aren't really a fan of off-theme cards. If I had to scrap two cards from the set to make room for other cards, these two would be them. But that being said, I think there's room for a few off-theme cards, especially in a 25-card set. Especially because I feel you can't just have a full-sized set chock-full of one-shots. I like having a non-terminal draw card in the set (that you don't have to trash to get that draw), and I have yet to come up with a good Trade token (or otherwise on-theme) version of such a card.

If I think of another good theme that complements the one-shots and can accommodate the types of cards I want to fill out the set, I'll do that. Honestly, the set already has sort of a sub-theme of Copper-related cards (Clerk, Mill Town, Wheelwright).

I do like how Refurbish combos with Fund, but that's really the only thing tying it to this set.

I was actually a bit worried when you said you were expanding the set and working with tokens, but now I don't even know why. I cannot wait to see what else you do with this set!

Thanks! I hope I don't disappoint you. Right now I'm struggling for more ideas, but I tend to find them eventually.

It would be really tricky to make the one-shot worthwhile without making the card too powerful when paired with strong trashers. You could make a case for writing Feast this way, to remove the unintuitive interaction with Throne Room while making it more appealing on Chapel boards, but that's a topic for the other thread.

Yeah, this is a good call.

It's unambiguous, it's clear to anyone who's played with Counterfeit, and a whole lot less confusing than TR / any one-shot. If it turns out to be an issue, maybe "While this card is in play, you may trash it" makes the order more clear?

"While this is in play" doesn't really work as a trigger, because it doesn't specify whether you can do it in the middle of resolving another card, etc. But I think you're right that it's unambiguous and doesn't need a change. The FAQ can clarify for anybody who's confused.

Yeah, that combo is bonkers. Getting three uses out of every Embargo you play could also be aggravating, and it might run out the tokens too quickly, but I can't think of any other cards you really have to worry about.

Hmm, that's a good call with Embargo. Especially since I use Embargo tokens as Trade tokens! :D  It may be that I'll have to take out the one-shot synergy after more playtesting. Hopefully not, but maybe.

If I need to buff it, my top two ideas at this point are reducing its cost to $4 and/or making you play the Action card before setting it aside.
I like that second one much more. It saves you a lot of AP, and makes it viable on a lot more boards. Of course, if Investment turns out to be terribroken as is, that might not be a good thing.  :(

I also like the "play it first" option except for the fact that it makes it not work with other one-shots because the Investment will lose track of the card before it can be set aside. Maybe that's not a big deal. Investment itself is a one-shot and with that change it would kind of make other cards into one-shots. And as you say, it saves a lot of AP, particularly when you have another terminal in hand you'd like to play.

Oh, also, I love your thoughts in the Conscripts Reaction thread. I haven't replied there yet, but I really appreciate the ideas. Hopefully I will yet fit such a Reaction into this set.
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2006
  • Respect: +2110
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #211 on: January 21, 2014, 01:35:43 am »
+1

If you're looking for a 4th attack what was wrong with Tax Collector (other than the name)? It's not too similar to Axeman. Axeman feels like a fixed Saboteur, while Tax Collector feels like a fixed Bureaucrat. It's a great card.

Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2006
  • Respect: +2110
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #212 on: January 21, 2014, 02:32:54 am »
+2

Quick impressions of cards

Clerk: It really seems like it's just a Peddler that sometimes fluffs instead of anything interesting strategically. It does mean you can't trash all your coppers, but that isn't particularly interesting. I like the idea but I'm not sure being a Cantrip is best suited to it. Maybe this could be a $4 "bazaar", which would give it some interesting play with engines.

Jubilee: This card seems pretty interesting strategically, kind of like a more dangerous Mining Village. One you'd have to think hard about buying, which is good for $2.

Redistrict: Love it. I wish this card was real.

Barrister: It's pretty much Rabble Jr. In the other topic you called it a Trasher/Mucker but it will probably largely just be a Mucker. Still the Domain thing means you might get a bonus duchy (or even "province) in return for losing junk. This will be crazy in multiplayer in a good way. I love the fact that the card stops people from trashing their own domains. At any rate the replacement for starting copper thing is done way better here than my "trinket" idea, and it's also the perfect way of answering the "what if" question of a self powering Alt-VP. Good card.

