Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] 16 17 ... 48  All

Author Topic: Dominion: Enterprise  (Read 412383 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #350 on: April 21, 2014, 05:41:43 pm »
0

So, here's a sample idea. Let me know what you all think:

Quote
Barracks
Types: Action – Campaign
Cost: $5
+1 Action. Choose one: gain 2 Conscripts from the Conscripts pile; or reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Attack card, put that Attack card into your hand, and discard the rest.

Conscripts
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $0*
+1 Action. +$2. Return this to the Conscripts pile. Each other player may discard a Domain. If he doesn't, he gains a Curse. (This is not in the Supply.)

The "Campaign" type simply means that each player starts with a Domain instead of one of his Coppers.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3191
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #351 on: April 21, 2014, 05:49:50 pm »
+1

Quote
Because a lot of people think it's too much better than Lab. That's not such a big deal that I'm going to cut it before finding a replacement, though. It may not get cut at all.

that's strange, I've never played it, but it looks a lot weaker than lab to me

Quote
    Barracks
    Types: Action – Campaign
    Cost: $5
    +1 Action. Choose one: gain 2 Conscripts from the Conscripts pile; or reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Attack card, put that Attack card into your hand, and discard the rest.

    Conscripts
    Types: Action – Attack
    Cost: $0*
    +1 Action. +$2. Return this to the Conscripts pile. Each other player may discard a Domain. If he doesn't, he gains a Curse. (This is not in the Supply.)

this adds a big luck factor into the game, and unlike moat or bane cards, you can't even manipulate it by buying several of them. you just have one domain and if you happen to draw it, you have a big lead. i don't like that at all.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2014, 05:53:20 pm by silverspawn »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #352 on: April 21, 2014, 06:07:46 pm »
0

Quote
Because a lot of people think it's too much better than Lab. That's not such a big deal that I'm going to cut it before finding a replacement, though. It may not get cut at all.

that's strange, I've never played it, but it looks a lot weaker than lab to me

Well, unless all three cards you reveal are of one type, you draw at least 2 cards. And you get more choice over what those cards are than you would with Lab. Sometimes you do reveal all three cards of the same type and/or you're force to discard a good card, so it's not strictly better. But it's probably usually better. Like Hunting Party.

Quote
    Barracks
    Types: Action – Campaign
    Cost: $5
    +1 Action. Choose one: gain 2 Conscripts from the Conscripts pile; or reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Attack card, put that Attack card into your hand, and discard the rest.

    Conscripts
    Types: Action – Attack
    Cost: $0*
    +1 Action. +$2. Return this to the Conscripts pile. Each other player may discard a Domain. If he doesn't, he gains a Curse. (This is not in the Supply.)

this adds a big luck factor into the game, and unlike moat or bane cards, you can't even manipulate it by buying several of them. you just have one domain and if you happen to draw it, you have a big lead. i don't like that at all.

I could be wrong, but I think you're really overrating the luck factor. Enough Conscripts fly around that you're likely to block a few Curses over the course of the game. Unlike a Moat or Bane, you can only block one per Domain per turn AND you lose $1 from your hand whenever you block a Curse. So it's actually less swingy than Moat in those two ways.

It's true that you can't buy more of them, but you can still often make your one Domain come up more often by trimming your deck.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3191
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #353 on: April 21, 2014, 08:03:42 pm »
+2

Quote from: LF
Well, unless all three cards you reveal are of one type, you draw at least 2 cards. And you get more choice over what those cards are than you would with Lab. Sometimes you do reveal all three cards of the same type and/or you're force to discard a good card, so it's not strictly better. But it's probably usually better. Like Hunting Party.

I just thought that you will reveal 3 cards of the same type quite frequently. BM will often have 3 treasures, engines will often have 3 action cards. But that's not important, you know more about how it actually plays out, so I'm probably just flat out wrong.

