Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22 23 ... 48  All

Author Topic: Dominion: Enterprise  (Read 412258 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Archetype

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 992
  • Suffers from Fancy Play Syndrom
  • Respect: +690
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #500 on: September 20, 2014, 02:41:51 am »
+2

I love the idea of giving other players Conscripts.
Logged

Minotaur

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2520
  • Respect: +3960
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #501 on: September 20, 2014, 08:47:04 am »
+1

Profiteer probably isn't worth it if it giving you Conscripts is the only way to give out Curses.  In that case, the player who doesn't get Profiteer gains the least Curses.  In games where you can start running out the Curse pile *before* you start handing out Conscripts, Profiteer is probably much stronger.
Logged
Storyteller/Crown is Donald's Vietnam Watergate.  Alchemy is Donald's Vietnam.  Scout is the time Donald choked on a pretzel.

NoMoreFun

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2005
  • Respect: +2109
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #502 on: September 21, 2014, 10:09:16 am »
+1

If there's no other attacks or conscript gainers, playing profiteer once then trashing it for benefit is probably a good play. It works well with Remodel etc. as you have 2 golds to turn into provinces later. I love the idea thematically - hopefully it works out.

Floodgate is too good for $3 if you work on the assumption that the official reaction cards would be that cost even without the reaction. If the cost distribution isn't right that is an easy fix.

Alternatively, have you tried Axeman at $6? It certainly looks like the kind of attack that should cost $6.

The comma with the "to" wording looks bad.
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2005
  • Respect: +2109
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #503 on: September 21, 2014, 10:32:46 am »
+2

When are you going to call it done? The expansion is already much better than the Fan Expansions on BGG. It's had more care and consideration than even the official cards. Are you going to eventually try and get simulations or an isotropic/androminion style playtest thing happening?
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #504 on: September 22, 2014, 11:54:29 am »
+1

If there's no other attacks or conscript gainers, playing profiteer once then trashing it for benefit is probably a good play. It works well with Remodel etc. as you have 2 golds to turn into provinces later. I love the idea thematically - hopefully it works out.

I tried this exact Profiteer with an old version of Conscripts and I was the only one who ever bought it. This Conscripts is definitely weaker, so I'm willing to give it one more shot. Probably I won't have this and Recruiter, though.

Floodgate is too good for $3 if you work on the assumption that the official reaction cards would be that cost even without the reaction. If the cost distribution isn't right that is an easy fix.

Floodgate cost $4 forever and it was a dud. I kept it around because I loved it, but it was super rare for others to buy it. Then Nic suggested costing it at $3. I tried one game with that and it sold like hotcakes. The pile didn't run out, but it got used a lot. So I currently have no desire to move it back to $4.

Floodgate at $3 isn't strictly better than Tunnel, which is all that really matters. I made a post way back in the day about why Aqueduct (Floodgate's predecessor) could cost $4 and not $3 despite the fact that it looked comparable to Tunnel power-wise. Basically the argument was that when you bought it (endgame), Aqueduct was better than Tunnel, because at that point Tunnel was just 2 VP. But since then I have learned a lot about making cards. I'm not going to limit myself from making cards that are strictly better or worse during different parts of the game, so the fact that Floodgate is way better than Tunnel in the late game is fine. Tunnel is almost always better earlier.

Most of the Action-Reaction cards could be OK at their cost without the Reactions, although they would mostly be weak. Tunnel is a special case because you care about its Reaction exclusively early in the game, and you care about its VP exclusively late. You usually care about both parts of Moat throughout the game. I forget where I was going with this. Anyway, Floodgate seems way better at $3 so far.

Alternatively, have you tried Axeman at $6? It certainly looks like the kind of attack that should cost $6.

Yeah, it originally cost $6. Then I changed it to $5 and added the buy restriction. If it doesn't work at $5, I will probably return it to $6 because that's way less wordy than the under-line text. But other than possibly opening with it, it seems fine at $5. It's not a tremendously powerful attack.

The comma with the "to" wording looks bad.

Yes, I think I'll remove it.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #505 on: September 22, 2014, 12:01:07 pm »
0

When are you going to call it done? The expansion is already much better than the Fan Expansions on BGG. It's had more care and consideration than even the official cards. Are you going to eventually try and get simulations or an isotropic/androminion style playtest thing happening?