Gambler: Lots of fun and original idea. Always liked this.

Mill Town: The "discard a card" always seemed like a very transparent way of making it weaker than vanilla village at 3. I do like any card that makes interesting use of Coppers. Both this and Clerk contradict Barrister/Domain, but that's probably fine. Importantly you can't ever gain provinces unless you go out of your way to buy a copper. I like that.

Refurbish: I think this card could be more interesting. Copper->Silver is actually not great trashing because of the -$1 (Mine and Taxman both have ways of negating the money loss), nor is Estate->Silver. A niche card, but will it be interesting often enough? This set's "counting house".

Committee: Maybe a bit slow, but I like the interactivity.

Craftsman: A niche card that maybe won't be interesting enough without other Trade token cards, but I can see other combos too. Worth playtesting on a board with good $5 cards or action heavy boards, or boards where it's the only non terminal. I think this is the right idea for the card that gains trade tokens on play.

Dignitary: Excellent top effect. The reaction answers a "what if" but it seems kind of shoehorned on. I don't know where else it would fit. I love reactions at any rate.

Floodgate: Love it. A high skill card. Could do well with the "worth 1VP for every empty pile" effect if you want an Alt-VP somewhere, but it's not necessary.

Terrace: I first thought it was bland, but then realised it's the perfect innocuous bonus for a village. If you buy lots of these you can line up your oneshot cellars to get the perfect megaturn.

Vendor: Sorry but I don't think this card is different enough from Gambler and Stables to be interesting. Not every card has to be super original and I'd enjoy playing with this, but considering the originality of the rest of the cards it does stand out a bit.

Axeman: YES! YES! YES! What an interesting attack. This card is what Saboteur should have been. I'm assuming the bottom clause is there so you can't open with it, which is fair.

Barracks/Conscripts: I keep thinking the gain 2 conscripts action is much better than the attack drawing, but I thought that regardless of what conscripts were. What I like here is that now having 2 conscripts has a thematic edge.

Convocation: May I suggest the name "Neapolitan" :P?

Exchange: I don't like how it's just a non terminal remodel except for the Trade token. The trade token effect has always been great and answers a big "what if?". I like Terrace so I shouldn't have a problem with this card's non trade token effect. Maybe Craftsman ruins the idea of trade tokens as oneshots, which is why...

Fund: The art for this should be the same as the art for a trade token, since the mechanic of this card is now embodied by many others. I've always liked the card although if there's room for a "you may trash" meets "when trash" clause, it's this card (eg have it be a silver that you can trash to gain another silver in hand)

General: I initially liked this card but thinking a bit more it's not really covering any ground that Scheme didn't, except benefiting oneshots (which is somewhat done by Procession). I guess it's a pseudo KC (play twice this turn, once next turn) and multiple generals can be interesting strategically. There are several cards that will work well with General in the set. although the pure oneshot (Investment) doesn't.

Lodge: Doesn't seem to cover any ground that Vault doesn't. Perhaps a cellar effect would be more interesting, or use the draw and discard from wheelwright with "you may spend a trade token. If you do, play this again". I'd love to see a "play this again" effect.

Investment: You need to be pretty sure about what you're doing with this card. I think it's a bit of a Counting House.

Wheelwright: Just seems like 2 effects tacked on together. Each other player gains a copper in hand is a great effect that I wish was on some official card (with this or ruins), but I wish the first effect were as interesting.

Overall I love the set and would love to playtest it in some form. Your work is the best case that can possibly be made for continuing to make new dominion sets.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #213 on: January 21, 2014, 09:17:14 am »
+2

If you're looking for a 4th attack what was wrong with Tax Collector (other than the name)? It's not too similar to Axeman. Axeman feels like a fixed Saboteur, while Tax Collector feels like a fixed Bureaucrat. It's a great card.

For reference, here's the card that you're referring to, which I had since renamed Magistrate:

Quote
Magistrate
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $4 or $5
+$2. Each other player reveals a card from his hand other than a Copper (or reveals a hand of all Copper). He discards it or puts it on top of his deck, your choice.

