Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7  All

Author Topic: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenges #3 and #4!  (Read 62912 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

rinkworks

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +937
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #25 on: July 09, 2012, 08:13:07 pm »
0

Important news about the Terminal Drawer challenge:

I said I was going to post the results for Challenge #4, but I (unintentionally) lied.  It turned out I had to disqualify 5 separate cards due to eligibility technicalities.  Since I'd told some people about eligibility problems and not others -- largely due to me not reading the cards as they came in or just plain misreading them -- it's not fair to disqualify them and not fair to let them in, either.

So the upshot is this:  The deadline for entering the Terminal Drawer challenge is postponed to Thursday, July 12, at 10am EDT.

This extension applies to everyone.  So if your card was disqualified, you can submit a revision or another card entirely.  If your card did make it in, you can still submit a revision or a replacement.  And if you never submitted anything at all, you still can.

The reason for (I think) all the disqualifications had to do with the card giving the player a choice to NOT meeting the minimum drawing criteria.  Note, for example, that Nobles is listed among those official cards that would NOT qualify, because the player is free to choose not to meet the minimum drawing criteria (i.e., by choosing +Actions instead of +Cards).  Also note that discards matter!  For example, Courtyard and Embassy only offer a net +2 Cards, not +3 and +5.  I don't want to go into further detail about specific card issues here, lest I make card design ideas public that should be private until the qualifying cards are announced.  But if you send me a message (remind me what your card was when you do), I'd be happy to go into more detail.

At present, the following people have qualified entries:  A Drowned Kernel, Adrienaline, andwilk, Archetype, Celestial Chameleon, ChocophileBenj, DWetzel, Graystripe77, greatexpectations, Grujah, iangoth, jonts26, Nicrosil, NoMoreFun, One Armed Man, Polk5440, Powerman, qmech, Qvist, RobertJ, Robz888, Schneau, senseless, Tables, Tejayes.  If your name isn't listed, I do not have a qualifying entry from you.

Sorry about the delay.  For future challenges, I'm going to have to figure out a better system for adjudicating eligibility.

In the meantime, voting for Challenge #3 is underway!  The ballot is here.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2012, 08:15:48 pm by rinkworks »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #26 on: July 09, 2012, 09:32:20 pm »
0

I'm mostly ignoring the cards that seem to have effects heavily influenced by (or exactly the same as) existing non-Victory cards.  There are others that I won't be voting for because I perceive potential game-breaking issues, or possibly less rational reasons. :P  Out of respect to the submitters, I'll only post comments on the cards I like the most.  I may post the criticisms after winners are announced.  There are a lot that I find interesting.



Loon is a loony card.  If your opponent is playing a Province game, rushing them early is a good idea (when there are no tokens to remove).  If there is other alt VP, Loon is probably a bad buy because Provinces can be avoided entirely.  Even without alt VP, Duchy rush and 3-pile would look Loon out.  If the Loon pile isn't emptied early, the Province player can buy Loon as well to even things out.  Very interesting dynamic.  One issue is that it is usually useless in Colony games.  Or maybe it just causes more mind games, hmm.

The more Grebe cards you gain, the more they are worth and the less they cost.  Rushing them is thus easier, if you can hit the high initial cost.  Not sure if the starting price is too high.  It does mean that a Province player probably doesn't want to buy a single Grebe, as it would be expensive for little payout.  If it is split 4/4 in a 2-player game, they are worth 4 VP each to each player but would have been quite expensive to get.  Might be better with a slightly lower price point.  Not sure.  The problem is exacerbated in games with more than 2 players.  But hey, TFB works well in that case, I think?

Petrel is simple but good.  Has a pretty fun mechanic with opponents.  In 2 players, if you buy 6 of a card, that is a set of 5 that your opponent cannot get.  This mechanic might break down a bit with more than 2 players, in that it's possible for nobody to be able to get a set of 5 of anything.

Gannet is neat.  It is an alt VP that does not like other alt VP.

Bittern is another nice, simple mechanic.  The math is a bit funky.  If you buy too many, they actually end up worth less.  If you buy the optimal amount, your opponent could actually buy some to screw that up.  Weird, but in a good way.

Oystercatcher is funky.  Not sure of average deck composition -- how much will it usually end up being worth?

Sandpiper is like Grebe in reverse.  I think it would be more interesting if everyone had their own collection of tokens (as in Grebe); as it is, I think you really have to rush it.

Kingfisher is so incredibly dangerous to buy, but I think it adds some neat mind games to the match.  You want to gain the last Kingfisher, so that you can control where the token is at game end.  If you aren't contested for Kingfisher, you have to be wary of your opponent gaining the last one and putting the token on Kingfisher itself (which will be empty at that point).  If your opponent puts it on a certain pile and they have won the Kingfisher split, you can opt to drain that pile to make Kingfisher worth less.  That makes Curse a good pile for the token, so long as there isn't a curser around.  Very neat.

Hmm... reading it over, I'm not sure how the scoring actually works.  Does it count the number of token'd cards remaining in the supply, or that you have in your deck?  I think the former, though the latter would be interesting in a different way.

Bluebird is simple but feels very classic.

Warbler is a really nice way to make counting Treasures work.
Logged

iangoth

  • Spy
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 89
  • Respect: +38
    • View Profile
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #27 on: July 09, 2012, 10:13:13 pm »
0

Here are some thoughts on the first half or so of the cards. There are some really cool ideas here, but I don't like that so many of them are designed so that you can't hope to win without buying a few. Don't be surprised if I edit this pretty soon--there's a good chance I misread/misinterpreted a few.


Gadwall: Very strong, probably too strong. 4vp for $6 is a good buy by itself, better than fairgrounds on a lot of boards and equivalent on most others. The curse-for-gold bit gives you a net effect similar to "buy a gold, gain +5 vp." Except it's even better than that, since a high cost vp card is more useful than a curse.

Loon: Interesting concept, but you'd be practically forced to buy it in most province games (it won't take long before they're better than duchies, and if you put off buying them, they become half price provinces), and you'd almost never want it in colony/alt vp games.

Grebe: I don't think you could afford to pass these up in a province game. If you buy 6, all but the first two were discount provinces. And you'll get to 6 if your opponent doesn't dip into the Grebes, too. They're easier and easier to buy as you go.

Flamingo: Very easy to pile out. An $8 hand empties these in a single turn with no help. Would give engines some comeback opportunities if they can pile out the estates, too. I think I like it.

Petrel: I'd expect this to be pretty strong. Could be dominant on many boards. Get 5 or more coppers, silvers, and estates, and they're already duchies. Add in one type of action card and the petrels themselves and you're at 5vp. Add curses to the game and they're cheap provinces.

Shearwater: Seems balanced. I like it.

Guillemot: Tailor-made for rush strategies. Ironworks-guillemot would put ironworks-gardens to shame. Each guillemot should be worth 5vp in two-player if you rush them uncontested, and the card helps you run out the estates, so you only have to deplete one more pile.

Cormorant: Clearly designed to be trashed. But 4vp for $6 is already good. Like Gadwall, I think it's too close to strictly better than fairgrounds on most boards.

Pipit: Should be fun, I think. The strength of pipit itself is largely dependent on what's in the Pipit pile.

Gannet: Should work. Not totally game-warping, but it would create some interesting dynamics when a 3-pile ending is possible but not the most direct route to victory.

Tanager: I think I like it. Probably more useful than outpost on average. Even without an outpost-style combo on the board, you can probably get enough out of the extra turn to justify buying this over a duchy in most situations.

Egret: Pretty balanced, I think. Creates a virtual +buy which ought to slightly tip the balance in the favor of engines.

Heron: On boards that support it, it effectively converts extra buys into vp and make 3-piling easier. Mostly worthless on boards that don't support it, though.

Bittern: You'd be pretty much forced to buy this. You can't let your opponent have a 7vp card for $4 uncontested.

Ibis: Useless on boards without +buy available, potentially overpowered when lots of +buy are available.

Spoonbill: Useless when there are no trashers

Osprey: Another card which I don't think you can afford to pass up. If you don't contest them, your opponent will get 8 cards worth 8 vp each for very little effort.

Harrier: A stronger version of egret, I think. To pay $9 for this and take a province is a no-brainer, late-game. You probably wouldn't use it to gain action cards a whole lot. Maybe a gold, now in then.

Kestrel: Most of the time, I guess you'd buy this when you don't expect to reshuffle again. Could be interesting as a pseudo-mint if the opportunity arises.

Plover: I expect the creator added the on-gain trash ability to guarantee there can be something in the trash with no other trashers, but that ability is too slow to make this card a worthwhile strategy in those games. Early, you'll be lucky to trash more than an estate. Late, you can hold back some coppers to trash, but at that point you're passing up buying a gold at minimum.