When will I call it done? Well, the short answer is "never". The slightly longer answer is "when Donald is really for-reals done making expansions". He recently said in the interview thread that he's sure there will be more expansions eventually. As long as expansions are being released, there is an increasing likelihood that cards from it will overlap what I've got here. If he ever does his own Trade token-style thing, I may scrap the set entirely, since that's the most exotic thing it's got going for it.

The long answer starts with "once I have 25 Kingdom cards I'm happy with". Right now I've got 24 Kingdom cards. Maybe some won't survive further testing. Testing has been slim lately. I would like to finalize a "Version 1.0" of the set, with the understanding that it may need to change as official sets use the same names or cards.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #506 on: September 22, 2014, 12:04:40 pm »
+1

This may have been discussed already... but with Guide, do you intend for the players to not be able to choose the order that they put the 2 cards back in? It doesn't say "in any order", which means that you can't choose the order, I guess. But this is tricky, because when you are looking at the cards, you would have to remember what order they were in; and it's hard to have accountability that you don't switch the order when you put them 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

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5300
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3188
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #507 on: September 22, 2014, 12:10:07 pm »
+1

This may have been discussed already... but with Guide, do you intend for the players to not be able to choose the order that they put the 2 cards back in? It doesn't say "in any order", which means that you can't choose the order, I guess. But this is tricky, because when you are looking at the cards, you would have to remember what order they were in; and it's hard to have accountability that you don't switch the order when you put them back.

the new version of guide allows you to choose to order. which is definitely a necessary change.

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #508 on: September 22, 2014, 12:12:43 pm »
0

This may have been discussed already... but with Guide, do you intend for the players to not be able to choose the order that they put the 2 cards back in? It doesn't say "in any order", which means that you can't choose the order, I guess. But this is tricky, because when you are looking at the cards, you would have to remember what order they were in; and it's hard to have accountability that you don't switch the order when you put them back.

the new version of guide allows you to choose to order. which is definitely a necessary change.

And yet, Dignitary still doesn't specify that you can choose the order. There's just no room on the card, which is unfortunate.

EDIT: GendoIkari, the latest cards are all here, in case you're interested. I have plans to eventually update the OP.
« Last Edit: September 22, 2014, 12:14:54 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

Nic

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 138
  • Respect: +85
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #509 on: September 22, 2014, 08:15:51 pm »
+1

• Guide has been renamed to Convoy, which I thought better exemplified the idea of playing it several times to get you further.
Ehh, I like the old name and art for Guide a lot better. On play, the card is about looking ahead and working around obstacles, and when you're well prepared you're able to traverse more of your deck in a single turn than someone without a Guide could.

The fix to Dignitary is perfect, and I'm glad that Exchange/Barter is back to its original setup as well.

I've got plenty of unsolicited advice about the last 1-2 cards. I like Auction, Floodgate, and Gambler, and I feel they all fill important niches in the set, but Refurbish and Vendor seem to me to just fill up space. (That's not to say they're bad cards; if you like Refurbish, then keep it.)
On the other hand, when I look at what's missing from the set, the lack of dual-type cards is a pretty big hole. Obviously Convocationclave would like to see something more than the one Domain that might be in your deck in a small percentage of games -- but more importantly, I'm worried Cathedral could be a dud without Action-Victory cards to buy. Either you wait until you start greening to use the trashing ability, or you pick up an Estate with your second buy, gaining one junk card now for the chance to trash two on the next shuffle. That might be a good deal in a Curse-heavy slog, but it doesn't seem like it'll see use without a lot of support. I would raise the number of cards trashed from two to 'up to three' and then see if that's too strong, but at the very least I would add a second Victory card to the set to improve the odds of a combo.