Weeeeell, there are reasons I went back to Axeman (which is closer to what Magistrate looked like back in the day). There's a fair bit of overlap between the cards in that once one hits you, the other can't that turn. Conscripts already invalidates Axeman's attack which I feel is bad enough. I don't want another Attack like that in the set.

I couldn't decide whether to cost Magistrate should cost $4 or $5. It seems weak for $5. Normally you're doing about as much damage to your opponent as a Militia or Bureaucrat. But it makes for less fun games than Militia because early on when you have a hand of 4 Coppers and an Action, you have to discard the Action.

Axeman has this problem of removing fun cards from your hand even worse, but it has several advantages.

• Now that you can't open with it (barring Nomad Camp or Baker/Necropolis), each other player has time to build up their deck with 4 good purchases before they start getting hit.
• The players being attacked have interesting decisions to make about which card (if any) to gain onto their decks.
• All decisions are made by the victim, making the card faster to resolve.

Sorry you're not a fan of Clerk or Vendor. I think it's important to have some simple cards, though. Clerk actually combos with several of the cards in the set, so I find it somewhat strategically interesting. Vendor is at least on-theme and is a nice, fairly spammable utility card, which every set should have some of. It at least has +1 Buy, which differentiates it from Gambler and Stables. It used to have a spy-like attack instead of +1 Buy, but that was really annoying and slow to resolve. I agree with Fragasnap, this version is much better.

Mill Town: The "discard a card" always seemed like a very transparent way of making it weaker than vanilla village at 3. I do like any card that makes interesting use of Coppers. Both this and Clerk contradict Barrister/Domain, but that's probably fine. Importantly you can't ever gain provinces unless you go out of your way to buy a copper. I like that.

Actually the "discard a card" has nothing to do with making it weaker than vanilla Village. It's a nerf to its gaining ability. Without it, you could get really lucky on turn 3 with a hand of 4 Coppers and a Mill Town, draw another Copper, gain a $5 card and buy another $5 card. Years ago, the card just had +2 Actions and the gain, without the draw or the discard. The filtering helps mitigate the swinginess while giving it a needed power boost.

Refurbish: I think this card could be more interesting. Copper->Silver is actually not great trashing because of the -$1 (Mine and Taxman both have ways of negating the money loss), nor is Estate->Silver. A niche card, but will it be interesting often enough? This set's "counting house".

Sure, it's weak trashing at first. But it effectively gives +$X where $X is the number of Silvers in your hand. Hopefully that makes up for it. It hasn't gotten enough testing yet.

Barracks/Conscripts: I keep thinking the gain 2 conscripts action is much better than the attack drawing, but I thought that regardless of what conscripts were. What I like here is that now having 2 conscripts has a thematic edge.

Yeah, I think in general the gain is better than the digging. But at least you sometimes have incentive to dig in order to play multiple Conscripts in a turn. The card's moved a long way from its initial design of "dig for an Attack" for better or for worse. The Conscripts tend to be the focus. It's well-liked as-is, though. I'm happy with it. The digging is sometimes used by my playtesters, so I don't feel it's a waste of text.

General: I initially liked this card but thinking a bit more it's not really covering any ground that Scheme didn't, except benefiting oneshots (which is somewhat done by Procession). I guess it's a pseudo KC (play twice this turn, once next turn) and multiple generals can be interesting strategically. There are several cards that will work well with General in the set. although the pure oneshot (Investment) doesn't.

New ground? Maybe not. I think it's a great combination of Throne Room and Scheme, though, and I'm quite proud of it. It's not strictly better than Scheme because you don't get to choose which card gets topdecked at the end of your turn. They can't all cover new ground, but if they provide a unique play experience, that's awesome. Mystic and Highway don't cover any new ground either, but I think you'll agree they're quite different than Wishing Well and Bridge.

Lodge: Doesn't seem to cover any ground that Vault doesn't. Perhaps a cellar effect would be more interesting, or use the draw and discard from wheelwright with "you may spend a trade token. If you do, play this again". I'd love to see a "play this again" effect.