Quote from: LF
I could be wrong, but I think you're really overrating the luck factor. Enough Conscripts fly around that you're likely to block a few Curses over the course of the game. Unlike a Moat or Bane, you can only block one per Domain per turn AND you lose $1 from your hand whenever you block a Curse. So it's actually less swingy than Moat in those two ways.

It's true that you can't buy more of them, but you can still often make your one Domain come up more often by trimming your deck.

well, sure, you will block one eventually, but I can still see games being decided by who has a domain in his hand the first two times. There are official cards which are like that too, but I just don't think we need another one. I mean, for swinder and mountebank I can overlook it, because the simplest version of the card just works like that. But conscripts - why should they care about a Domain? It just seems like adding a luck factor for the sake of adding a luck factor, and I don't like that. Moat is luck dependend, but it's also skill dependend, you need to know how many to buy. This "cares about domain" mechanic doesn't involve any skill.

If you just want to make a weaker variant of "each player gets a curse", then I'm sure there is a better way. how about "each other player may discard a silver or two coppers. if he doesn't, he gains a curse". That's similar to Torturer though.

note that I haven't actually played with the old conscripts, so my opinion may be based on wrong assumptions, maybe they kick in later than I think, or you play them more frequently than I think. And it's a personal thing, I tend to dislike luck factors that serve no purpose, but I'm sure a lot of others won't mind it.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2014, 08:05:13 pm by silverspawn »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #354 on: April 22, 2014, 11:36:29 am »
0

I just thought that you will reveal 3 cards of the same type quite frequently. BM will often have 3 treasures, engines will often have 3 action cards. But that's not important, you know more about how it actually plays out, so I'm probably just flat out wrong.

One thing you may be missing is that because Convocation is itself an Action, you can load up on them. So that reduces the chance that you draw three Treasures.

well, sure, you will block one eventually, but I can still see games being decided by who has a domain in his hand the first two times. There are official cards which are like that too, but I just don't think we need another one. I mean, for swinder and mountebank I can overlook it, because the simplest version of the card just works like that. But conscripts - why should they care about a Domain? It just seems like adding a luck factor for the sake of adding a luck factor, and I don't like that. Moat is luck dependend, but it's also skill dependend, you need to know how many to buy. This "cares about domain" mechanic doesn't involve any skill.

If you just want to make a weaker variant of "each player gets a curse", then I'm sure there is a better way. how about "each other player may discard a silver or two coppers. if he doesn't, he gains a curse". That's similar to Torturer though.

The idea is definitely to make a less-reliable version of "Each other player gains a Curse." Partly this is because Barracks gains 2 Conscripts at once. Without some mitigating factor, I think this makes it more likely that the Curses won't be split evenly.

I created the current version (discard down to 3, if you can't gain a Curse) because it did two cool things. First, it solved the above split issue. Second, it made you want to use Barracks's digging ability to get multiple Conscripts into your hand in a turn. But unfortunately, the version that both discards and junks is just way too brutal. I could have changed it to discarding down to 4 cards in hand, but that makes Dignitary an anti-counter for it. Not great.

The Domain version is meant to fix the brutal nature of the previous version while still somewhat mitigating how fast the Curses fly, etc. I'm definitely not adding it just for the sake of adding randomness. I don't really think it's going to make the card much more random at all, honestly. Before, if you got lucky and got two Conscripts in the same hand, you got to give each other player a Curse. In some ways, that was more random.

I'm not a fan of being able to block by discarding Coppers and Silvers. As you say, that's a lot like Torturer. In addition to the fact that I obviously want my cards to be fairly distinct from official cards, Torturer is a particularly bad card to emulate, causing many novice players no end of grief. Being able to block by discarding an Estate (or any Victory card) might work, but probably it's too much of a disincentive to wanting Conscripts at all. I'm open to other ideas, but I can't think of any right now.

I don't deny that Domain blocking is a particularly visible bit of luck, but that's definitely not the point of doing it. And again, the fact that you're effectively getting Cutpursed even when you do block means you're not getting off scot-free.

note that I haven't actually played with the old conscripts, so my opinion may be based on wrong assumptions, maybe they kick in later than I think, or you play them more frequently than I think. And it's a personal thing, I tend to dislike luck factors that serve no purpose, but I'm sure a lot of others won't mind it.