• Vendor is kind of unexciting. I'd like to perhaps replace it with a cooler card. Either its replacement or the 25th card (or both) should have +1 Buy.
I playtested Landlord (from the Intrigue contest) and I remember it being a lot of fun, but clearly underpowered. It fills a similar niche to Vendor, and merging the two could make a nifty card. Something like 
Quote
Vendlord - Action-Victory - $5
+2 Cards
+2 Buys
You may discard a Victory card. If you do, +2 Actions. (Or +1? I dunno)

Worth 1VP per empty Supply pile.
This version of Landlord is almost certainly well-priced, considering how weak the original was. It has one of the components needed to force a 3-pile, but not without a strong deck to back it up.  I don't know how you feel about using other people's cards in your expansion, but I really think that this card (or something close) would work really well in it. I didn't mention it earlier because I didn't know that you also wanted to replace Vendor.

The comma with the "to" wording looks bad.
Yes, I think I'll remove it.
Yeah, you're only saving a few letters, and it doesn't jive with the rest of Dominion text. It's not even consistent with Jubilee, since that effect can't be abbreviated.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #510 on: September 22, 2014, 10:57:06 pm »
+1

• Guide has been renamed to Convoy, which I thought better exemplified the idea of playing it several times to get you further.
Ehh, I like the old name and art for Guide a lot better. On play, the card is about looking ahead and working around obstacles, and when you're well prepared you're able to traverse more of your deck in a single turn than someone without a Guide could.

Well, I feel at this point that the main thrust of the card is replaying it. It might be nice to save the name Guide for something that had more of a focus on reordering your deck.

I've got plenty of unsolicited advice about the last 1-2 cards. I like Auction, Floodgate, and Gambler, and I feel they all fill important niches in the set, but Refurbish and Vendor seem to me to just fill up space. (That's not to say they're bad cards; if you like Refurbish, then keep it.)
On the other hand, when I look at what's missing from the set, the lack of dual-type cards is a pretty big hole. Obviously Convocationclave would like to see something more than the one Domain that might be in your deck in a small percentage of games -- but more importantly, I'm worried Cathedral could be a dud without Action-Victory cards to buy. Either you wait until you start greening to use the trashing ability, or you pick up an Estate with your second buy, gaining one junk card now for the chance to trash two on the next shuffle. That might be a good deal in a Curse-heavy slog, but it doesn't seem like it'll see use without a lot of support. I would raise the number of cards trashed from two to 'up to three' and then see if that's too strong, but at the very least I would add a second Victory card to the set to improve the odds of a combo.

• Vendor is kind of unexciting. I'd like to perhaps replace it with a cooler card. Either its replacement or the 25th card (or both) should have +1 Buy.
I playtested Landlord (from the Intrigue contest) and I remember it being a lot of fun, but clearly underpowered. It fills a similar niche to Vendor, and merging the two could make a nifty card. Something like 
Quote
Vendlord - Action-Victory - $5
+2 Cards
+2 Buys
You may discard a Victory card. If you do, +2 Actions. (Or +1? I dunno)

Worth 1VP per empty Supply pile.
This version of Landlord is almost certainly well-priced, considering how weak the original was. It has one of the components needed to force a 3-pile, but not without a strong deck to back it up.  I don't know how you feel about using other people's cards in your expansion, but I really think that this card (or something close) would work really well in it. I didn't mention it earlier because I didn't know that you also wanted to replace Vendor.

I definitely appreciate the unsolicited advice. In general I want to get as much feedback as possible.

I am not opposed to having an Action-Victory card, but I also don't consider it a hole that needs filling. If anything, Conclave might be too much of an automatic buy with such cards available. I mean it's fine if that combo comes up sometimes, but I don't specifically need it in the same set.

I really have no idea yet how Cathedral will play. I have it cut and sleeved, but haven't played any test games with it yet. I'm hoping it'll encourage buying Duchies, etc. to get your tokens, but don't know if that'll really happen. It is worth noting that if you buy an Estate (or a Province) with multiple Cathedrals in play, you get a token for each one. If it needs buffing, "up to 3" is certainly on the table.

To my eye, Vendlord seems to lack focus. Maybe if I played with it I'd feel differently. But you usually don't mind discarding Victory cards, so it's weird to be rewarded for doing it. It is itself a Victory card, so you can discard one to another, but probably that feels bad. Like, I tried a card that was [+1 Card; +1 Action; +$1 | When you discard this other than during Clean-up, you may set it aside, putting it into your hand at the start of your next turn]. But it rarely felt good to do that trick because often enough you'd rather play it this turn instead.