I love the "Play this again" for a Trade token ability. I will strive to use it. However, I am going to test Lodge as-is before changing it.

Wheelwright: Just seems like 2 effects tacked on together. Each other player gains a copper in hand is a great effect that I wish was on some official card (with this or ruins), but I wish the first effect were as interesting.

Which 2 parts seemed tacked together? The discard and draw to 7 have obvious synergy with each other, I would think. So those aren't just tacked together. The Copper gain for others makes you specifically less likely to play a ton of Wheelwrights. It also makes the other players want Wheelwright less, in a similar fashion to Vault. If you have a Vault in hand, you're unlikely to want to use other players' Vaults to lower your hand size. Similarly, if you have a Wheelwright in hand, you're unlikely to want to gain Copper into your hand. Unless you wanted that Copper in your deck anyway, it doesn't do you much good. So it should encourage divergent strategies, which I like.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #214 on: January 21, 2014, 12:22:22 pm »
+1

First attempt at a "play this again" Trade token mechanic:

Quote
Pioneer
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+2 Cards. Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. Discard one and put the rest back. You may spend a trade token. If you do, play this again.

When you gain this, take a Trade token.

I said before that I didn't want to have a Trade-tokens for draw mechanic, but with this card you'll often know what you'd be drawing, so I'm fine with it. Feedback?
« Last Edit: January 21, 2014, 12:28:31 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #215 on: January 21, 2014, 01:38:04 pm »
+1

First attempt at a "play this again" Trade token mechanic:

Quote
Pioneer
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+2 Cards. Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. Discard one and put the rest back. You may spend a trade token. If you do, play this again.

When you gain this, take a Trade token.

I said before that I didn't want to have a Trade-tokens for draw mechanic, but with this card you'll often know what you'd be drawing, so I'm fine with it. Feedback?

It seems to me that a "play this again for a token" would be really neat on a non-terminal, because then it can be a village as the special action. With a terminal, the special action doesn't do anything different/unique. Though I do like that with Pioneer, the special action isn't just draw 2, it's specifically draw the 2 cards that you just put back.
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

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #216 on: January 21, 2014, 02:17:30 pm »
0

First attempt at a "play this again" Trade token mechanic:

Quote
Pioneer
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+2 Cards. Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. Discard one and put the rest back. You may spend a trade token. If you do, play this again.

When you gain this, take a Trade token.

I said before that I didn't want to have a Trade-tokens for draw mechanic, but with this card you'll often know what you'd be drawing, so I'm fine with it. Feedback?

It seems to me that a "play this again for a token" would be really neat on a non-terminal, because then it can be a village as the special action. With a terminal, the special action doesn't do anything different/unique. Though I do like that with Pioneer, the special action isn't just draw 2, it's specifically draw the 2 cards that you just put back.

Although I agree it would be cool to have a card that effectively gives additional Actions through Trade tokens, I'm strongly leaning toward a terminal for "play it again". For one thing, 4 out of the 5 existing Trade token cards are non-terminal. More importantly, Pioneer has the special advantage of needing absolutely no tracking, which is a great asset for a card that can be played an arbitrary number of times. The set already has quite a bit of difficult Action, Coin, and Buy tracking, due to a number of one-shots that give those resources (and General, which might not let you "set aside" those cards on the way to the trash for tracking purposes). With Pioneer, no matter how many times you played it, you have the same number of Actions, Buys, and Coins. Whatever's in your hand is in your hand and whatever's on your deck is on your deck.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #217 on: January 21, 2014, 05:41:22 pm »
+1

I'm not sure if I ever actually went through this set in detail, but I'll try now.  Will refer to cards by name since there aren't text versions to quote... sorry. :P



Clerk -- simple, looks solid.

Jubilee -- 2-shot mini-Festival.  No idea if the cost is appropriate, but I know LF has tested plenty.  One interesting niche it fills is to strengthen 5/2 starts.  On some boards, there isn't anything worth buying at $2.  Now, you can buy a disappearing Silver.  That in itself could be interesting on some boards.  You often need Silver to start buying engine components, but the Silver is junk once you have the engine going.  Jubilee is a good substitute (and doubles as a temporary engine component while it's around).  All that is pretty deep for such a simple card.  Deceptive!