Oystercatcher: I like the basic concept, but I think the numbers might need tweaking. You can to a lot with 14 non-victory cards, which makes these cheap provinces. Even if you just buy seven treasures, you can pick up a lot of these pretty quickly (I tested with fairgrounds as a stand-in. Got 6 by like turn 13-14). Of course, you stall out pretty quickly, but you get the idea. With good trashing, Oystercatcher could be ridiculously strong.

« Last Edit: July 10, 2012, 11:35:55 am by iangoth »
Logged

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5477
  • Respect: +2860
    • View Profile
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #28 on: July 09, 2012, 10:16:57 pm »
0


Gadwall
$6 - Victory
4 VP
--
When you gain this, trash a card from your hand. If you trashed a Curse this way, gain a Gold.
Poorly designed mechanic.  You already want to trash curses.  And it just hoses cursers too much, just having this on the board makes them as useful in hand as copper at the least.
Quote
Loon
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP per territory token on [This Card]'s supply pile.
--
Whenever a player buys a Province, put a territory token on [This Card]'s supply pile.
Whenever a player buys a [This Card], remove a territory token from [This Card]'s supply pile.
Me gusta. Game changer on every board
Quote
Grebe
$9* - Victory
Worth 1 VP per [This Card] token you have.
--
This costs $1 less per [This Card] token you have (but not less than $0).
--
When you gain this, gain a [This Card] token.
Too good.  Both players want as many of these as they can get, every Province game.

Quote
Flamingo
$2 - Victory
Worth 2 VP if you have more Estates than [This Card]s.
--
When you buy this, +$1, +1 Buy.
I don't know what to think of this.  It probably accomodates some rush strategies, which I think are interesting so long as they're balanced. 

Quote
Petrel
$5 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for each card you have 5 or more copies of.
A little on the weak side.  Which is the side you want alt VP on but it.
Oh wait, if you pick up two estates and don't trash your starters this enables more easily.  This could be cool.
Quote
Shearwater
$4 - Victory
2 VP
--
When you buy this, place a card that is in play on top of your deck.
I like the idea but I think it's too easy to decide to buy it a little too often.  I think it'd be better at 3$, 1 vp.
Quote
Guillemot
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every 2 Estates in your deck (round down).
--
When you gain this, trash a Treasure from the play area.  If you trash a Treasure, gain an Estate.
This is too strong

Quote
Pipit
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for each Masterpiece card in your deck.
--
Setup: Add an extra Kingdom card pile to the Supply. Cards from that pile cost $1 more and are Masterpiece cards.
There are so many cards that work just fine at 1$ more, I think this could too frequently lead to degenerate games.


Quote
Bittern
$4 - Victory
This card is worth 1 VP for each [This Card] left in the supply at the end of the game.
You never don't want this.  The first one is worth seven VP, then the next one your opponent buys is worth seven VP, then the next is worth 5, then the next is worth 5.. and that's 4 at least that will be bought every game, and that's too mandatory.  The ability to pick up an unanswered one of these with 12$+buy exacerbates first player advantage.

Quote
Spoonbill
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every two differently named cards in the trash, rounding down.
Too kingdom dependent.

Quote
Harrier
$4* - Victory
2 VP
During your Buy phase, this costs whatever you want, as long as it costs at least $4.
--
When you buy this, gain a card costing less than this.
--
(Rules clarification: [This Card]'s cost can change in the middle of the Buy phase. E.g., with $11 and 2 buys, buy [This Card] for $5 and for $6. When cost reduction like Bridge is out, [This Card] must still cost at least $4.)
Donald said he didn't let Haggler gain cheaper cards unrestricted due to 8$ Province-Duchy pairings.  9$ Province-Tunnel pairings are a bit weaker, but I think it it's still problematic.

Also, Dat Farmlands interaction 0.0
Quote
Plover
$5 - Victory
This card is worth 1 VP for every 5*P cards in the trash (round down).
(P = number of players)
--
When you gain this, trash up to 4 cards from your hand.
Unfortunately it's probably not strong enough when it works on its own with no other trashers.
Quote
Oystercatcher
$6 - Victory
Worth 10 VP, minus 2 VP for every 5 non-Victory cards in your deck (rounded down).
--
When you buy this, you may trash a card from your hand.
I'm so bad at thindeck, but this is really good thindeck design.  The price seems right.

Quote
Yellowlegs
$7 - Victory
2 VP
--
When you gain this, gain a card costing less than this.
Doesn't this compare poorly to Harem when it gains gold?

Quote
Sandpiper
$2* - Victory
When you gain this card, place a VP token on this card's supply pile.
--
For each VP token on the pile, the cost of this card increases by 1.
--
At the end of the game, this card is worth victory points equal to the number of VP tokens on the pile.
Degenerate purchase choice.
Quote
Tern
$3 - Victory
2 VP
--
If you gain this during your action phase:
+1 Card
+1 Action
+$1
Not enough enablers to be worth existence imo.
Quote
Puffin
$9 - Victory
4 VP
--
When you gain this, gain a Duchy and an Estate.
The difference here is that it doesn't drain the estate pile, making this ok.
Quote
Macaw
$6 - Victory
2 VP
--
When you gain this, you may trash a card from your hand. If you do, gain 2 Silvers; if you don't, gain 1 Silver. Put the gained Silver(s) on top of your deck.
Too duhish in greening phase.  As a Mandarin fan I might be biased about moves on his turf.. but this does seem pretty strong.

Quote
Kingfisher
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every 2 cards in the supply pile with the [This Card] token on it (rounded down).
--
When you gain this, you may move the [This Card] token to a Kingdom supply pile of your choice.
--
Setup: Place the [This Card] token on the [This Card] supply pile.
Swingy swingy swingy swingy.  I see this being very random when both players are obeying the Penultimate Kingfisher rule, and one or the other manages the +buy double purchase first. 

Quote
Waxwing
$6 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every Province in the supply at the end of the game.
Very overpriced.

Quote
Flycatcher
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every three [This Card] tokens you have.
--
In games using this, you may gain a [This Card] token at the end of any turn in which you shuffled your deck.
Seems fun.  I'll just have to trust the balance, I have no idea how often I shuffle.
Quote
Vireo
$6 - Victory
3 VP
--
When you gain this, gain a Victory card costing less than this.
I sorta dig it actually.
Logged

iangoth

  • Spy
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 89
  • Respect: +38
    • View Profile
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #29 on: July 09, 2012, 10:20:49 pm »
0

Uhh, rinkworks, there are two cards named bluebird.
Logged

zahlman

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 724
  • Respect: +216
    • View Profile
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #30 on: July 10, 2012, 12:25:12 am »
0

Quote
Tern
$3 - Victory
2 VP
--
If you gain this during your action phase:
+1 Card
+1 Action
+$1
Not enough enablers to be worth existence imo.

This becomes ridiculous with Ironworks, though. 2VP for $3 is already almost worthwhile (the effect on Tunnel is sometimes huge, but it's hard to trigger). This turns your Ironworks into a Lab +2VP +$1 for the cost of a dead card.

Quote
Quote
Yellowlegs
$7 - Victory
2 VP
--
When you gain this, gain a card costing less than this.
Doesn't this compare poorly to Harem when it gains gold?

I think the intent is to let you get Yellowlegs + Duchy instead of Duchy + Estate in greening phase when you hit $7. That said, it does seem kinda marginal to me, too.

I don't see my card here. But I also don't see a copy in my outbox... I have this sneaking suspicion that I wrote up a message to submit entries, and then somehow failed to actually submit it >____<
« Last Edit: July 10, 2012, 12:33:05 am by zahlman »
Logged

rspeer

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 469
  • Respect: +877
    • View Profile
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #31 on: July 10, 2012, 01:52:12 am »
0

The things that make an alt VP card bad can be obvious, but the things that make it good can be really subtle. On some of these I have a definite opinion, but on a lot of them I'll just be speculating on how the card will be used, without concluding immediately whether that's good or bad for gameplay.

Gadwall
$6 - Victory
4 VP
--
When you gain this, trash a card from your hand. If you trashed a Curse this way, gain a Gold.

So you could buy this card along with Provinces, as a much better Duchy. Or you could use it for a come-from-behind win if you got cursed a lot. Perhaps, with sufficiently careful play, you could use it to get early VP while conserving the number of crap cards in an engine deck.