Anyway, sorry to be so down on it. I'll think about it more. And I'll think about other possibilities for an Action-Victory card for the set. It might be interesting to have one that you could use as a one-shot, but was worth VP if you kept it around. But maybe that's not interesting. Hmm…

I like Refurbish fine, but it doesn't need to be in this set. It has the combo with Fund and works well with all the non-terminal draw, but that's about it. It's definitely first on the chopping block as far as $3 cards go.

The comma with the "to" wording looks bad.
Yes, I think I'll remove it.
Yeah, you're only saving a few letters, and it doesn't jive with the rest of Dominion text. It's not even consistent with Jubilee, since that effect can't be abbreviated.

I actually just meant that I'd remove the comma, but perhaps I should go back to the old "If you do" wording for consistency. I've softened quite a bit on using new phrasings, though. The important thing is that it's unambiguous, which "You may spend a token to do X" is.
« Last Edit: September 22, 2014, 10:59:35 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #511 on: September 23, 2014, 10:57:50 am »
0

Profiteer probably isn't worth it if it giving you Conscripts is the only way to give out Curses.  In that case, the player who doesn't get Profiteer gains the least Curses.  In games where you can start running out the Curse pile *before* you start handing out Conscripts, Profiteer is probably much stronger.

I'm hoping it'll still be worth it in games with good ways to trash Curses. Or in games where Gold is particularly strong. Or in games where other Attacks are scarce so that opponents might have a hard time connecting the Conscripts you give them with each other. Gaining a Gold on your deck isn't the best thing ever, but you know. It's pretty good. Hopefully "Gold next turn" is worth "Curse somewhere down the line" in enough games.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5300
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3188
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #512 on: September 23, 2014, 11:11:53 am »
+1

The ability to give out curses on other cards isn't the main factor I think. Rather the ability to handle curses. Gaining a gold on top of your deck, giving other players junkers, a terminal action without cycling, that's all effects that clog your deck. the card will be good in games where you can handle curses, and really terrible on boards that are all about action density, but don't have strong trashing. it's also another card that allows you to play a very low economy/high trashing game, it easily works as a deux-ex-machina for your economy, as long as you can draw your deck reliably and get rid of junk as it comes.

it might also be okay in straight forward BM games without trashing, as a later pickup instead of silver.

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #513 on: September 23, 2014, 11:20:17 am »
0

One thing about Refurbish and Vendor: they're currently two of the simplest cards in the set. It's nice to have some simple cards. Clerk and Fund are pretty simple. Auction is simple. The version of Barracks that just puts a Conscripts into your hand is very simple. As far as Conscripts-gaining goes, I could be happy with just that version of Barracks and Profiteer.

I guess the cards in Enterprise aren't super-complex, with a few notable exceptions (Committee, General, maybe Barrister). But even compared to Dark Ages, the cards are wordy. A fair amount of that is "When you gain this, take a Trade token". But still. Wordy.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #514 on: September 23, 2014, 11:44:16 am »
0

The set now has a bit of a "Silver with a Bonus" theme - Refurbish, Fund and now Conscripts.

Limiting Conscripts to Barracks makes me think you could reconfigure Barracks so it doesn't have to have its own pile of special cards. A card that both gains silvers and trashes them for curses perhaps? I don't like wasted piles. Something doesn't seem quite right about the new situation and it might be that, and it might be the fact that you are making a tradeoff between a Silver and a one time attack. Instead of seeming like a delayed attack, the thing that comes to mind when you play a conscripts is "everyone's deck gets worse".

On another note, what's wrong with digging anyway? I haven't had enough IRL dominion playtime to evaluate how annoying it really is. I have a bit of it in my own set (a card that has you dig for a victory card, and a card that makes everyone dig for a card costing 3 or more); should I try and find alternatives?

Sorry I didn't directly respond to these earlier.

Um, probably I'm keeping Conscripts rather than trying to use Silver. Probably either Recruiter or Profiteer will survive in some form.

The problem with digging is that it's time consuming, especially when you're digging for one or two specific cards in your deck, which is often enough the case for Barracks. I'm not saying that digging is never worth doing; Committee digs for cards, though it usually finds the cards it needs very quickly. But, along with the fact that it's vastly simpler, avoiding digging is a reason for me to try a Barracks that just gains a Conscripts right to your hand.