Redistrict -- The primary action is a weak Upgrade.  However, it can also function as a 1-shot Remodel.  Flexible enough that it could have interesting applications, but it's still appropriately weak for the low cost.

Barrister/Domain -- Wordy, and it might need a little more.  It says that each other player "puts the rest back on top" but it doesn't specify what order.  Most cards say "in any order he chooses", but Barrister may not have enough space for that.  It might need to be relegated to the FAQ.  An alternative is to just have everything else discarded, but then it loses the mini-Rabble effect.  Not sure how I feel about this in general.  Not a huge fan of Thief, of which this is partially a variant.

Gambler -- Basically an early game trasher that eventually disappears.  Sometimes you get unlucky and lose it early (or have to trash an early purchase, like a Silver).  A bit swingy, but that's part of the theme.  Even then, you draw the good card so you get a bit of a bonus anyway!

Mill Town -- Pretty strange.  Weaker than Village for +actions, but on some boards you'll just make due.  Its more interesting function is as an early-game gainer, which may allow you to build an engine fast enough to make up for the weaker village support.  On some boards, it may actually pull even more weight by gaining more expensive things.  That's neat.

Refurbish -- I don't know how this would play out.  It turns a card into a single Silver, which is sometimes better than Trader (trashing Coppers, Curses, Ruins) but often worse (trashing anything else).  But it also makes Silvers as valuable as Gold while in play.  An interesting synergy there.

Committee -- Kind of an odd jumble of interactions.  It makes the name particularly apt.  This provides some early game trashing, but could quickly transition into a sort of weak Workshop that gives you little choice.  I think it would be best in fast-trashing engines, where each play will gain you another relevant engine component.

Craftsman -- Not sure I like the use of Trade tokens here.  Seems like something that would be better handled with Coin tokens?  It would have some differences, of course.  Hm.

Dignitary -- Pretty simple, but can make for some tough decisions.  That's cool.  The reaction is also something that feels like it should have been an official card.  Really neat.

Floodgate -- Feels kind of like an on-gain Tactician.  That's alright, though it doesn't grab me for some reason.

Terrace -- Village with a kind of one-shot mulligan.  Seems fine.

Vendor -- Kind of a mix of Lab and Stables.  I imagine that it would generally be used for filtering until the game-ending turn when you let all the Vendors get trashed in order to draw your deck.  The +Buy lends itself to that strategy.  It is reminiscent of Mining Village this way.  I like it.

Axeman -- Not sure how to feel about this.  The attack seems very powerful, but the top-decked gain mitigates it somewhat.  In some ways, it is weaker than Saboteur in that it gives opponents some control over what gets trashed, not to mention that the gain is top-decked and can cost just $1 less than the trashed card.  The buy restriction is interesting.  It mostly stops players from opening with Axeman and making it more difficult to get in the early game.

Barracks/Conscripts -- Conscripts is quite powerful, though one-shot.  It's non-terminal Militia that Curses if the opponent has already discarded.  Given that strength, Barracks is also pretty good.  Barracks' second option also makes for an interesting choice.  Get a second Witch, or get a Barracks to play your one Witch more often?  Looks good.

Convocation -- interesting in that it promotes building a deck balanced between Treasures and Actions.  Not sure how it compares with Lab.  At first glance, Lab seems like it would be better most of the time.  Even if you manage to draw three, one of those is a Victory card anyway.  But that extra revealed card means that Convocation provides filtering, potentially drawing a better card than Lab would have gotten you, as well as clearing out extra VP cards.  That's different enough.

Exchange -- non-terminal Remodel with a one-shot "gain to hand".  That's alright.  I wonder about having multiple Remodel variants in the set, but Exchange and Redistrict serve very different purposes.  But why doesn't this have a Re- name?