Quote
Loon
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP per territory token on [This Card]'s supply pile.
--
Whenever a player buys a Province, put a territory token on [This Card]'s supply pile.
Whenever a player buys a [This Card], remove a territory token from [This Card]'s supply pile.

eHalcyon described the plan to buy it early when there are no tokens to remove. If your opponent doesn't interfere, then, an early Loon a super-Duke for Provinces, even in a Colony game. (Kind of. You have to buy the "Dukes" first, but then you don't care who gets the provinces.) And if your opponent *does* interfere, which he probably should instead of letting you grab 8 VP for $4, then he has to spend buys on a card that he's deliberately decreasing the value of. But he's doing it later, while you stalled your deck early, so that might work out in his favor. Mind games!

Quote
Grebe
$9* - Victory
Worth 1 VP per [This Card] token you have.
--
This costs $1 less per [This Card] token you have (but not less than $0).
--
When you gain this, gain a [This Card] token.

You pretty much want almost all of these, or none of them, but then you can't get away with none of them if the other player is trying to get all of them.

Two problems. It's a rich-get-richer thing (or actually more like "now that I'm rich, I get free coffee" --Ben Folds), and I think that would be pretty swingy. And with 3 or more players, it turns into the failure card mechanic of Kill Doctor Lucky. ("I thought you were going to stop him!" "Why would I do that when you should stop him?")

Quote
Flamingo
$2 - Victory
Worth 2 VP if you have more Estates than [This Card]s.
--
When you buy this, +$1, +1 Buy.

+$1 and +1 buy? That means you only need $9 to buy this whole pile. I know you don't get the VP that way, but if you can buy the whole pile in one turn, it doesn't matter what the card says on it, someone just turned their temporary lead into a victory on piles.

Quote
Petrel
$5 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for each card you have 5 or more copies of.

That would be 5 VP for Petrel, Copper, Estate, Silver, and whichever third pile you drain besides Petrel and Estate for the easy Petrel rush. I don't like easy rushes.

Quote
Shearwater
$4 - Victory
2 VP
--
When you buy this, place a card that is in play on top of your deck.

It's a one-shot improved Scheme (in that it can also put treasure back on your deck). Diluting your deck might mean you have to use it carefully. But its benefit and 2 VP might mean you just want it a lot. Not sure.

Quote
Guillemot
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every 2 Estates in your deck (round down).
--
When you gain this, trash a Treasure from the play area.  If you trash a Treasure, gain an Estate.

The player who wins the split gets 4 VP each for $4 while running out two piles. I agree with pops that this is too good.

Quote
Cormorant
$6 - Victory
1 VP
--
When you buy this, gain 3 VP tokens.

At worst this card is going to be straight-up 4 VP for $6, nothing to sneeze at. At best you remodel it into 9 VP, or bishop it for 7 VP. I'm not necessarily saying it's too good, but it's a little better than Fairgrounds, which is worth 2 if you screw up and realistically up to 8.

Quote
Pipit
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for each Masterpiece card in your deck.
--
Setup: Add an extra Kingdom card pile to the Supply. Cards from that pile cost $1 more and are Masterpiece cards.

If the Masterpiece is a cantrip, then two piles (Pipit and the Masterpiece) are going to be gone in a flash. Contrast to Duke where you have to be willing to bog down your deck with two kinds of unplayable cards.

Quote
Gannet
$6* - Victory
When the game ends, if the Province or Colony supply pile is empty (if it was available), then this is worth 4 VP. Otherwise, this is worth 2 VP.
--
During your Buy phase, if two supply piles are empty, then this costs $3.

So it's $6 for 4VP in many cases, but if you rush it it gets cut down to $3 for 2 VP. With occasional cases where you get to buy 4 VP for $3 and end the game on provinces anyway.

Quote
Tanager
$6 - Victory
2 VP
--
The turn you buy this, only draw 3 cards (instead of 5) in this turn's Clean-up phase. Take an extra turn after this one. This can't cause you to take more than two consecutive turns.

From the "I wish Outpost was good" department.

Quote
Egret
$3* - Victory
2 VP
--
When you buy [This Card], pay any amount greater than or equal to its cost. Then, gain a victory card costing at most $2 less than that amount.
There are a bunch of cards similar to this. A bonus for high-variance money, like Bank, because you can turn a VP card into a bigger one (yes, it takes up two slots in your hand, but you may very well not care).

On a similar note, I was thinking it would have been amusing if someone had just submitted

Continent
$14 - Victory
15 VP

Quote
Heron
$8 - Victory
1 VP
--
During your buy phase, this card costs $2 less per action in play, but not less than $0.
--
When you buy this, you may set it aside. If you do, return it to your deck at the end of the game.

A bonus of up to 8 out-of-deck VP for whoever gets their engine going faster. Or, for that matter, you can keep it around in your deck to trash it for benefit like Peddler.

Quote
Bittern
$4 - Victory
This card is worth 1 VP for each [This Card] left in the supply at the end of the game.

Buy two to cooperate, three to defect, and four if you're playing solitaire.


...now I'll stop here and post before I collide with too many other posts.
Logged

iangoth

  • Spy
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 89
  • Respect: +38
    • View Profile
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #32 on: July 10, 2012, 05:58:01 am »
0

Thoughts on the cards, continued (Now with 75% more formatting!):

Yellowlegs
$7 - Victory
2 VP
--
When you gain this, gain a card costing less than this.

Presumably the designer priced it at $7 to be a consolation prize for when you miss the province. I imagine you'd mainly buy it for Yellowlegs->duchy lategame or for trash-for-benefit fuel midgame, which is fine, if a little dull.

Quote
Sandpiper
$2* - Victory
When you gain this card, place a VP token on this card's supply pile.
--
For each VP token on the pile, the cost of this card increases by 1.
--
At the end of the game, this card is worth victory points equal to the number of VP tokens on the pile.

Another card you're essentially forced to buy, since it's a better deal than provinces and worth more by the time the pile runs out. What's more, they're cheaper if you're the first to start buying, so everyone has to rush to get them.

Quote
Tern
$3 - Victory
2 VP
--
If you gain this during your action phase:
+1 Card
+1 Action
+$1

Ridiculous with ironworks/workshop, slightly less ridiculous with remodelers, but simply a consolation prize without enablers. There really aren't enough enablers to make this consistently interesting, even if it turns out to be balanced.

Quote
Puffin
$9 - Victory
4 VP
--
When you gain this, gain a Duchy and an Estate.

Really only something you'd buy on your last run through the deck to get in as many points as you can. Could increase the endgame slog effect because the player who is not too far behind can buy this to gain a small lead without taking the second-to-last province. Now the other guy can't take that province, so he buys a puffin, too. But now both players' decks are so green they'll have a tough time even getting to $8.

Quote
Macaw
$6 - Victory
2 VP
--
When you gain this, you may trash a card from your hand. If you do, gain 2 Silvers; if you don't, gain 1 Silver. Put the gained Silver(s) on top of your deck.

Quite strong, I think. I'd take it over a duchy almost every time. Two silvers on top of your deck gives you high odds of purchasing a province next turn.

Quote
Hummingbird
$6 - Victory
2 VP
--
When you gain this: +1 VP.  You may trash a card from your hand. If you do, get +VP equal to half its cost in coins, rounded down.

I think I like it. Trashing gold or hummingbird nets you fewer points than a farmland remodelling a gold or farmland, but you have one less green card floating around, and hummingbird can get vp out of more things. I'd make the trashing mandatory, though, like farmland. Relatively minor change, but it feels better to me.

Quote
Kingfisher
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every 2 cards in the supply pile with the [This Card] token on it (rounded down).
--
When you gain this, you may move the [This Card] token to a Kingdom supply pile of your choice.
--
Setup: Place the [This Card] token on the [This Card] supply pile.

As others have said, very swingy. Unless you split the kingfishers evenly, you can't afford to let your opponent buy the last one. If you have more kingfishers, he puts the token on an empty pile. If you have less, he puts it on, say, the curses.

Quote
Pelican
$6* - Victory
4 VP
--
When you buy this card, you may pay an additional $3 ($6). If you do, gain another (2) [This Card].

I like that it supports engines without +buys on the board (gives you a reason to work up to $12 turns). Much stronger than puffin, which is also $9 for 8vp, but split between 3 cards.

Quote
Waxwing
$6 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every Province in the supply at the end of the game.

In other words, 0, on many boards. In games where you can ensure a 3-pile ending, this would be fun, but I don't know if you can realistically do that before these become worth $3 or less on enough boards.

Quote
Woodpecker
$4 - Victory
Worth 5 VP minus 1 for every three treasures in your deck (round up), but not less than 0.
--
When you buy this, you may trash a treasure card from play and from your hand.

Without trashing, this card isn't going to be worth it at all. If I understand the wording ("round up" is confusing terminology at best, but I won't get into that here), it's worth $2 vp with your 7 initial coppers, and it's all downhill from there. Even with strong trashing, there are very few engines that run on so few treasures that you'd want this card.