Kicking in late and then being played frequently is pretty much the very essence of Conscripts, at least as obtained via Barracks. It's sort of like Familiar (but quite a bit different in practice).
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3191
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #355 on: April 22, 2014, 02:33:11 pm »
+1

Quote
The Domain version is meant to fix the brutal nature of the previous version while still somewhat mitigating how fast the Curses fly, etc. I'm definitely not adding it just for the sake of adding randomness. I don't really think it's going to make the card much more random at all, honestly. Before, if you got lucky and got two Conscripts in the same hand, you got to give each other player a Curse. In some ways, that was more random.
well, in the end you'll have to playtest it. I'm not that convinced anymore that it's a bad idea, though I still kind of dislike the idea that you just get a protection card assigned

how about this version?

+1 Action
Choose one: +2$, and each other player discard down to 3 cards; or each other player with 3 cards in his hand gains a curse

or would that just make it less fun because you'll choose cursing anyway?

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #356 on: April 22, 2014, 02:58:05 pm »
0

how about this version?

+1 Action
Choose one: +2$, and each other player discard down to 3 cards; or each other player with 3 cards in his hand gains a curse

or would that just make it less fun because you'll choose cursing anyway?

It weakens the card, but doesn't lessen the harshness of the attack, which is the problem. Always having a discard and a cursing attack whenever Conscripts were available was the issue.

Another problem with having Conscripts be a discard attack is that it was a nombo with Axeman, which is extra bad when you consider Barracks's digging ability. If Conscripts doesn't always make opponents discard, it means you can meaningfully play your Axeman after your Conscripts.
Logged

Co0kieL0rd

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 743
  • Respect: +863
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #357 on: April 23, 2014, 12:26:27 pm »
+1

Thank you, LastFootnote, for not overlooking my post in the end^^

Update: I think I'm going to change Conscripts again. It's just too brutal. When I first made it, my thought process was that the discard attack would hurt less once everybody had a bunch of Curses in their decks. This is sort of true, but always having a 3-card hand makes it really tough to trash those Curses and still do anything else with your turn. It's just too sloggy for it to be in every game with Barracks, let alone every game with Barracks OR Recruiter.

So I'm thinking of returning to a version that just straight-up hands out Curses. Perhaps I'll reverse the current card and make it do a milder attack once the Curses are gone. Maybe discard down to 4, maybe something else. I'm also considering returning from "+1 Action" to "you may play an Attack card from your hand".
I'm glad you see that Conscripts need to be nerfed. I playtested Recruiter and Conscripts with four players a while ago in a random kingdom with no trashing around, but Swindler and some other attack in addition, which made the game as tedious as it can get. I found that I really like the idea of a reaction that gains you an attack card directly into your hand. I'd appreciate if Recruiter was going to keep sticking around. The attack card gained being Conscripts in its form as it was at the time was the main problem here.

I was thinking of creating another card or two that used Domains. That way I can have a new type like Looter and can cut the setup text out of Barrister. Also, if you're playing multiple games with Enterprise cards, it's more likely that you won't have to switch up the starting decks between games. I was trying to come up with some sort of trash-for-benefit card in the Mine/Taxman vein. Or maybe they could act as a moat against Conscripts! That would be a nerf. Hmm…
Yeah, please integrate Domains into other card texts :D But them moating Conscripts doesn't seem right to me, I agree with silverspawn there. It would create a little too much interlocking between the cards within this set while adding nothing but unnecessary complexity to a random kingdom.

Also, if you want to integrate Domains as they are into other cards ("campaign" cards), they should obviously do one (or both) of two things: Either do something with Domains for benefit (ideally, trash them), or gain Domains from somewhere (ideally, the trash). Because Domain alone isn't really a good card, it's like a small Harem. There has to be some way to get more of them, but they aren't in the supply, so you have to get them from the trash. Why would they be in the trash? Either because a player was attacked and thereby forced to put them there (Barrister), or because a player decided to trash a Domain for a big bonus earlier (it would need to be big, for the lack of Domains overall). Conscripts doesn't have anything to do with that, so it should not care about Domains.