Fund -- a Silver+ that fits the set theme by giving a one-shot +Buy.  The way it does it is elegantly done.  My main concern is that this does seem a bit weak to me.  I think that a Silver with +Buy would be fine at $5, if a bit boring.  Fund is pretty much strictly inferior to that.  Even so, the elegance argues for leaving it as is. :P

General -- Throne Room with a bonus, where the bonus is Scheme.  Seems like a cool idea.  I wonder about tracking, but that could probably be handled simply from card placement.  when I play TR I put the throned card on top of it.  Doing the same thing with General gives a natural way to track which cards will get top-decked (well, excepting the trashed cards that get pulled back that is).  Interestingly, General-General can function as mini KC-Scheme.  It doesn't keep as many cards and isn't sustainable unless you can draw more Generals in the next hand, but it helps.  That's cool.  I didn't think I'd ever see a TR+ that I'd like.

Lodge -- The Smithy+ of the set, which grants a one-time Victory->coin.  Simple enough.

Investment -- I've discussed this before.  I really like it.

Wheelwright -- Not sure how I feel about this one.  Eh, it looks fine. :P





Not sure if any of that feedback is useful, but I hope it is.  Definitely the most polished fan set I've seen around.

On the trade token cards -- any particular reason why some of them are on-gain and others are on-buy?  I suppose Exchange is on-buy to prevent it from draining its own pile with Fortress.  Were the rest on-gain?  Eh, probably.


PPE: reading others' comments now.  I don't think Fund needs clearer wording -- trashed treasures have already produced coins for you, and this is consistent with established rules (e.g. Spoils, Mint).

Interesting note about Floodgate tricks.  Still not fully sold, but I see why you refuse to scrap it.

NoMoreFun makes a good point about how Lodge is pretty close to Vault.
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 440
  • Respect: +703
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #218 on: January 21, 2014, 06:03:52 pm »
+1

I actually recently had a game with Terrace and Tinker (no longer pictured), where it was way too easy to rack up Trade tokens just by gaining Terraces (with Ironworks). ...
That's not to say that I couldn't have some other card that got you two tokens when you gained it. It would probably have to be a less spammable card, though. There's not much opportunity cost for stocking up on Terraces in most games.
Fair point. From experience, a mini-Forge (especially with draw) is ludicrously powerful.
Making a spammable card afford multiple tokens could especially encourage the use of that card's perhaps more situational Trade token ability in the presence of other Trade token cards. Were that card Terrace, buying one would give so many Trade tokens, it would seem trivial to spend one for its effect. You're probably right overall. This was only a gut reaction.

Yeah, that combo is bonkers. Getting three uses out of every Embargo you play could also be aggravating, and it might run out the tokens too quickly, but I can't think of any other cards you really have to worry about.
Hmm, that's a good call with Embargo. Especially since I use Embargo tokens as Trade tokens! :D  It may be that I'll have to take out the one-shot synergy after more playtesting. Hopefully not, but maybe.
King's Court/Embargo already does this, so I cannot imagine that General/Embargo will present any bigger an issue even though General is much more attainable. If it were to present such a problem, you can probably Embargo the Generals before it would be much of an problem.

If I need to buff it, my top two ideas at this point are reducing its cost to $4 and/or making you play the Action card before setting it aside.
I like that second one much more. It saves you a lot of AP, and makes it viable on a lot more boards. Of course, if Investment turns out to be terribroken as is, that might not be a good thing.  :(

I also like the "play it first" option except for the fact that it makes it not work with other one-shots because the Investment will lose track of the card before it can be set aside. Maybe that's not a big deal. Investment itself is a one-shot and with that change it would kind of make other cards into one-shots. And as you say, it saves a lot of AP, particularly when you have another terminal in hand you'd like to play.
To be fair, you probably wouldn't want to invest in true one-shots anyway. The problem is that Investment is basically nonterminal if built to play cards first which changes the card significantly. The change would further incentivize investing in nonterminal cards because one could invest and get the pay off on the same turn. I would look into making it as viable as possible to invest in good terminal Actions... but I'm not sure how to do that.

First attempt at a "play this again" Trade token mechanic:

Quote
Pioneer
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+2 Cards. Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. Discard one and put the rest back. You may spend a trade token. If you do, play this again.

When you gain this, take a Trade token.

