Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[LastFootnote]

So... any cards that you are going to remove from Enterprise? 

I will say one thing only. There was a card very close to Wheelwright, but it has since been dropped from the new set. I don't feel super-jazzed about having a card that's close to an outtake in Enterprise, but my version is different and has been working, so Wheelwright is back for the time being.

[XerxesPraelor]

How did you get to playtest?

[silverspawn]

So, yeah. I haven't had much Enterprise playtesting since May because all my Dominion time has been taken up with playtesting the next official expansion.

ohh. is it good?

[LastFootnote]

How did you get to playtest?

As explained in the other thread, I was sort of grandfathered in from when I playtested Prince. Donald was kind enough to include me in this playtest as well.

So, yeah. I haven't had much Enterprise playtesting since May because all my Dominion time has been taken up with playtesting the next official expansion.

ohh. is it good?

Yes, it is mega-awesome. It will likely be my favorite set and it includes my favorite card.

[enfynet]

Favorite card?

Is it (better than) Moat?

[Moneymodel]

Auction/Tactician OP!



It's not OP

[LastFootnote]

It has occurred to me that pulling a card out of the discard pile is a good candidate for a Trade token ability. It could replace Terrace as

+2 Actions. You may pay a Trade token to look through your discard pile and put a card from it into your hand. Otherwise, +1 Card.
When you gain this, take a Trade token.

Or I could make it a $5 Peddler variant.

+1 Action. +$1. You may pay a Trade token to look through your discard pile and put a card from it into your hand. Otherwise, +1 Card.
When you gain this, take a Trade token.

I kind of like the village better. First, it makes you that much more likely to want to pull an Action card. Second, $5 seems maybe steep for something that is effectively just a Peddler after you use the ability. I mean Terrace is just a village after you use it, but $4 for a village isn't awful. $5 for a peddler is maybe OK? Tough to say.

EDIT: OR, I suppose these cards could just have a flat "+1 Card" up front and then the ability pulls an extra card for you. Seems maybe too strong for the village, but could perhaps work for the peddler.

[Co0kieL0rd]

Is there a problem with original Terrace's mulligan option? I like it just fine.

"+1 Card. +1 Action. +$1. You may pay a Trade token to look through your discard pile and put a card from it into your hand." for $5 seems reasonable to me. Although the suggested Village variant makes a bit more sense because it doesn't draw a card, and thus can't cause an unwanted reshuffle, when you pay the token. That case may be rare but it's really irritating when it happens.

[silverspawn]

I also really liked the original terrace

[LastFootnote]

For the first time in a long time today, I played some Enterprise games. Two and a half all-Enterprise games, in fact (had to cut the third game short to go furniture shopping). Here are my thoughts:

• I remembered how good Terrace is. Probably not worth cutting just for a different Trade token village.
• I tried the new Conscripts. I like it! They're pretty slow to get going, but they are way less harsh than the previous version (with discard, then curse). So that's a win.
• I tried the other version of Barracks (+1 Action; gain Conscripts to hand). My opponent hadn't seen the old version, so no feedback on the difference between the two yet. I like the new version; it's certainly much faster.
• I opened with Profiteer the first game. It seemed super-strong, but then I lost the game (by 1 point). I'll keep trying it as-is. If it is too strong, bumping it to $5 sounds better than gaining the Gold to your discard pile.
• Everybody keeps forgetting to discard a card when playing Mill Town! This is a longstanding issue. I'm not sure how I can make it easier to remember. I recently made the spacing better on the card, so maybe I just need to print out that version. Aaaaanyway, I think this might be the first time I've tried the version that doesn't require at least 3 Coppers in hand for the gain. It makes it really easy to gain e.g. Clerks. Maybe that's fine, it didn't seem game-breaking.
• Barter's new bottom seemed fine. I've only bought it with one Silver in play so far.
• I'm finally happy with Conclave's wording. My opponent was a relative novice and there was no confusion this time! Finally.
• I think I'm finally ready to try the simpler General (Play a card twice; put it on your deck when you discard it). It makes it a worse fit for the set, but it's just SO much simpler. Maybe it'll be fine. If not, I guess I can keep it for some theoretical future set.
• Fund and Barrister have an interesting interaction that is obvious in hindsight. Once somebody activates a Fund, it's just there in the trash for the next player who plays a Barrister to steal. It goes into their hand and they have an incentive to activate it immediately: it might get stolen! So the cycle continues. This interaction kind of leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but I'm not sure it's actually a problem.