On another note, I playtested Lodge a few weeks ago in 2 or 3 games. Those were games with no other trade token cards in the kingdom. I found that spending the trade token would rarely benefit the current hand enough to make you really wanna do it. Because then it's gone, but you might encounter more hands with several VP cards in them in the late endgame. But getting a new trade token is so expensive with no other TT-gainer around! You profit the most from it in the endgame, and then you don't want to buy additional Lodges for TTs but Duchies.
None of those games had really strong engines available, I think. Otherwise, it might have been different. Nevertheless, I would recommend giving Lodge another way of gaining a TT, maybe this phrase I saw attached to several card suggestions here: "While this is in play, when you buy a Victory card, take a Trade token." This would make Lodge an interesting BM enabler and also relieve the transition from engine to greening. It might be too strong, though.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2014, 01:00:36 pm by Co0kieL0rd »
Logged
Check out my fan cards!
Dominion: Seasons - a small set Asper and I made that revolves around a unique and original mechanic
Roots and Renewal - this set is about interacting with the Supply and manipulating your opening turns
Flash cards - trying out a new concept

KingZog3

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3163
  • Respect: +1380
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #358 on: April 24, 2014, 12:06:43 am »
+1

Personally I like Domains just being on one card. It makes them more unique, and that card more unique. Considering Barrister (that is the card that uses Domains right?) is already probably not super strong, the fact that you start with a $3 card already changes a lot with TfB cards. This alone makes that card interesting.

I guess they would be like ruins if they only had 3 cards using them. But despite being interesting sometimes, they don't seem to be game changing, more game enhancing (like the Baker Coin. It wouldn't be so cool if half the Guilds cards had that set-up rule). My 2 cents is to keep Domain on just one card, then it becomes more like Baker and less like Ruins. Not that Ruins are bad, but they are a more impactful (not a word) concept that a small set-up change like Domains.
Logged

pacovf

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3499
  • Multiediting poster
  • Respect: +3838
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #359 on: April 24, 2014, 08:44:36 am »
+1

Have you tried using some variation of "If this is the first action/attack card you have played this turn, ..., otherwise, ... " for conscript? This could be a way to limit how many curses it can deal (make it non-repeatable)

You could also try some variation of "Conscripts cannot be played if there isn't any action card in play"*, or some other limiting condition, to force you to build a deck around it for it to be successful.

Basically, go the conspirator way.

*This example is probably a bad idea, but it does make the curse-giving much harder to achieve.
Logged
pacovf has a neopets account.  It has 999 hours logged.  All his neopets are named "Jessica".  I guess that must be his ex.

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1102
  • Respect: +2144
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #360 on: April 24, 2014, 12:21:52 pm »
+1

I'm not sure if this really solves anything, but an idea I just thought of for Conscripts: "+1 action, +$2; Each other player with 4 or more cards in his hand discards a card.  Each other player who didn't discard anything gains a Curse."  So basically a slower version of the original, it takes three plays of Conscripts to deal out Curses.  Maybe that's too much and I'm also not sure I like that the first play is only an Urchin attack, so it basically needs to line up with another Conscripts (or other discard attack) to be good, but maybe that's the nerf it needs.  Just a thought.
Logged

navical

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 196
  • Respect: +268
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #361 on: April 24, 2014, 12:46:43 pm »
+1

My random thought idea for Conscripts:

"+1 action, +$2; Each other player with 5 or more cards in his hand reveals his hand and discards a card that you choose, then draws a card."

- the idea being, replace a good card with a random one.

It stacks, which I think is important for a non-terminal attack, yet even if you play lots there's still the chance that the top card gives your opponent something to do. The turn-killing potential might still be too high, though.