I said before that I didn't want to have a Trade-tokens for draw mechanic, but with this card you'll often know what you'd be drawing, so I'm fine with it. Feedback?

This should say "look at" instead of "reveal" and "put the rest back in any order." I like it. I especially like that a single Pioneer can be used as many times as you have Trade tokens. That could be a great payoff in games with cards with weaker Trade token abilities like Jubilee and Terrace. I'd like it a bit more if the discard was optional, but it is probably better to keep it simple since most of the time discarding will be the better option.
There are, of course, numerous ways around the "unknown draw" issue. How about making a sort of Embassy whose discard (or penalty otherwise) is made less severe by paying a Trade token?
Logged
Dominion: Avarice 1.1a, my fan expansion with "in-games-using-this" cards and Edicts (updated Oct 18, 2021)

mail-mi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1298
  • Shuffle iT Username: mail-mi
  • Come play some Forum Mafia with us!
  • Respect: +1364
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #219 on: January 21, 2014, 07:26:02 pm »
+2

Fund -- a Silver+ that fits the set theme by giving a one-shot +Buy.  The way it does it is elegantly done.  My main concern is that this does seem a bit weak to me.  I think that a Silver with +Buy would be fine at $5, if a bit boring.  Fund is pretty much strictly inferior to that.  Even so, the elegance argues for leaving it as is. :P
doesn't the silver you gain go to hand so you can play it in the same turn?
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

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #220 on: January 21, 2014, 09:12:22 pm »
+1

Fund -- a Silver+ that fits the set theme by giving a one-shot +Buy.  The way it does it is elegantly done.  My main concern is that this does seem a bit weak to me.  I think that a Silver with +Buy would be fine at $5, if a bit boring.  Fund is pretty much strictly inferior to that.  Even so, the elegance argues for leaving it as is. :P
doesn't the silver you gain go to hand so you can play it in the same turn?

Oops, missed that.  Yes, that makes it much better.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #221 on: January 22, 2014, 11:02:47 am »
0

Thanks for the comments, eHalcyon. Glad you seem to like the set overall.

Exchange -- non-terminal Remodel with a one-shot "gain to hand".  That's alright.  I wonder about having multiple Remodel variants in the set, but Exchange and Redistrict serve very different purposes.

As a counterpoint, Guilds is a 13 card set with 3 Remodel variants: Stonemason, Taxman, and Butcher. As long as they're sufficiently different, I think having several Remodels can be OK.

Yeah, that combo is bonkers. Getting three uses out of every Embargo you play could also be aggravating, and it might run out the tokens too quickly, but I can't think of any other cards you really have to worry about.
Hmm, that's a good call with Embargo. Especially since I use Embargo tokens as Trade tokens! :D  It may be that I'll have to take out the one-shot synergy after more playtesting. Hopefully not, but maybe.
King's Court/Embargo already does this, so I cannot imagine that General/Embargo will present any bigger an issue even though General is much more attainable. If it were to present such a problem, you can probably Embargo the Generals before it would be much of an problem.

Well, King's Court gets you 30 Embargo plays, maximum. General gets you theoretically infinite Embargo plays. That's not necessarily a deal breaker, but that combined with the other tracking issues are making me want to at least try having General do something else when the card is trashed, like gaining a Gold or another copy of the card or something.

If I need to buff it, my top two ideas at this point are reducing its cost to $4 and/or making you play the Action card before setting it aside.
I like that second one much more. It saves you a lot of AP, and makes it viable on a lot more boards. Of course, if Investment turns out to be terribroken as is, that might not be a good thing.  :(

I also like the "play it first" option except for the fact that it makes it not work with other one-shots because the Investment will lose track of the card before it can be set aside. Maybe that's not a big deal. Investment itself is a one-shot and with that change it would kind of make other cards into one-shots. And as you say, it saves a lot of AP, particularly when you have another terminal in hand you'd like to play.
To be fair, you probably wouldn't want to invest in true one-shots anyway. The problem is that Investment is basically nonterminal if built to play cards first which changes the card significantly. The change would further incentivize investing in nonterminal cards because one could invest and get the pay off on the same turn. I would look into making it as viable as possible to invest in good terminal Actions... but I'm not sure how to do that.