Also how has your playtesting of Silver/new conscripts gainers been going? I've had no playtesting opportunities for my own fan cards.

No testing of Conscripts yet, unfortunately. I will keep you posted!
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #515 on: September 23, 2014, 12:39:11 pm »
0

I am not opposed to having an Action-Victory card, but I also don't consider it a hole that needs filling. If anything, Conclave might be too much of an automatic buy with such cards available. I mean it's fine if that combo comes up sometimes, but I don't specifically need it in the same set.

On the other hand, I have exactly 2 blank cards in the set, assuming 15 copies of Conscripts. That means I could have another Victory card and be fine. It can't really use Trade tokens unless it both gains and spends them on-play (like Craftsman), because it would need two dividing lines. But perhaps I could try an Action-Victory that you can trash for an effect just to see if it's worth doing. It doesn't sound super-exciting because probably you buy it either for the VP or for the effect. If I cost it at $6 and it's worth 3 VP or less, then really the VP is just a consolation prize in case you never get around to trashing it.

EDIT: Hmm, maybe a one-shot that you have to combo with something in order for it to work well. If you never get the combo off then hey, at least it's worth some VP.

EDIT 2:

Quote
Canton
Types: Action - Victory
Cost: $5 or $6
Trash this and discard a Gold. If you did, gain a Province.

Worth 2 VP.

EDIT 3: You guys think Auction could cost $2? Probably it could cost $2.
« Last Edit: September 23, 2014, 02:29:33 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #516 on: September 23, 2014, 02:52:38 pm »
+1

What's up with profiteer? A better attack than Embassy for less? :P

Oh, pacovf. You so funny!  ;D

Any particular reason why the other players don't get a choice?

It's cleaner and faster to resolve. As you noted, Embassy doesn't give a choice when giving out Silver. Governor doesn't either. And really, if you're building the kind of deck that doesn't want Silvers, you can probably pretty easily return all your Conscripts to their stack (or all but one if there are no other Attack cards). And probably you give out Curses in the process!
« Last Edit: September 23, 2014, 02:55:56 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 440
  • Respect: +703
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #517 on: September 23, 2014, 07:28:17 pm »
+1

And yet, Dignitary still doesn't specify that you can choose the order. There's just no room on the card, which is unfortunate.
Quote
Look at the top 2 cards of your deck and put them back in any order. Choose one: +2 Cards; or +1 Card, +$1; or +$2.
Would the above wording fit onto Dignitary? It does not take many more characters so long as both coin images appear on the same line. It is an annoying card to word considering how simple the effect is.

Um, probably I'm keeping Conscripts rather than trying to use Silver. Probably either Recruiter or Profiteer will survive in some form.

The problem with digging is that it's time consuming, especially when you're digging for one or two specific cards in your deck, which is often enough the case for Barracks. I'm not saying that digging is never worth doing; Committee digs for cards, though it usually finds the cards it needs very quickly. But, along with the fact that it's vastly simpler, avoiding digging is a reason for me to try a Barracks that just gains a Conscripts right to your hand.
I would be happy seeing another version of Barracks or Recruiter with the changes to Conscripts, but if all Recruiter does is gain Conscripts and all Barracks does is gain Conscripts to hand, they are going to feel similar. As a designer I would find that similarity frustrating.

I like that Barracks hunts for an Attack when you want it to-- especially since having an extra card pile like Conscripts is the only way to make such a card. The problem with the current Barracks is that it costs $5, so hunting for your Witch is useless since you could have just gotten another Witch instead. Eventually you cannot stand to get more Witches, but buying Barrackses does not solve the problem since your Witch will terminally draw them anyway.
A $4 Barracks that could gain a single Conscripts to hand or hunt for an Attack might also struggle to work since the Attack you hunt down probably will not be much better than the non-terminal Silver that a Conscripts is, especially at the cost of gaining another Conscripts. If you did not gain the Conscripts to hand and gave a different flat benefit, I am not sure how it would compare to the two Conscripts gained by your suggested Recruiter update.
What if Barracks gave you some flat benefit or the hunting effect and then gained a Conscripts?
Quote
Barracks
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action. Choose one: <Vanilla Benefit>; or reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Attack, put it into your hand, and discard the rest. Either way, gain a Conscripts from the Conscripts pile.
This would also make it less swingy with $3 Attacks since colliding with Barracks on turn 3 would not give out a Curse.