[also, there's a minor theme-related point that in general cursers have witch-names whereas discard attacks have soldier-names]
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3191
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #362 on: April 24, 2014, 02:45:15 pm »
+1

My random thought idea for Conscripts:

"+1 action, +$2; Each other player with 5 or more cards in his hand reveals his hand and discards a card that you choose, then draws a card."

- the idea being, replace a good card with a random one.

It stacks, which I think is important for a non-terminal attack, yet even if you play lots there's still the chance that the top card gives your opponent something to do. The turn-killing potential might still be too high, though.

[also, there's a minor theme-related point that in general cursers have witch-names whereas discard attacks have soldier-names]
you're underestimating the power of discarding a specirfic card. playing it twice will often be enough to kill a turn, even in a solid engine (just nuke the villages). it's also really swingy, because the power heavily depends on the density of your opponents deck

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12849
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #363 on: April 24, 2014, 03:39:16 pm »
+1

you're underestimating the power of discarding a specirfic card. playing it twice will often be enough to kill a turn,
Hell, playing it once will sometimes be enough to kill a turn. Not all the time, but probably at least once per game.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

KingZog3

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3163
  • Respect: +1380
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #364 on: April 24, 2014, 03:43:34 pm »
+1

you're underestimating the power of discarding a specirfic card. playing it twice will often be enough to kill a turn,
Hell, playing it once will sometimes be enough to kill a turn. Not all the time, but probably at least once per game.

It's only slightly worse than Pillage, which is a harsh attack that doesn't benefit you on the turn it's played. Also I think it's too similar of an effect. I don't think Conscripts need to be crazy powerful. A nonterminal attack that gives $$ is already very good, so even if it's just a discard attack it's plenty good and interesting. The focus should be on how you gain them, not how strange an attack Conscripts is.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #365 on: April 28, 2014, 05:47:31 pm »
0

There are a lot of strong opinions about Conscripts, which is cool.

I actually like the idea of starting the game with a card that protects from certain attacks. That's what I (and I think others) originally thought Shelters were going to do before the of Dark Ages previews. Less "rain shelter" and more "bomb shelter". Having that card be Domain is just a convenience. Anyway, it's possible that some of these other solutions could work.

Personally I like Domains just being on one card. It makes them more unique, and that card more unique. Considering Barrister (that is the card that uses Domains right?) is already probably not super strong, the fact that you start with a $3 card already changes a lot with TfB cards. This alone makes that card interesting.

I guess they would be like ruins if they only had 3 cards using them. But despite being interesting sometimes, they don't seem to be game changing, more game enhancing (like the Baker Coin. It wouldn't be so cool if half the Guilds cards had that set-up rule). My 2 cents is to keep Domain on just one card, then it becomes more like Baker and less like Ruins. Not that Ruins are bad, but they are a more impactful (not a word) concept that a small set-up change like Domains.

I appreciate all that. I don't have a really strong opinion about how many cards in the set use Domains. I agree that it's more special when it's just one card, but if, say, three cards use them (Barrister, Recruiter, Barracks), it actually simplifies setup for the kinds of games I play. What I mean is that if I'm playing with Enterprise (and maybe another set), it's convenient if there's almost always a card that uses Domains because I don't have to keep changing the starting decks between every game.

In fact, I am seriously considering just using the rule, "Whenever you play with any cards from Enterprise, replace one starting Copper in each player's deck with a Domain."

Have you tried using some variation of "If this is the first action/attack card you have played this turn, ..., otherwise, ... " for conscript? This could be a way to limit how many curses it can deal (make it non-repeatable)

You could also try some variation of "Conscripts cannot be played if there isn't any action card in play"*, or some other limiting condition, to force you to build a deck around it for it to be successful.

Basically, go the conspirator way.

*This example is probably a bad idea, but it does make the curse-giving much harder to achieve.

I have briefly considered something like this. Originally, I was thinking about Conscripts doing something if it was in play when you played another Attack card. But oops, Conscripts doesn't stay in play (barring General). Maybe I can put something like that on other Attack card later. Your Conspirator version works, although it's a bit harder to track because, again, Conscripts don't stay in play. But it could work!