Quote
Flycatcher
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every three [This Card] tokens you have.
--
In games using this, you may gain a [This Card] token at the end of any turn in which you shuffled your deck.

This card opens some very unique strategies, in my opinion. It should open up engine possibilities that wouldn't otherwise exist on weak boards where you emphasize cycling over money, aiming to shuffle your deck every turn. If the game runs 20-ish turns and you shuffle every turn after a certain point, flycatchers would be worth enough to be a strategy on their own. In a conventional engine, flycatchers would also build value quickly, but the game would tend to end sooner, limiting their value. In a big money game, I'd guess they would tend to be worth 2-3vp, sort of like gardens, but I could be off base there. Edit: Also, I like that it could combo with chancellor. Anything that combos with combos with chancellor is cool in my book.

Quote
Bluebird
$10 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every differently costed card in your deck.
--
Rules: In games using this, add Platinum to the Basic cards in the Supply.

I like it. 0 for copper, 2 for estate, 3 for silver, 4 for some action, 5 for duchy, 6 for gold, 8 for province, 9 for platinum, 10 for bluebird. That's 9 vp for $10, which is pretty good. If potion cards are in play, this could be better than colonies. Needs some clarification in a few cases, eg peddler and tournament prizes, though.

Quote
Vireo
$6 - Victory
3 VP
--
When you gain this, gain a Victory card costing less than this.

Another one you'd buy late to squeeze out as much vp as possible. Pretty reasonable, but not terribly exciting.

Quote
Bunting
$6 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for each special card in your deck.
--
Setup: Before the first turn each player selects a special card from among the kingdom cards and these are announced simultaneously.

This card would be totally dominant in any 2 player game with a decent, spammable card in the kingdom. If you and your opponent pick the same pile, it's a race to win the split--the winner of the split wins the game. If you pick different piles or your opponent goes for provinces, your buntings could be super cheap colonies by the end of the game. Bunting should be a little balanced in multiplayer, though. Any card you'd want a ton of copies of is a card everyone else is going to buy, too. Buying up all the chancellors to make your Buntings worth 10 vp just isn't going to work out, but you might get away with 5 or so with some planning.

Quote
Lark
$4 - Victory
2 VP
--
When you gain this card, you may gain a copy of a card costing $4 or less that does not have the name [This Card].

Lets you run out the piles super fast. I expect this to be too strong.

Quote
Nuthatch
$4 - Victory
2 VP
--
When you gain this, you may gain a Curse. If you do, gain a card costing up to $6 that is not a Victory card.

Too weak. Two junk cards and a gold for $4 is a deal I'd almost never take.

Quote
Warbler
$5 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for each set of Copper, Silver, and Gold in your deck.

I think this could be a bit strong, but I like the idea. In a standard big money game, it's no trouble to pick up at least 6 golds if you're not racing for provinces. The silver and copper take care of themselves.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2012, 06:41:11 am by iangoth »
Logged

Schneau

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1174
  • Shuffle iT Username: Schneau
  • Respect: +1461
    • View Profile
    • Rainwave
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #33 on: July 10, 2012, 07:53:56 am »
+2

On a similar note, I was thinking it would have been amusing if someone had just submitted

Continent
$14 - Victory
15 VP

I came this close to submitting this card.
Logged

andwilk

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 201
  • Respect: +152
    • View Profile
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #34 on: July 10, 2012, 08:08:19 am »
0

There are two cards named Bluebird in the list.  It may cause a problem when it comes time to tally the votes!

Bluebird
$5 - Victory
Worth 1 VP per [This Card] in your deck.
--
Can only be bought if you have at least 1 Action Card in play.


Bluebird
$10 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every differently costed card in your deck.
--
Rules: In games using this, add Platinum to the Basic cards in the Supply.
Logged

rinkworks

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +937
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #35 on: July 10, 2012, 08:24:32 am »
0

Uhh, rinkworks, there are two cards named bluebird.

Gah.  It's because those two cards had the same real name, so my script screwed up the substitution.  I'll add in a check for that.

One of the Bluebird cards is now named Osprey.  If you posted about one of them already, can you please edit your posts to prevent further confusion?  Sorry about this.

I will send a PM to those who have voted and get clarification.
Logged

Polk5440

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1708
  • Respect: +1788
    • View Profile
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #36 on: July 10, 2012, 10:37:46 am »
0

For what it's worth, my thoughts are below. For me, it helps to group the cards into categories when thinking about them.

Interaction
I am liking the cards that allow your opponents to more directly affect your victory point count by buying certain cards. I also like the cards that interact with Provinces or Estates and how the game ends. For instance: Gannet, Guillemot, Bittern, Waxwing, and Loon. Although, some are better than others.

Alt VP, Straight Up
I guess there is still space for straight-up alternate VPs counting certain types of cards and getting VP tokens. For instance: Petrel, Cormorant, Bluebird, Warbler, Woodpecker, Osprey, and Spoonbill. Some of these are better than others, but there are a couple I would definitely like to play.

VP+Action-like ability

Some of these cards wish they were actions (or from engine-builders who don't like buying boring green cards and would rather just buy actions?). While some of these cards are interesting, I wish some of these cards had been billed as Victory-Action dual types instead, or just were an improved action card submitted for a different category. They might be even more interesting that way.

Flamingo: If I'd only played a Pawn, then I wouldn't need to buy this.
Shearwater: If I'd only played a Scheme or an Herbalist...
Tanager: If I'd only played an Outpost...
Heron: I like the Peddler influence, but is it going to be an ignorable card in too many kingdoms?
Harrier: I wish I'd played a Haggler and purchased a Duchy, then I wouldn't need to buy this.
Plover: I wish I'd played a Chapel,...
Oystercatcher: I wish I'd played an Upgrade to get rid of those curses and coppers,...
Tern: If only I were a better Dominion player, I wouldn't need this to make Ironworks work.
Hummingbird: I wish I'd played a Bishop, then I wouldn't need to buy this.
Lark: If I'd only played a Workshop...
Nuthatch: If I'd only gained a Lark....jk [edit: b/c it's actually better and leads to a game breaking cycle with Border Villages -- see nopawnsintended post below].

With these cards plus all the trash and gain on gain/on buy cards (Gadwall, Egret, Kestrel, Yellowlegs, Puffin, Macaw, Woodpecker, Pelican, and Vireo), and I'm beginning to think a lot of submitted cards are vying for the upcoming expansion of the Hinterlands expansion! I love that expansion and its on buy/on gain theme, and evidently lots of designers do, too. But how much of it do we really need?

Tokens, Mats, and Accounting, Oh My!

For me Dominion has reached a saturation point with regards to new mats and token types. When playing in person, it's time consuming to set up and do all the token accounting needed during the game when you have more than one type of special set-up card in play and are switching them in and out each game. Online there is not that constraint, but with so many cards that require detailed accounting (which is fun only when done really well), some of the following entries should come with a warning: "card counter required."

Loon: Serious accounting ("Did I put territory token on when I bought my last Province?" "Yes." "No." ...). One thing that wasn't mentioned above is the ability to Ironworks, Remodel, Upgrade, etc. into Loons without affecting its worth, which adds (too much?) power to the card.
Grebe: Concerns about stength
Pipit: I like that this is a riff on the Young Witch set up. Does require you to remember the cost of the card is one more than printed, though.
Ibis: Accounting every time you don't use a buy ("Did I...?")
Sandpiper: Uses existing tokens, which I like. Seems to have the potential to be more balanced than Grebe, if the starting price was a little higher.
Kingfisher: Another token! And introduces politics in a way that isn't normally present in a game of Dominion.
Flycatcher: Another token!
Bunting: More special decks! (and not as streamlined as Pipit)

I think this Challenge shows that coming up with a good, balanced Victory Card is more difficult than it first appeared.

[Disclaimer: one of the cards mentioned in the post is mine.]
« Last Edit: July 10, 2012, 03:29:08 pm by Polk5440 »
Logged

Autumn

  • Swindler
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17
  • Respect: +6
    • View Profile
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #37 on: July 10, 2012, 10:58:23 am »
0

My submission doesn't seem to be on the list :/ I sent the message to submit the card I designed, but it isn't appearing in my Sent Items folder. I was really happy with the cards I'd made, too.. :(
Logged

greatexpectations

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1097
  • Respect: +1067
    • View Profile
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #38 on: July 10, 2012, 11:12:45 am »
0

Card           Cost  Buys   Gains   % Gained  Win Rate With/Without
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Vineyard      $0P   .83     .01        28.3         1.01/1.00
Duke           $5    .71      .08        28.4         .95/1.02
Curse          $0    .01     1.21       28.5         .91/1.04
Fairgrounds  $6    .86      .07        39.9         .99/1.01
Silk Road     $4     1.23    .04        50.4         1.00/1.00
Gardens      $4     1.35    .28        52.3         1.00/1.00
Farmland     $6     1.3      .11       56.3          .99/1.02
Duchy         $5    1.26    .17        59.6          .99/1.01
Harem         $6    1.58    .13        61.8          1.00/.99
Tunnel        $3     2.1     .18        71.8          .98/1.04
Colony        $11   2.63    .12        78.2          1.09/.66
Great Hall    $3    2.13     .39       78.9           .98/1.06
Island         $4    2.3       .38       82.6          1.01/.97
Province     $8    2.91      .16       85.8          1.03/.82
Nobles        $6    2.78     .14       87.2           1.02/.92
Logged
momomoto: ...I looked at the tableau and went "Mountebank? That's for jerks."
rrenaud: Jerks win.