It would be cool to somehow incentivize Investing in terminal Actions, but I think the fact that non-terminals make better Investment targets is just the nature of the beast. So I think I'm going to try buffing it with a "play that Action" first and see how it goes.

First attempt at a "play this again" Trade token mechanic:

Quote
Pioneer
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+2 Cards. Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. Discard one and put the rest back. You may spend a trade token. If you do, play this again.

When you gain this, take a Trade token.

I said before that I didn't want to have a Trade-tokens for draw mechanic, but with this card you'll often know what you'd be drawing, so I'm fine with it. Feedback?

This should say "look at" instead of "reveal" and "put the rest back in any order." I like it. I especially like that a single Pioneer can be used as many times as you have Trade tokens. That could be a great payoff in games with cards with weaker Trade token abilities like Jubilee and Terrace. I'd like it a bit more if the discard was optional, but it is probably better to keep it simple since most of the time discarding will be the better option.
There are, of course, numerous ways around the "unknown draw" issue. How about making a sort of Embassy whose discard (or penalty otherwise) is made less severe by paying a Trade token?

*slaps forehead* Thanks for the "look at" instead of "reveal". Usually I'm such a stickler about that. "Put the rest back in any order" is already missing from Barrister and Dignitary for space reasons and I'm considering just leaving it off all the applicable cards. When I mock up Pioneer, I'll see if I can fit it in easily. I figure that it can be a general rule in the rulebook, since no published card that makes you put cards on your deck enforces a particular order.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #222 on: January 22, 2014, 12:31:29 pm »
+1

First attempt at a "play this again" Trade token mechanic:

Quote
Pioneer
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+2 Cards. Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. Discard one and put the rest back. You may spend a trade token. If you do, play this again.

When you gain this, take a Trade token.

I said before that I didn't want to have a Trade-tokens for draw mechanic, but with this card you'll often know what you'd be drawing, so I'm fine with it. Feedback?

It seems to me that a "play this again for a token" would be really neat on a non-terminal, because then it can be a village as the special action. With a terminal, the special action doesn't do anything different/unique. Though I do like that with Pioneer, the special action isn't just draw 2, it's specifically draw the 2 cards that you just put back.

Although I agree it would be cool to have a card that effectively gives additional Actions through Trade tokens, I'm strongly leaning toward a terminal for "play it again". For one thing, 4 out of the 5 existing Trade token cards are non-terminal. More importantly, Pioneer has the special advantage of needing absolutely no tracking, which is a great asset for a card that can be played an arbitrary number of times. The set already has quite a bit of difficult Action, Coin, and Buy tracking, due to a number of one-shots that give those resources (and General, which might not let you "set aside" those cards on the way to the trash for tracking purposes). With Pioneer, no matter how many times you played it, you have the same number of Actions, Buys, and Coins. Whatever's in your hand is in your hand and whatever's on your deck is on your deck.

Ah, I hadn't even considered playing it more than twice! Yeah, that really changes things. Of course you can only play it twice if you just bought one copy, but if you got Trade Tokens other ways... yeah, that would be cool.
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

mustang255

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 28
  • Shuffle iT Username: Mustang255
  • Respect: +26
    • View Profile
    • Souva Games
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #223 on: January 22, 2014, 09:34:59 pm »
+1

How does the investment mat interact with the end game? Do they count towards your deck at the end of the game? This would matter for action-victory cards, Vineyards, Gardens, and possibly Fairgrounds and Silk Road as well.

Also, Investment+Rats = HILARITY. I am trying to think of a scenario where that would actually be a viable deck; possibly something involving lots and lots of fortresses.
Logged

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1102
  • Respect: +2144
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #224 on: January 22, 2014, 09:47:07 pm »
+2

How does the investment mat interact with the end game? Do they count towards your deck at the end of the game? This would matter for action-victory cards, Vineyards, Gardens, and possibly Fairgrounds and Silk Road as well.

Same as Island, Native Village, Haven, etc.  They go back to your deck at the end of the game.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 48  All
 

Page created in 0.117 seconds with 20 queries.