But I definitely want Conscripts to do some sort of Attack the first time it gets played, because always having to line up two is just too much to ask. The set has enough trashing, and a spy attack would take too many words. It could either give a Copper or discard down to 4. I'll keep this in mind.

I'm not sure if this really solves anything, but an idea I just thought of for Conscripts: "+1 action, +$2; Each other player with 4 or more cards in his hand discards a card.  Each other player who didn't discard anything gains a Curse."  So basically a slower version of the original, it takes three plays of Conscripts to deal out Curses.  Maybe that's too much and I'm also not sure I like that the first play is only an Urchin attack, so it basically needs to line up with another Conscripts (or other discard attack) to be good, but maybe that's the nerf it needs.  Just a thought.

Thanks for the though, but again, the real problem is not how strong or weak Conscripts is, but the potential harshness of its Attack. Having to deal with Curses when you have a 3-card hand is fine for a few games here and there, but not for every game with Conscripts. Also, if I can do a version that doesn't discard at all, Conscripts will no longer clash with Axeman, which would be a big win in my book.

My random thought idea for Conscripts:

"+1 action, +$2; Each other player with 5 or more cards in his hand reveals his hand and discards a card that you choose, then draws a card."

- the idea being, replace a good card with a random one.

It stacks, which I think is important for a non-terminal attack, yet even if you play lots there's still the chance that the top card gives your opponent something to do. The turn-killing potential might still be too high, though.

[also, there's a minor theme-related point that in general cursers have witch-names whereas discard attacks have soldier-names]

Nice thought, but I agree with the other posters. The attack is just too harsh. As far as the theme goes, I agree that Conscripts makes you think "discard" more than "Curse-giving", but I'm not sure I really want to retheme Barrack/Conscripts and I think Curse-giving is probably the best fit for a delayed, one-shot Attack.

Co0kieL0rd, thanks for your feedback on Conscripts, Domains, and Lodge. I really need to take Lodge off the OP, since I have yet to test it and I think I can probably do better. I might try the "When you buy a Victory card, gain a Trade token" on a Lodge-type card if the new version of Cathedral doesn't pan out. I'm having trouble coming up with a good Domain-centric trash-for-benefit card that doesn't seem too redundant with Redistrict and Exchange, both of which I really like as they are.

Anyhow, I'm going to test the cares-about-Domains version of Conscripts, but I'll keep an open mind when it comes to other ways to fix it up.

I got three playtesting games in the other day which included another veteran player and a couple of fairly new players. The cards tested over the three games were: Clerk, Jubilee, Redistrict, Guide, Refurbish, Committee, Craftsman, Floodgate, Vendor, Convocation, Fund, General, and Wheelwright. The big hit among the new players was Wheelwright, which was kind of nice since it doesn't get much love here on f.DS. It's good to have some cards that appeal to new players and some that appeal to advanced players.

I believe the other veteran player bought Floodgate at least once, so that was cool. He also went pretty nuts with the new version of Craftsman (now in the OP) in both games we played with it. It's still a pretty versatile card, especially with another Trade token card available.

In stark contrast to my last few tests of Convocation, it didn't perform very well power-wise that night. There were a lot of 3-Treasure pulls. That makes me feel better about keeping it as-is. I think Refurbish might be too weak. I'm really warming up to Redistrict; I think it's probably here to stay. Once again, Jubilee seems fine even when it's the only Trade token card. Guide and Vendor were fine. Clerk didn't see much play. Committee and General are maybe too complex for new players. But I can't make Committee any simpler. General could be fine without the "saves cards from being trashed" part in another set, but if I do make another set, it'll probably be centered around Activation cards, and it already has Balcony as a $5 Throne variant.
Logged

pacovf

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3499
  • Multiediting poster
  • Respect: +3838
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #366 on: April 29, 2014, 06:28:00 am »
0

Have you tried using some variation of "If this is the first action/attack card you have played this turn, ..., otherwise, ... " for conscript? This could be a way to limit how many curses it can deal (make it non-repeatable)

You could also try some variation of "Conscripts cannot be played if there isn't any action card in play"*, or some other limiting condition, to force you to build a deck around it for it to be successful.