I am not opposed to having an Action-Victory card, but I also don't consider it a hole that needs filling. If anything, Conclave might be too much of an automatic buy with such cards available. I mean it's fine if that combo comes up sometimes, but I don't specifically need it in the same set.

On the other hand, I have exactly 2 blank cards in the set, assuming 15 copies of Conscripts. That means I could have another Victory card and be fine. It can't really use Trade tokens unless it both gains and spends them on-play (like Craftsman), because it would need two dividing lines. But perhaps I could try an Action-Victory that you can trash for an effect just to see if it's worth doing. It doesn't sound super-exciting because probably you buy it either for the VP or for the effect. If I cost it at $6 and it's worth 3 VP or less, then really the VP is just a consolation prize in case you never get around to trashing it.

Hmm, maybe a one-shot that you have to combo with something in order for it to work well. If you never get the combo off then hey, at least it's worth some VP.

Quote
Canton
Types: Action - Victory
Cost: $5 or $6
Trash this and discard a Gold. If you did, gain a Province.

Worth 2 VP.
I like the idea of a one-shot Victory card, but I would rather the Victory points be more interesting than your proposed Canton. What if it counted Provinces? Donald discounted it as a "win-more" effect, but if it was a powerful one-shot like Canton that made gaining the Provinces easier it could force players to make some interesting decisions.
Logged
Dominion: Avarice 1.1a, my fan expansion with "in-games-using-this" cards and Edicts (updated Oct 18, 2021)

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #518 on: September 23, 2014, 09:13:24 pm »
+1

I seem to remember discussing the Redistrict wording a bunch already. The current version seems good to me, but I have 1 small suggestion... maybe "If you do, also gain...". While the current wording is completely correct according to the rules, some people (the types who get other stuff wrong because they don't read literally enough) may think that if you trash it, you gain a card costing 2 more instead of a card costing 1 more, not in addition to.
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 #519 on: September 24, 2014, 01:00:49 am »
0

Quote
Look at the top 2 cards of your deck and put them back in any order. Choose one: +2 Cards; or +1 Card, +$1; or +$2.
Would the above wording fit onto Dignitary? It does not take many more characters so long as both coin images appear on the same line. It is an annoying card to word considering how simple the effect is.

Unfortunately, that doesn't fit on three lines. And with four lines I could just add "and put the rest back in any order". It would look like this:



That's really cramped, but I guess it fits. It's really a shame it's so wordy since it's otherwise a great top for a Reaction. Sort of interesting but not necessarily a card that can stand on its own. Power-wise it's probably fine, but it's not something you'd be excited to buy. The reaction helps a lot.

I would be happy seeing another version of Barracks or Recruiter with the changes to Conscripts, but if all Recruiter does is gain Conscripts and all Barracks does is gain Conscripts to hand, they are going to feel similar. As a designer I would find that similarity frustrating.

Yes, obviously I don't want them to be too similar. I think [+1 Action; Gain a Conscripts into your hand] and [Gain 2 Conscripts] are sufficiently different, but [Gain a gold on your deck; Each other player gains a Conscripts] is way more different. So ideally, Profiteer will test well and I'll keep some version of either Barracks or Recruiter.

I like that Barracks hunts for an Attack when you want it to-- especially since having an extra card pile like Conscripts is the only way to make such a card. The problem with the current Barracks is that it costs $5, so hunting for your Witch is useless since you could have just gotten another Witch instead. Eventually you cannot stand to get more Witches, but buying Barrackses does not solve the problem since your Witch will terminally draw them anyway.
A $4 Barracks that could gain a single Conscripts to hand or hunt for an Attack might also struggle to work since the Attack you hunt down probably will not be much better than the non-terminal Silver that a Conscripts is, especially at the cost of gaining another Conscripts. If you did not gain the Conscripts to hand and gave a different flat benefit, I am not sure how it would compare to the two Conscripts gained by your suggested Recruiter update.
What if Barracks gave you some flat benefit or the hunting effect and then gained a Conscripts?
Quote
Barracks
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action. Choose one: <Vanilla Benefit>; or reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Attack, put it into your hand, and discard the rest. Either way, gain a Conscripts from the Conscripts pile.
This would also make it less swingy with $3 Attacks since colliding with Barracks on turn 3 would not give out a Curse.