One Armed Man

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 410
  • Respect: +88
    • View Profile
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #39 on: July 10, 2012, 02:02:07 pm »
0

Gadwall
Too much benefit from trashing a curse; Awkward/Easy Choice with Fairgrounds.

Loon
So if you buy 2 of these, then 4 Provinces are bought, then 2 more of these are bought, they are worth 2VP each? The race seems to be get as many before Provinces are bought. I think that those buys should be gains.

Grebe
A Victory card that only works well if you get lots of it. If this is split 5/3, then it is 5^2-3^2 or 16 points in your favor. That is 8 points each, which is excessive.

Flamingo
I always thought this was cute. If you have $3 to spend, buying this and an estate is 3VP. That is like spending $5 on Duchy except you also get a blank card.

Petrel
If power level becomes a concern, a version could be made that cost 4 and has "1 VP for each non-Treasure card you have 5 or more copies of" That gives it 1 less VP for Copper (but you can trash your Copper) and has players get actions instead of Silver.

Shearwater
Like a Mandarin that gives Victory points near the last reshuffle. It needs rewording so you can't pick up opponent's Merchant Ships.


Guillemot
It is very easy to get 5 additional Estates in normal games so this becomes 4VP. The risk of it becoming 5VP is enough for opponents to pick this up to prevent you from getting the next to last one. Unless there is heavy trashing, in which this doesn't get bought.

Cormorant
The difference between this and Fairgrounds at 4VP is that this works with trash for benefit but not gainers. A little bland.

Pipit
Like Young Witch, varies in quality greatly based on what is a Masterpiece. Any cantrip/power card that doesn't normally cost 3 makes this pile run out.

Gannet
Gannet wants to not end on piles.
This is actually a fun meta-game when it fights you to end the game on provinces and then makes it easy for a player to end it on piles. I previously said
"A lot of text to say you want the piles ending. Great concept, but there has to be a simpler way of encouraging it."


Tanager
Outpost makes you plan your deck around getting extra turns. I don't see anything particularly wrong with this card.

Egret
This needs wording similar to the other adjustable price VP submission.

Heron
A VP instead of a peddler? This is essentially giving you a VP chip since you cannot interact with it in the same way you can peddler.

Bittern
Other posts describe the problem better than I can.

Ibis
Worthless without +Buy. 3 Markets played every turn increase 5 of this card's VP by 1 each. This creates a situation in which the player doesn't want to buy cards or end the game.

Spoonbill
Like Trade Route, when you are getting the most out of this, you have to do both parts (buy this card, trash random cards). Unlike Trade Route, it is easier to get in on the game because it is not a terminal action.

Osprey
Interesting restriction,  but probably not sufficient. If this is split 5/3, then it is 5^2-3^2 or 16 points in your favor. That is 8 points each, which is excessive.

Harrier
This makes the a superprovince worth 8VP for $9. This also empowers alt-VP rushes. Seems ok.

Kestrel
An odd Mint, a virtual $ helper, or a last reshuffle tiebreaker. Seems ok

Plover
You can't trash the money you used to pay for it, so this is only useful in the late game or weird hands like (Smithy)SSCCEEE. I can't see there being more cards in the trash than cards in your deck without Remake, Apprentice or Bishop. This would always be weaker than Gardens.

Oystercatcher
Worthless without other trashing. Discourages you from buying cards to an extent, since you can't improve your deck's money density without hurting your VP. Like most on-buy, it can be "upgraded" or trash-for-benefited for greater benefit since you already get the chance to trash an estate.

Yellowlegs
Like an Egret, Vireo, and Harrier, but I can see the point to this. Has interesting reaction with Quarry/Forge, can be "upgraded" or trash-for-benefited for greater benefit, makes Haggler frightening, etc. Seems okay.

Sandpiper
You want to get these as soon as possible, since they become more difficult to get later on. Getting the first 2 (on $5 and 2 buys) makes it so no other player wants to try to compete for it. I don't think that is interesting gameplay.

Tern
Ironworks and Workshop are good comboes. Remake, Remodel, Expand, Upgrade, Governor, Border Village(?), Forge(?) have uses and also turn this card into something else later. This could be of significant use on the games it finds an interaction. Seems okay.

Puffin
Since people will often want this above Province, makes ending the game on Provinces more difficult. This might delay the game as it causes the game to end on piles, complicating a lot of strategies involving. After each player buys 2 of these, their engines grind to a halt (on 6 Victory cards) and it is a scramble to end on piles. Seems okay.

Macaw
If used to trash an estate or copper, is a better Farmlands for that purpose. If not used to trash a card, is a harem + blank card that the harem part goes to the top of your deck. Seems weak since both of those cards are weak.

Hummingbird
I forgot to talk about this one last time. It is too similar to bishop and farmland. It is always better than Duchy as well.

Kingfisher
Can be worth 5VP, 4VP if players remove cards from each pile. Each player has the opportunity to hop the value up and down if they have less Kingfishers than each other. This might barely make up for a 5/3 Province split (3 or more Kingfishers worth 4 or more points or vice versa). Seems fun.

Pelican
I always thought the parenthesis on Governor was unintuitive. This card can be a 12-cost 12 VP+2 blank cards. Any engine that makes that much might want to consider Province/Duchy so they have less blank cards. Similar to, and works well with, Farmland. Seems okay.

Waxwing
Very conditional, weird with Colony. The idea is that 2 players can get this and if you lose the split, you can make the cards worthless by buying Provinces. 5/3 Waxwing 0/3 Provinces, 6/2 Duchies would be 25+0+18=43 / 15+18+6=39. Each bought Province becomes 6+2XVP for however bad the split is. In 3 player, this could be worth 12VP each in a cursing/alt VP game. You need to get 6 Provinces to match the 2 other players who got 6 of these each.

Woodpecker
$4 - Victory
Worth 5 VP minus 1 for every three treasures in your deck (round up), but not less than 0.
--
When you buy this, you may trash a treasure card from play and from your hand.
Board dependent, which is good. If you can trash all your coin, like with a bishop, this can be a monster. Can be upgraded/ trash-for-benefited for good effect. Seems potentially high demand so the game ends on piles. Seems okay.

Flycatcher
Discourages ending the game, especially if you can shuffle every turn with Hunting Party, Golem, etc. Most egregious, you "should" gain the token in the paper version every time you shuffle even if no one wants this card.

Bluebird (10 cost)
0234568 10. 9 often, 7 sometimes. That makes this card 8 to 10 VP in all but the trimmest of decks, making an Bluebird game indistinguishable from a Colony game. Would this need a ruling to say that Potion cards count for their coin values?

Vireo
Too strong, makes a $6 Province really easily.

Bunting
Is the setup restriction before or after seeing your opening hand? If you have 5/2, you can win the split on a 5 cost power card and 4/3 can declare a 3 cost card they can start with 2 of. The choice is interesting, but gets degenerate in 4Player, where every other card gives a Bunting advantage.

Lark
A late game/workshop rush/trash for benefit helper. Can be a cheap Duchy+blank card. Much stronger than Farmland. Seems fine

Nuthatch
Really stuffs your deck. 3 cards for $4? If you are the only one being Cursed anyway, I could see this not hurting too bad. You can get Grand Market or Goons. Alt VP rushes and trasher helper. You can always use this for a $4 and 2VP. Seems fine

Warbler
Encourages Big Money too much.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2012, 05:22:58 pm by One Armed Man »
Logged

rinkworks

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +937
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #40 on: July 10, 2012, 02:49:46 pm »
0

Quote
Kingfisher
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every 2 cards in the supply pile with the [This Card] token on it (rounded down).
--
When you gain this, you may move the [This Card] token to a Kingdom supply pile of your choice.
--
Setup: Place the [This Card] token on the [This Card] supply pile.

Quote
Kingfisher. . . That makes Curse a good pile for the token, so long as there isn't a curser around.  Very neat.