Basically, go the conspirator way.

*This example is probably a bad idea, but it does make the curse-giving much harder to achieve.

I have briefly considered something like this. Originally, I was thinking about Conscripts doing something if it was in play when you played another Attack card. But oops, Conscripts doesn't stay in play (barring General). Maybe I can put something like that on other Attack card later. Your Conspirator version works, although it's a bit harder to track because, again, Conscripts don't stay in play. But it could work!

But I definitely want Conscripts to do some sort of Attack the first time it gets played, because always having to line up two is just too much to ask. The set has enough trashing, and a spy attack would take too many words. It could either give a Copper or discard down to 4. I'll keep this in mind.

I believe that tracking shouldn't be an issue. "If this is the first action you have played this turn, ..., otherwise..." is obvious, even if conscript leaves play. There's no way you are forgetting that you have played something just before it. But I agree that the "If this is the first attack you have played this turn, ..., otherwise..." is a bit harder to track. If you are playing some sort of engine, you might forget you've cursed the other players already (maybe the curses ran out, so they don't have curses on top of their discard pile to remind them of your attack). That could be solved by simply changing the card to say: "during your cleanup phase, return conscripts to the conscripts pile"

The version "conscripts cannot be played if there isn't any action card in play" has no tracking problem; might argue that this is not the way to solve the problem though (cheap cantrips/villages, or barracks, make conscripts just as bad again).

I am not sure if this might help the card, and definitely try the domain version first. Just trying to explain my idea a bit better.
Logged
pacovf has a neopets account.  It has 999 hours logged.  All his neopets are named "Jessica".  I guess that must be his ex.

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3191
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #367 on: April 29, 2014, 07:39:11 am »
0

small question: is there a reason why convocation says "Action," "Treasure," but "Vicotry card"?
« Last Edit: May 01, 2014, 03:49:11 pm by silverspawn »
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3191
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #368 on: May 02, 2014, 02:28:40 pm »
0

Can you tell me a few details about how exactly you go about getting your ideas on cards? I only picked up on that recently. I've made a few cards with these templates, but their size is 326*500, which isn't identical to the size of physical cards, and resizing means a loss in quality.

I've created a template in original size (200*307) and did two versions of the same card as an experiment, one by using the 200*307 template, and the other one with the original template and a resize afterwards

card via 200*307 template


card via resize:


they aren't quite identical, I've worded the one a little bit differently, but my point is mostly the font. it's different, but I'm not even sure I like the first one more. It seems closer to actual cards though, and I imagine it'll be easier to read if you have to use even smaller font for more complex cards.

So my question is: what is the best way to do this? None of the images in your OP are in original size. Do you just resize them before printing, or do you have the original versions in phsyical size and just use larger versions for the thread because it looks better? Also, which templates do you use?

And, how do you do the card values on the bottom left corner? I've been using the suggested font from the tutoral, but it doesn't look right.

It also doesn't seem like an elegant way to even use image editing software. everything except the textbox should be doable with a simple program.

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12849
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #369 on: May 02, 2014, 04:48:04 pm »
0

I recommend making a Magic Set Editor template if you're planning to make lots of cards. It requires some effort, but isn't that difficult and once it's done, MSE is pretty much the perfect tool for creating cards.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Moneymodel

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 128
  • Respect: +131
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #370 on: May 15, 2014, 06:31:03 pm »
0

Can you tell me a few details about how exactly you go about getting your ideas on cards? I only picked up on that recently. I've made a few cards with these templates, but their size is 326*500, which isn't identical to the size of physical cards, and resizing means a loss in quality.