[Co0kieL0rd]

That reminded me I played another Enterprise game some time ago but couldn't post the results at the time so I saved the text and then forgot about it. Anyway, here it is:

Vagrant, Floodgate, Great Hall, Market Square, Nomad Camp, Fortress, Barracks, Highway, General, Harem

Originally, we wanted to test Profiteer instead of Barracks. But when we chose the 7 non-Enterprise cards at random, we quickly noticed that there’s no trashing and no Cursing attacks on the board so we were both pretty sure we would never buy Profiteer. So we replaced it with Barracks.
I skimmed over the discussion about the new versions of Conscripts and Barracks and decided that, since you seem determined to keep Conscripts as they are shown in the OP, we would use the version Barracks that gains you 1 Conscripts directly to hand (so not the one in the OP).
Anyway, I think we both pursued the same strategy here. First priority was getting some Barracks and Conscripts as fast as possible. Then we piled out Highways, picked up Market Squares and Nomad Camps for the important +Buys, and some Generals.
I had very lucky draws in the beginning and feel like the game was already decided when I got two Barracks into my deck even before the second reshuffle. I won the Curse split 6-4 which enabled me to end the game on piles when we were equal on Provinces. The game ended so quickly that we didn’t even think about gaining alt-VP cards, including Floodgate. It wasn’t very useful here anyway because there were so few terminals in our decks.
At least we both each managed to use General on a Conscripts once with a second Conscripts in hand while there were still Curses in the Supply. I found that once the Curses are out, you should ask yourself if you still want a lot of Conscripts in your deck. On this board they didn’t trouble me but if there had been terminal draw involved, I might have returned some of possible.

In hindsight, I think maybe we underestimated Profiteer. Next time we'll just keep it. And obviously we used the old, more complex version of General.

Question: How many Conscripts should the Conscripts pile contain? 10 or 15?

[LastFootnote]

Co0kieL0rd, thanks for testing, as always! I think Profiteer looks weaker than it is, which is a shame but there it is. I believe it's actually strongest with no other Attack cards available because then it's a long time before you get hit with Curses.

Question: How many Conscripts should the Conscripts pile contain? 10 or 15?

I use 16 copies myself, but anything in that ballpark is fine. 10 copies might be too few, especially in Profiteer games with more players.

[TWoos]

Which post has the most current version of the cards posted?

Is it the first post of the thread?

[LastFootnote]

Which post has the most current version of the cards posted?

Is it the first post of the thread?

As of now, yes. I just updated Barracks to the version I'm currently using. I'm about to simplify General, but I haven't created the new image yet.

EDIT: OK, now I have.

[silverspawn]

good change!

[Fragasnap]

Tracking would be a tiny bit stranger (though less technical), but you would maintain the primary functionality of General if you worded it as

General
Types: Action
Cost: $5
You may play an Action from your hand twice. When it leaves play, you may put it on top of your deck.

[Jack Rudd]

Is General on General a thing? It looks like a thing.

[LastFootnote]

Tracking would be a tiny bit stranger (though less technical), but you would maintain the primary functionality of General if you worded it as

General
Types: Action
Cost: $5
You may play an Action from your hand twice. When it leaves play, you may put it on top of your deck.

That's what General originally was. It's too confusing with Gambler, Mining Village, etc. Play General, playing a Mining Village. Draw a card. Choose to trash the Mining Village, putting it on top of your deck. Then play the Mining Village again, whereupon the Mining Village draws itself. Then you can play it a third time, maybe trashing it a second time. It's just too much to track. Nice thought, though.

The version of General in the OP has the major advantage of requiring zero tracking. But players read it and are like, "What? No comprende."

[LastFootnote]

Is General on General a thing? It looks like a thing.

You can totally General a General. I've done it. I'd do it again.

[Thanar]

Thanks for the updates to your cards. It would be great if you could post an updated version of the enterprise_imgs.zip file with the hi-res versions.

[LastFootnote]

Thanks for the updates to your cards. It would be great if you could post an updated version of the enterprise_imgs.zip file with the hi-res versions.

Here you go.

[LastFootnote]

Played two 2-player Enterprise/Seaside games last night.