Quote
If you have more kingfishers, he puts the token on an empty pile. If you have less, he puts it on, say, the curses.

Quick note here:  the base card piles couldn't get a Kingfisher token on it, since it's only allowed to go on "Kingdom" supply piles -- so just the ten (or eleven) piles that are different every game.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #41 on: July 10, 2012, 03:01:35 pm »
0

Quote
Kingfisher
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every 2 cards in the supply pile with the [This Card] token on it (rounded down).
--
When you gain this, you may move the [This Card] token to a Kingdom supply pile of your choice.
--
Setup: Place the [This Card] token on the [This Card] supply pile.

Quote
Kingfisher. . . That makes Curse a good pile for the token, so long as there isn't a curser around.  Very neat.

Quote
If you have more kingfishers, he puts the token on an empty pile. If you have less, he puts it on, say, the curses.

Quick note here:  the base card piles couldn't get a Kingfisher token on it, since it's only allowed to go on "Kingdom" supply piles -- so just the ten (or eleven) piles that are different every game.

Oh?  I thought "Kingdom" referred to everything... but I supposed I mixed it up with "Supply".
Logged

nopawnsintended

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220
  • Respect: +186
    • View Profile
    • My Website
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #42 on: July 10, 2012, 03:28:27 pm »
0

Here are my comments.

Gadwall: It seems like there would be very special circumstances under which you would want to buy this.  Trashing a curse is a benefit unto itself.  Adding gold seems too generous in this case.  Otherwise, you may not want to trash cards remaining in your hand (as in late game situations).  This seems to be the norm, so I'm not sure about this one.

Loon: I like this one.  An interesting early game buy choice.  Also, this could have cool interactions with remodel-expand.  If adopted, replace "territory" token with VP token.  We don't need more types of tokens and mats, and VP tokens work fine as counters.

Grebe: On the fence.  I think the card would be better if there were a communal token mat.  Again, I don't like extra tokens, but that's my preference for simplicity.

Flamingo: I dislike the "when buy, +buy" effect.  Seems like it would lead to ambiguities.  I like the interaction with Estates.  Estates are not often viewed as a resource, and this card makes you want to hang onto them -- an interesting tradeoff (though, not sure the two VP is enough to make this a strong desire).

Petrel: This is sort of interesting.  To make it worth more than a duchy, you'd need to pick up a couple of extra estates, and have two card types where you have more than half the pile.  This seems tricky to me, and it may be hard to make this work (unless others have a good idea here).

Shearwater: This is cool.  I think this could work better at the $5 price point.  The when buy ability could be very strong late game, and would definitely be worth giving up one VP for putting the best card back on the deck.

Guillemot: I like this.  As I mentioned with Flamingo, I like the concept of making estates worth something (usually you want to trash).  Rushing with Ironworks/Workshop is nice, but as worded, gaining them won't get you an estate because you don't trash the treasure.  I haven't worked all of the rush details out in my mind, but I think impoverishing yourself of treasure might keep this in check.  Rushing on gain with this feels like it would be like rushing Gardens, but without the coppers to help with the big green clog.

Cormorant: This seems like it needs a trash for benefit card, which is a little too kingdom dependent for my taste.

Pipit: Hmm... this complicates setup, but could be fun.  Technical issue: I'm not sure how to deal with the added cost in casual play.  The card as printed would still have its regular cost.  Also, like Young Witch's bane, this may work better with some cost restriction.  I'm not sure though... I could be swayed on this.

Gannet:  Super interesting card.  If you have a lot of Gannets, you want to empty the province pile.  But, to get a lot of Gannets, you want two piles to be empty so they're cheap... but then, you don't want to empty the Gannet pile because then you have a pile of 2VP cards!  Opponents could then play games with your VP by 3 piling before provinces or colonies are gone.  This is an interesting knife edge case that you don't see with other cards.

Tanager: 2VP with a when gain outpost.  Somewhat interesting tradeoff with Duchy (especially when a card like Alchemist or other fun durations are in the kingdom), but I don't really like the Outpost mechanic.

Egret: Hard to understand as written.  If I understand what it does correctly, maybe reword to say "When you buy a victory card costing $5 or more, you may gain an Egret."


Heron: Peddler for victory points!  Alternatively, an Estate that doesn't clog.  Given my love for Estates, I like it. 

Bittern: This looks interesting.  Cool interaction with Trash for Benefit.  A fun opportunity to mess with other players' VP.

Ibis: New tokens, new mats.  On boards with no +Buy, this would be an expensive Estate.  With lots of +Buy, could be cool, but I'm not sure it is worth the setup.

Spoonbill: Interesting in trash for benefit games, but not if there isn't trashing.  Possibly too kingdom dependent.

Osprey:  I'm not sure I like the increasing value.  Seems like a card that cannot be ignored (lest your opponent gets all of them).  In solitaire, the incentive gets stronger to buy this as you get more in your deck.  In 2P games, you have the incentive to deny your opponent those huge gains (so you'd want to at least buy one or two to tamp down the value).  The "Action in Play" restriction seems like a minor annoyance, but I'm pretty action heavy.


Harrier: The card is confusing to me, even with the rules clarification.  Maybe it's the economist in me, but I don't like the freedom to name my own price.

Kestrel: On the fence. Seems like a great buy late game when you're not going to get to another shuffle.  Also, could be an interesting way to want to run the curse pile out (for 3 piling).  If curses are out, maybe 8 VP is too much for a $6 card you put on your deck?


Plover: An on gain chapel with a benefit from the trash.  I like the digging through the trash aspect, but not so much when modified by number of players.  For 4P games, you'd need 20 cards in the trash to make this worth one?  If this card is the only way to trash, that's going to be hard to obtain (because the amount of trashing depends more on the # of cards than the number of players in that case).

Oystercatcher: This poses an interesting tradeoff, but I think I would have a hard time keeping track of the non-victory cards in my deck (not a PCE user here). 

Yellowlegs:  I'm mostly positive on this. Buy a Yellowlegs, gain a Border Village, gain a Duchy, gain a Duchess... could be fun.  It is some consolation for being suck at 7.

Sandpiper:  I like the concept, but not the cost..  At $2, it is an estate with HUGE option value.  At $3, it is a tunnel with HUGE option value.  At $4, it is a duchy with option value.  At $5, it is a 10-diff-card fairgrounds with option value.  At $6, 5 VP w/ option value.  At $7, a province with option value (2 cards still available).  I would buy it and keep buying it at the current price schedule.  Maybe start it at $3 (or $4, might be too high)?


Tern: With Ironworks, you get a super lab with money.  Seems too strong for $3.

Puffin: Seems overpriced given the amount of deck clog it will cause.  This may be a good late game buy if estates and duchies aren't out.

Macaw: Fun card.  In money deprived endgames, this could cure the logjam enough to hit three piles (possibly by repeatedly buying Macaw-MACaw-MACAW!!!).  It could also do nice things to curse clog.

Hummingbird: Interesting.  An on-gain Bishop.  Buy a Hummingbird, trash a Hummingbird might be a fun play.

Kingfisher: I'm confused by this one.  Is there one [This Card] token or many?  Seems like you'd need many to make the accounting work.  Again, more tokens == less enjoyment for me.


Pelican:  Nonlinear pricing.  One for $6, Two for $9, Three for $12.  Without caring about deck clog, equivalent to Double Province on $12 if there are any of these left.  Double province at -$4 seems like a no-brainer price to pay for one additional dead card in the deck.  I sense that pelicans would run out quickly. 

Waxwing: Really good in three pile games.  IGG rush with these would be possibly more interesting.  Of the Province dependent VPs, I like Gannet better.

Woodpecker:  Seems expensive.  I don't see this being worth more than three, and often will be worth very little.

Flycatcher: Points for cycling.  That's interesting, but again, there's my disdain for tokens.  Maybe use VP tokens for this?

Bluebird: Clarification on this one: Do you add a Colony as well?  If no, it would be odd to see kingdoms without the platinum-colony combination.  If yes, it seems like bluebird could be worth a lot of VP.  Not sure if that's good or bad.  I wouldn't ignore the card.

Vireo: This feels like it is worth too much VP.  Possibly make it 2 VP and it would be better.  Otherwise, $6 for 6 VP is a great deal if you don't have to do much deck manipulation for it.  Maybe the clog makes this worth it.

Bunting:  I announce lighthouse.  My friend announces Hamlet.  We both pile lighthouses and hamlets --> 5-5 split on each.  So, Buntings are worth 10?  In multiple player, this could get crazy, no?

Lark: An on-gain workshop.  I wonder how it interacts with Bridge/Highway/Princess.  Even so, I'm not too excited about gaining something less than $4.  From this class of cards, I like Yellowlegs better.