I've created a template in original size (200*307) and did two versions of the same card as an experiment, one by using the 200*307 template, and the other one with the original template and a resize afterwards

they aren't quite identical, I've worded the one a little bit differently, but my point is mostly the font. it's different, but I'm not even sure I like the first one more. It seems closer to actual cards though, and I imagine it'll be easier to read if you have to use even smaller font for more complex cards.

So my question is: what is the best way to do this? None of the images in your OP are in original size. Do you just resize them before printing, or do you have the original versions in phsyical size and just use larger versions for the thread because it looks better? Also, which templates do you use?

And, how do you do the card values on the bottom left corner? I've been using the suggested font from the tutoral, but it doesn't look right.

It also doesn't seem like an elegant way to even use image editing software. everything except the textbox should be doable with a simple program.

Now I'm really curious what Prayer cards do.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3191
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #371 on: May 16, 2014, 01:59:41 pm »
0

Quote
Now I'm really curious what Prayer cards do.

actually, the reason i picked holy ground for a sample here was specifically because i didn't want to promote any of my cards; it's impossible to judge it if you don't know the card it refers to

but since you ask, it's +3 cards, +1 action, discard a card, return this to the supply. a lab+ oneshot

Fragasnap

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 440
  • Respect: +703
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #372 on: June 18, 2014, 05:28:14 pm »
+1

I got to play some games using Enterprise cards.

Axeman and Refurbish were in a University game was alongside Pillage. Though Axeman was a fine card, it still felt very similar to Pillage since it forces players to lose a useful card. Refurbish on the other hand was a lot more fun than I expected. Its slow trashing was still fine since I managed +$1 or even +$2 with Silvers eventually as the game moved forward (though trashing Coppers). I imagine in most cases, faster trashing will be better, but Refurbish ultimately worked quite well and felt very different from faster trashers.

Guide in a game using Goons and Familiar. Frustrating game, but Guide was fun. I used it quite effectively. Since there was no trashing, the sifting it gives was incredibly useful, in addition to using its ability for multiple plays on two occasions.

One of my playing partners (probably the best person I tend to play with the game) doesn't care much for the set in general. He finds a lot of the cards are fiddly, weak, or too similar to existing cards. I generally disagree, but can see where he is coming from since a bunch of the cards don't push a singular mechanical flavor.
Logged
Dominion: Avarice 1.1a, my fan expansion with "in-games-using-this" cards and Edicts (updated Oct 18, 2021)

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #373 on: June 18, 2014, 05:32:19 pm »
0

I got to play some games using Enterprise cards.

Axeman and Refurbish were in a University game was alongside Pillage. Though Axeman was a fine card, it still felt very similar to Pillage since it forces players to lose a useful card. Refurbish on the other hand was a lot more fun than I expected. Its slow trashing was still fine since I managed +$1 or even +$2 with Silvers eventually as the game moved forward (though trashing Coppers). I imagine in most cases, faster trashing will be better, but Refurbish ultimately worked quite well and felt very different from faster trashers.

Guide in a game using Goons and Familiar. Frustrating game, but Guide was fun. I used it quite effectively. Since there was no trashing, the sifting it gives was incredibly useful, in addition to using its ability for multiple plays on two occasions.

One of my playing partners (probably the best person I tend to play with the game) doesn't care much for the set in general. He finds a lot of the cards are fiddly, weak, or too similar to existing cards. I generally disagree, but can see where he is coming from since a bunch of the cards don't push a singular mechanical flavor.

Thanks for the feedback! Did he say which cards he found fiddly or weak? I guess I don't feel that any are too similar to existing cards, but it would be good to hear about that, too.

I'm taking a break from working on the set now, but chances are I'll get back to it again someday, probably with a huge overhaul that'll add, remove, and tweak a bunch of cards.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3191
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #374 on: June 18, 2014, 07:28:55 pm »
+1

i love how you just ignored my question entirely  ::)

it's fine though, showdown clearly knows what he's doing, and he doesn't seem to mind it either, so you don't have to bother now.
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] 16 17 ... 48  All
 

Page created in 0.427 seconds with 21 queries.