Having the extra pile isn't the only way to do such a card. You could also go Young Witch style and say, "Setup: Add an extra Attack Kingdom card pile to the Supply". But obviously, this being originally a one-shot themed set, I chose the pile-of-one-shots route.

Buying a Barracks is almost certainly better than buying a second Witch, but not interestingly or excitingly so. You get to cycle more and there's less danger of collision, but it's just not enough bang for your buck at $5. So ideally a card that digs for an Attack costs at most $4. But as cool as digging for an Attack sounds, it's got some factors working against it. It's slow, especially because you're usually hunting for one or two cards in your deck, which might be quite large. In a game without other Attack cards, your suggested version is basically, "Gain a Conscripts to hand unless this is the first time you've played a Barracks this game." Except that you have to dig through your deck for the Conscripts. Maybe the vanilla bonus is good enough that you'll sometimes opt for that. Certainly you will if your Barracks and Conscripts happen to collide of if you get your Conscripts first. But you know. Mostly you're just hunting for your only Conscripts and then gaining another one. You're simply delaying the effect. And Conscripts now has a delay built right into it, so that seems less necessary than it once was.

Really what it comes down to is that, in practice, players use Barracks to gain Conscripts or hunt for Conscripts. In my experience, there has been much less hunting for other Attacks. If Conscripts wants to be paired with another Attack (like the version in the OP or the current version), Barracks can help with that by digging for one. But you still have to collide either your Barracks or an Attack with your Conscripts! So Barracks is just another potential combo piece to increase the chances of connecting. And if Barracks's main function is to match up Conscripts with another Attack in your hand, it's way faster to just gain a Conscripts right into your hand.

I also like "dig for an Attack" as a concept. And I hate to remove cards that people find exciting. But I have to find the right balance between looking exciting and playing well. Barracks plays OK as it is, but I think I want to try the new version and see how it goes over.

Quote
Canton
Types: Action - Victory
Cost: $5 or $6
Trash this and discard a Gold. If you did, gain a Province.

Worth 2 VP.
I like the idea of a one-shot Victory card, but I would rather the Victory points be more interesting than your proposed Canton. What if it counted Provinces? Donald discounted it as a "win-more" effect, but if it was a powerful one-shot like Canton that made gaining the Provinces easier it could force players to make some interesting decisions.

Hmm. In general, I try to subscribe to the philosophy of "one concept per card" where possible. Sometimes that's not exciting enough and combining with another concept is just what is needed. But I want to at least try the really simple version first.

Counting Provinces feels a lot like Duke to me. And as Donald said, you already want Provinces in most games, so it's not pushing in a new direction, which formula VP cards generally should. That doesn't mean I won't try any formula, though, if it turns out the cards needs to be more exciting.

I seem to remember discussing the Redistrict wording a bunch already. The current version seems good to me, but I have 1 small suggestion... maybe "If you do, also gain...". While the current wording is completely correct according to the rules, some people (the types who get other stuff wrong because they don't read literally enough) may think that if you trash it, you gain a card costing 2 more instead of a card costing 1 more, not in addition to.

If Redistrict were almost guaranteed to gain a card that costs exactly $1 more than the trashed card, I would go for this wording. But if you trash a Copper and there's no $1 card on the board, then the "also gain" is itself a bit confusing. It kind of implies that the second gain is contingent on the first gain, which it no longer is. I'll think about it more, but I'm leaning toward leaving it as is. Hopefully the space between the two parts will emphasize the fact that the second part is completely separate from the first part in terms of the gain.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2014, 01:03:37 am by LastFootnote »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #520 on: September 24, 2014, 01:20:42 am »
0

First mockup of Canton, just to see how it looks.