Nuthatch: Endgame strategy upon getting $4 coin at the beginning the game.  Requires Border Village.  Buy Nuthatch, gain Curse, gain Border Village, gain Nuthatch.  Repeat until nuthatches are out.  Then, border village into curse.  All you need is to get rid of one curse and two Border Villages before pulling the trick.

Warbler: Interesting way to get treasure to matter.  I was thinking of something similar that just counted up treasure.  I have less intuition about having sets of copper-silver-gold than I do about total coin, but maybe this card would get me to pay attention to that.

All in all, I think there are some interesting cards here.
Logged

jonts26

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2746
  • Shuffle iT Username: jonts
  • Respect: +3668
    • View Profile
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #43 on: July 10, 2012, 04:10:40 pm »
+1

I think VP cards are some of the hardest to balance properly. And pure VP cards offer even more challenges to overcome. If it's the kind of card you can build a strategy around, you'd like it to only be that way sometimes. But you'd also like it to have some utility in games where it's not the dominant point card. If it's the kind of card that won't ever dominate a game, then you want it to be useful support in most games you see it. Too many of these cards fail on those criteria for me. Either they they are just too weak to be considered in most games, or they are too strong half the time while being too weak the other half.

That said, balance is only one of the criteria I'll use to rank these. Creativity can overcome poor balance, since I figure if I ever play with these cards I can tweak them if I don't like the power level.

Anyway quick thoughts:

Gadwall
$6 - Victory
4 VP
--
When you gain this, trash a card from your hand. If you trashed a Curse this way, gain a Gold.
$6 for 4VP sounds about right to me. The trash a curse clause rarely triggers outside of curse games so it'll be often useless, and probably a touch too strong in them since you are basically netting 5 VP and a Gold for $6.
Quote
Loon
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP per territory token on [This Card]'s supply pile.
--
Whenever a player buys a Province, put a territory token on [This Card]'s supply pile.
Whenever a player buys a [This Card], remove a territory token from [This Card]'s supply pile.
Could create a decent metagame, but I suspect this is actually too strong as is. If one player rushed them early game, your opponent is basically stuck since he can't start gaining provinces without powering these up. So both players will end up rushing these early, and then the game will degenerate somewhat.
Quote
Grebe
$9* - Victory
Worth 1 VP per [This Card] token you have.
--
This costs $1 less per [This Card] token you have (but not less than $0).
--
When you gain this, gain a [This Card] token.
Too strong. Basically negates the need to ever buy provinces. Also creates a huge snowballing effect for the player who gets going faster.
Quote
Flamingo
$2 - Victory
Worth 2 VP if you have more Estates than [This Card]s.
--
When you buy this, +$1, +1 Buy.
The +$1/+buy clause I think kills this card. I get the idea is to buy one of these and then use the extra buy to nab an estate, but it's way too easy to just drain this pile for the leading player.
Quote
Petrel
$5 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for each card you have 5 or more copies of.
I like this one, and I think it's balanced but I'm not positive. Pretty easy to get to 3 points with coppers, estates, and silvers maybe. Often gets up to 4 or 5, and with the right board 6+. So it sometimes acts just as support, and sometimes can work as it's own strategy.
Quote
Shearwater
$4 - Victory
2 VP
--
When you buy this, place a card that is in play on top of your deck.
On buy scheme effect. Probably balanced as is, but a little uninteresting to me. Likely you just use this to topdeck a Gold or strong action in the end game when you fail to hit a province.
Quote
Guillemot
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every 2 Estates in your deck (round down).
--
When you gain this, trash a Treasure from the play area.  If you trash a Treasure, gain an Estate.
Probably a bit strong. Too easy to gain these and estates, leading to a very fast rush with no need for another card to support.
Quote
Cormorant
$6 - Victory
1 VP
--
When you buy this, gain 3 VP tokens.
I considered making a card which gave VP tokens, but really, in almost every game this card is just $6 for 4VP. OK you get to keep 3 of those points if you trash this for benefit, but I don't find that to be more interesting.
Quote
Pipit
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for each Masterpiece card in your deck.
--
Setup: Add an extra Kingdom card pile to the Supply. Cards from that pile cost $1 more and are Masterpiece cards.
I suspect this will either brokenly strong or very weak, with little ground in the middle.
Quote
Gannet
$6* - Victory
When the game ends, if the Province or Colony supply pile is empty (if it was available), then this is worth 4 VP. Otherwise, this is worth 2 VP.
--
During your Buy phase, if two supply piles are empty, then this costs $3.
I think this will go unbought in too many games, though the games where it is relevant should be somewhat interesting.