• My Tactician/Refurbish deck (with no other trashing) could not get off the ground. I never seemed to get Refurbish and Silvers in any of my Tactician hands. Refurbish continues to seem weak-ish, but I'm going to keep trying it. I am loathe to make it more complex.
• I like how Floodgate and Tactician don't stack (without the help of a gainer). Floodgate continues to work great at $3. Turns out it's a cool combo with Conscripts. Even if you already have multiple Conscripts in hand, you can choose not to play your last one and ship it forward to your next turn, possibly matching it up with more Attacks.
• Profiteer continues to look fine strength-wise, but the people I play with IRL tend not to buy it. There is a powerful "I don't want to give my opponent an Attack" sentiment. My opponent did at least gain one eventually via being hit by Axeman.
• My opponent and I both had a 5/2 split with Auction as the only $2 card, so that was bought. My opponent went on to buy 3 more Auctions throughout the game, which she later realized was an error. Still, the card seems a worthwhile purchase. Usually it's at least a nonterminal [+1 Buy; +$1], which is reasonable for $2, and often it was better. Still not sure whether it's worth a slot, but I hope it works out.
• I didn't get much use out of Barter because I bought it so late. If you don't open with Silver, maybe Barter isn't so worth getting. I'll keep testing it.
• New Barracks is still seeming good although my opponent slightly preferred the old version. I am considering bringing back the ability to dig for an Attack card, as in you either gain a Conscripts to hand or dig for an Attack. I'd like to be rid of the digging, but hey it was the original premise of the card.
• I was able to open Axeman in one game. It whiffed the first two times I played it. So no evidence so far of it being too strong as an opener, though I'm guessing it hurts a lot if it hits on turn 3 or 4.
• Jubilee and Gambler were fine, as ever. I continue to like the new Conclave.

[LastFootnote]

One 3-player game today.

• Axeman seems fine so far, although the kind of player who hates having their cards trashed hates it. It was suggested that Axeman use a $3 to $6 range like Knights, etc. I'm not totally against it, but there are reasons that it is the way it is. I wanted players to have the option of trashing a Province for e.g. a Gold or King's Court on their deck. Also it's nice that it can hit Platinum, etc. Mostly I wanted players to have as many options as possible about what to trash, but maybe that's not worth it.
• Barrister itself seems good. It stole a lot of Gold this game, although most of it was Gold that Axeman trashed. Domains could still be better. Two of us trashed our Domains to the first Axeman play, and I gained them both with Barrister plays. Then I spent the rest of the game trying to get the last one (with Generaled Barristers, etc.). It did change hands from one of my opponents to the other, but I didn't get it, which was too bad since it would have made me win (final score 35[1 domain]/30[2 domains]/12). Anyway, Domain could be more desirable, although I am loathe to make it more complex. One option is to start each deck with 2 Domains and have Domains worth [1 VP per other Domain in your deck]. Another option (which I like better) is to have one each and make them worth [1 VP plus 1VP per Domain in your deck].
• Clerk got bought out fast because there was quite a bit of Copper gaining going on. The winner once bought 4 Clerks in a single turn.
• The new General seems solid.
• Dignitary is maybe too complex, which sucks. To the casual player, both halves of it are confusing. I don't think the top half is worth doing on its own, but maybe I'm wrong. The bottom half was fine back when it could be [trash down to 4 cards in hand] but is now easy to misread.

[LastFootnote]

Another option:

Domain
Types: Treasure–Victory
Cost: $3
Worth $1.
Worth 3 VP if you have at least 2 Domains in your deck (otherwise worth 0 VP).

Any opinions greatly appreciated.

[pacovf]

Another option:

Domain
Types: Treasure–Victory
Cost: $3
Worth $1.
Worth 3 VP if you have at least 2 Domains in your deck (otherwise worth 0 VP).

Any opinions greatly appreciated.

So, I haven't playtested anything at all, so my opinion is worth about two rupees, but here, have it anyway.

I like this better than the other options, because its "powerlevel" can't vary as wildly between two and four players. That was one thing that always concerned me about the idea. I mean, with two players, you are looking at 4 points tops, while with four players, that goes up to 16. That is crazy. This seems more reasonable, in that sense.
The aspect that makes me a bit wary though, is that stealing a domain can cause a 6pt swing, and it is mainly luck based...