« Last Edit: September 24, 2014, 01:23:16 am by LastFootnote »
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2005
  • Respect: +2109
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #521 on: September 24, 2014, 08:12:24 am »
+1

I love Action/Victory cards, but I'm not sure the set needs one. As far as initial impressions go, Conclave (why all the name changes? Exchange, Guide and Convocation were fine...) will show its worth compared to laboratory when you draw 3 cards or when a "good" card is the 3rd card you reveal. More of a problem is showing that it's sometimes worse, which will be when you reveal 3 actions or treasures and are forced to discard two of them, or when the first 2 cards you reveal are "good" cards. Best not be giving Conclave too much to make it good in the one set.

As for Cathedral, if the "gain one junk card to trash 2 later" thing doesn't tip people off, then being a source of trade tokens for something like Guide (I can't get enough of the Cathedral/Guide interaction) or Terrace will. The trade token thing doesn't need to come up in every game.

I don't like Canton at all; the strategy will always be "Do I want a Duchy, or this?", with the answer coming down to a risk calculation rather than anything interesting to do with the way you've built your deck up to that point. It also is sort of in the same territory as farmland. At the very least, the card absolutely can't cost $5.

One more note; Barter now, with the 2 trade tokens, is clearly much, much better than remodel for only $1 more. I guess that's the nature of the 4->5 gap. No need to change anything; remodel would up there with Horse traders in the "cards that benefit least from being non terminal" stakes, but it needs to be non terminal for the trade token effect (and the combo with Draw to X is nice). Official cards like Smithy->Margrave and Young Witch->Witch have much more demonstrable gaps.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #522 on: September 24, 2014, 09:11:16 am »
+1

I love Action/Victory cards, but I'm not sure the set needs one. As far as initial impressions go, Conclave (why all the name changes? Exchange, Guide and Convocation were fine...) will show its worth compared to laboratory when you draw 3 cards or when a "good" card is the 3rd card you reveal. More of a problem is showing that it's sometimes worse, which will be when you reveal 3 actions or treasures and are forced to discard two of them, or when the first 2 cards you reveal are "good" cards. Best not be giving Conclave too much to make it good in the one set.

As for Cathedral, if the "gain one junk card to trash 2 later" thing doesn't tip people off, then being a source of trade tokens for something like Guide (I can't get enough of the Cathedral/Guide interaction) or Terrace will. The trade token thing doesn't need to come up in every game.

I'm not adding an Action-Victory card specifically for the combos. It's more like, there's space for another Victory card, but I don't really want another pure Victory card.  Or maybe it would be fine to have one, though I don't have ideas for one at the moment.

I don't like Canton at all; the strategy will always be "Do I want a Duchy, or this?", with the answer coming down to a risk calculation rather than anything interesting to do with the way you've built your deck up to that point. It also is sort of in the same territory as farmland. At the very least, the card absolutely can't cost $5.

Yes, I do not have high hopes for the card. I might try it out to see if it plays better than I expect. It has since occurred to me that it's perhaps too similar to Farmland.

One more note; Barter now, with the 2 trade tokens, is clearly much, much better than remodel for only $1 more. I guess that's the nature of the 4->5 gap. No need to change anything; remodel would up there with Horse traders in the "cards that benefit least from being non terminal" stakes, but it needs to be non terminal for the trade token effect (and the combo with Draw to X is nice). Official cards like Smithy->Margrave and Young Witch->Witch have much more demonstrable gaps.

There is the possibility that Barter actually is too strong with 2 Trade tokens, though I hope it's not.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11808
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12846
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #523 on: September 24, 2014, 09:14:53 am »
+2

That's really cramped, but I guess it fits.
In the Finnish translation, Young Witch has 8 lines of text, a dividing line and a vanilla bonus and it fits.
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

NoMoreFun

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2005
  • Respect: +2109
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #524 on: September 24, 2014, 10:16:05 am »
+1


I'm not adding an Action-Victory card specifically for the combos. It's more like, there's space for another Victory card, but I don't really want another pure Victory card.  Or maybe it would be fine to have one, though I don't have ideas for one at the moment.


The leftover space is filled up by Conscripts right? Now that they're no longer oneshots, running out may become an issue in multiplayer. Not the end of the world but it would be a shame for them to run out, especially if they're being gained 2 at a time.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22 23 ... 48  All
 

Page created in 0.067 seconds with 21 queries.