EDIT: I think i read this wrong. Actually seems like a pretty interesting card all around. Most games it'll just act like a better duchy.
Quote
Tanager
$6 - Victory
2 VP
--
The turn you buy this, only draw 3 cards (instead of 5) in this turn's Clean-up phase. Take an extra turn after this one. This can't cause you to take more than two consecutive turns.
One shot outpost? Going to be pretty weak most of the time. Will likely end up just being a desperation ploy for the endgame.
Quote
Egret
$3* - Victory
2 VP
--
When you buy [This Card], pay any amount greater than or equal to its cost. Then, gain a victory card costing at most $2 less than that amount.
Seems balanced to me. $4 for 3VP, $5 for 4VP, $7 for 5VP spread out over 2 cards. Never going to be a power card, but will influence the end game dance a bit.
Quote
Heron
$8 - Victory
1 VP
--
During your buy phase, this card costs $2 less per action in play, but not less than $0.
--
When you buy this, you may set it aside. If you do, return it to your deck at the end of the game.
Probably going to be worthless on a number of boards, and will be drained pretty quickly on most engine boards with +buy. The option to set it aside is good, as it functions either as just a 1VP chip or lets me keep it to interact with trash for benefit cards. Also interacts with swindler.
Quote
Bittern
$4 - Victory
This card is worth 1 VP for each [This Card] left in the supply at the end of the game.
Not sure I like what this card does to the endgame. The first couple are obscenly strong but then your opponent needs to start buying them just to block you, and in the end we just end up with a bunch of lowish point extra green cards clogging our decks.
Quote
Ibis
$3 - Victory
1 VP
Worth another 1 VP for every 3 tokens on your [This Card] mat.
--
Setup: Each player has his own [This Card] mat. At the start of a player's Clean-up, he gains a token on his [This Card] mat for each unused Buy.
In any game with decent sources of +buy, this card is going to be obscenely powerful. And in a game with no +buy it will be completely ignorable. Needs a lot more middle ground.
Quote
Spoonbill
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every two differently named cards in the trash, rounding down.
Another card which is either worthless or very very strong with nothing in the middle. Needs trashing to be useful, but any decent trashing will get this up to 5-6 points easily enough. Also suffers from the trade route problem. You can't build a strategy around this by trashing everything cause it powers it up for your opponent as well. So only used in games where you're trashing a lot anyway.
Quote
Osprey
$5 - Victory
Worth 1 VP per [This Card] in your deck.
--
Can only be bought if you have at least 1 Action Card in play.
Exponential point growth might make this too strong. The buy restriction tempers that somewhat, but I'm not convinced this is too powerful, especially with any sort of engine where you can buy a bunch of these at once.
Quote
Harrier
$4* - Victory
2 VP
During your Buy phase, this costs whatever you want, as long as it costs at least $4.
--
When you buy this, gain a card costing less than this.
--
(Rules clarification: [This Card]'s cost can change in the middle of the Buy phase. E.g., with $11 and 2 buys, buy [This Card] for $5 and for $6. When cost reduction like Bridge is out, [This Card] must still cost at least $4.)
Wording is a bit clunky, but the intent is clear. Similar to egret, but much more powerful. Too strong I would think. Spending $6 for 5VP, or $9 for 8VP is very strong.
Quote
Kestrel
$6 - Victory
8 VP
--
When you gain this, trash all treasures you have in play and gain a Curse.  If you do not gain a Curse, place [This Card] on top of your deck.
Just way too strong for engines where you don't want treasure. 8vp for $6! There is the curse, but in engines you can likely get rid of that easily enough. Also the second curse clause seems unnecessary since that will only matter in games where there is another curser.
Quote
Plover
$5 - Victory
This card is worth 1 VP for every 5*P cards in the trash (round down).
(P = number of players)
--
When you gain this, trash up to 4 cards from your hand.
Better than the other trash card since it has a trash mechanism built in. I think it might still be weak, especially in multiplayer without other trashing cards because you need a ton of these just to get up to even duchy points.
Quote
Oystercatcher
$6 - Victory
Worth 10 VP, minus 2 VP for every 5 non-Victory cards in your deck (rounded down).
--
When you buy this, you may trash a card from your hand.
Maybe balanced? Hard to tell. I would find it very hard to keep track of the value of this card during the game, moreso than other variable VP cards. Also with the current wording, this thing can go quite negative with a large deck.
Quote
Yellowlegs
$7 - Victory
2 VP
--
When you gain this, gain a card costing less than this.
Another gain a cheaper card thing. Seems balanced. Will almost always be used to gain a Duchy I would think though, since you don't really want extra green cards outside of the end game. So maybe not the most interesting card, but sometimes plain and balanced is nice.
Quote
Sandpiper
$2* - Victory
When you gain this card, place a VP token on this card's supply pile.
--
For each VP token on the pile, the cost of this card increases by 1.
--
At the end of the game, this card is worth victory points equal to the number of VP tokens on the pile.
Too strong, I think. If I buy 6 of these, they are worth province points and yet I didn't have to pay as much as a province for any of them.
Quote
Tern
$3 - Victory
2 VP
--
If you gain this during your action phase:
+1 Card
+1 Action
+$1
Compare to tunnel. Even if you never use the 'reaction' part, still useful. Will be out of control with Ironworks, and still very strong with other gianers. Probably mostly balanced as is though.
Quote
Puffin
$9 - Victory
4 VP
--
When you gain this, gain a Duchy and an Estate.
Going to cause some massive clogging in the endgame since you are getting 8VP for $9. But you will have some interesting decisions on whether to go for this or Province.
Quote
Macaw
$6 - Victory
2 VP
--
When you gain this, you may trash a card from your hand. If you do, gain 2 Silvers; if you don't, gain 1 Silver. Put the gained Silver(s) on top of your deck.
very strong, I think. I might consider taking this over Gold midgame or Duchy in the end game. So could offer some interesting choices at least.
Quote
Hummingbird
$6 - Victory
2 VP
--
When you gain this: +1 VP.  You may trash a card from your hand. If you do, get +VP equal to half its cost in coins, rounded down.
So it's a bishop? I guess it could be interesting. You could do a weak golden deck of this and some money without much set up.
Quote
Kingfisher
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every 2 cards in the supply pile with the [This Card] token on it (rounded down).
--
When you gain this, you may move the [This Card] token to a Kingdom supply pile of your choice.
--
Setup: Place the [This Card] token on the [This Card] supply pile.
As a friend of mine said, he thinks this card could be renamed kingmaker. Does odd things in multiplayer and in 2p it's going to be a ton of jockeying for position, and I'm not sure in an interesting way.
Quote
Pelican
$6* - Victory
4 VP
--
When you buy this card, you may pay an additional $3 ($6). If you do, gain another (2) [This Card].
The wording confuses me. Is it saying i could pay either $6,$9 or $12 to gain 1,2 or 3 of these cards? If so, too strong. $9 for 8VP is really really good, even over 2 cards.
Quote
Waxwing
$6 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every Province in the supply at the end of the game.
Could be intersting in curse slogs or if my opponent goes alt VP. Will far too often go unbought though.
Quote
Woodpecker
$4 - Victory
Worth 5 VP minus 1 for every three treasures in your deck (round up), but not less than 0.
--
When you buy this, you may trash a treasure card from play and from your hand.
I kind of like this in concept. Will sometimes be worthless (money games), sometimes dominant (engines with good money giving actions and sometimes in the middle (weaker, or money based engines). I can get behind that. Might still need balancing, it's hard to tell. The round up wording confuses me. Am I rounding treasures up to nearest 3 or points up to nearest integer?
Quote
Flycatcher
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every three [This Card] tokens you have.
--
In games using this, you may gain a [This Card] token at the end of any turn in which you shuffled your deck.
So it's basically a VP card that rewards deck cycling or thin decks. It could be ok in theory, but likely this leads to some degenerate games where you just trash down to a very thin deck with a bunch of these and sit and do nothing forever.
Quote
Bluebird
$10 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every differently costed card in your deck.
--
Rules: In games using this, add Platinum to the Basic cards in the Supply.
So it's a colony replacement, more or less. Lets see, at most this will get up to 11 points or 15 with potions, . Realistically  8 or 9? I can see it being balanced, as you have to build around it much the same way you do Faigrounds. But unlike fairgrounds, this could often be fewer points than province for a lot more money, so you don't pick it up as a consolation prize, which hurts it's value somewhat.
Quote
Vireo
$6 - Victory
3 VP
--
When you gain this, gain a Victory card costing less than this.
Way too strong. 6 Points for $6? Even over 2 cards that breaks things.
Quote
Bunting
$6 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for each special card in your deck.
--
Setup: Before the first turn each player selects a special card from among the kingdom cards and these are announced simultaneously.
Can the special card be any of the cards named or does it have to be your own? Can you name this card as the special card? Either way this is way too strong if there is any decent cantrip around.
Quote
Lark
$4 - Victory
2 VP
--
When you gain this card, you may gain a copy of a card costing $4 or less that does not have the name [This Card].
Why a copy of the card? Why not just gain a card. Anyway this is going to be super super good with IW or Silk Roads or likely gardens as rush cards. Otherwise, probably not that interesting except as a consolation for not even getting duchy in the end game.
Quote
Nuthatch
$4 - Victory
2 VP
--
When you gain this, you may gain a Curse. If you do, gain a card costing up to $6 that is not a Victory card.
Probably a bit too weak. Early game I do not want a green, and it's not worth it to take a green and a curse just to get a $6 card instead of a $4 card. Late game, it's not so bad to get 2VP for $4, but I don't see this card being impactful hardly ever.
Quote
Warbler
$5 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for each set of Copper, Silver, and Gold in your deck.
I like it. Might be too strong. Might need some balancing. But it's the most interesting VP per treasure variant I've seen.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2012, 05:05:15 pm by jonts26 »
Logged

jonts26

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2746
  • Shuffle iT Username: jonts
  • Respect: +3668
    • View Profile
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #44 on: July 10, 2012, 04:25:55 pm »
0

Maybe it's the economist in me, but I don't like the freedom to name my own price.

So you are in favor of all prices being fixed prior to the game and not able to fluctuate based on the market? Communist.
Logged

nopawnsintended

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220
  • Respect: +186
    • View Profile
    • My Website
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #45 on: July 10, 2012, 04:55:53 pm »
0

Maybe it's the economist in me, but I don't like the freedom to name my own price.

So you are in favor of all prices being fixed prior to the game and not able to fluctuate based on the market? Communist.

Prices fluctuating based on the market is one thing (of which I am in favor; see my comment on Gannet), but naming your own price and getting it is something entirely different.
Logged

One Armed Man

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 410
  • Respect: +88
    • View Profile
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #46 on: July 10, 2012, 05:26:57 pm »
+1

Fluctuating on the Market.
Cost 6
1VP for every 2 differently named actions in your deck.
In the Black Market deck, this card costs 2 more.
During your Buy step, this card costs 1 less for each Market you have in play.
Logged

Archetype

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 992
  • Suffers from Fancy Play Syndrom
  • Respect: +690
    • View Profile
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #47 on: July 11, 2012, 12:40:28 am »
0

My thoughts:

Gadwall: Like others have said, trashing the curse should be benefit enough

Loon: Very interesting mechanic, but I don't know if I like it. It counters Provinces, but also itself by lowing the point output. I'd probably only by it to counter an opponent.

Grebe: Would be much better if a community mat. Seems hard to stop if it wasn't.

Flamingo: Reminds me of Surplus Goods. Really like interactions with Estates *cough* Baron *cough* Seems like once you get a mega turn you can pile drive these, then Estates. Don't know if it's strong enough though. Tunnel costs three and always gives the same VP, and an awesome reaction.

Petrel: Would be better if it costs 6

Shearwater: A nice Royal Seal on-buy ability, balanced, but I would usually buy Island over this, but it depends on the situation.

Guillemont: Would be better without it's on-buy ability

Cormorant: Nice ability. Good Remodel fuel too.

Pipit: I feel this card would be often ignorable if it didn't bring in a power card with it.

Gannet: I love this card! When it's cheaper, the more likely it's pile will run out, and thus make it worth less points.

Tanager: So it's an Outpost. Outpost is pretty meh, so I'm not digging this card

Egret: If you got the cash, can be used late game to get this and a Province.

Heron: Peddler in Victory form. The only thing is, with Peddler, it helps grab more Peddlers. This doesn't really do that. Seems on the weaker side.

Bittern: Original, but may be too good. Once it reaches the optimal price to point ratio, no more will be bought (hopefully).

Ibis: May be too hard to track.

Spoonbill: Too situational, I'm afraid

Osprey: Very interesting restriction, it counters a boring BM strategy to obtain this. Seems a little unbalanced though, needs to be tested.

Harrier: Wording needs some work, but seems balanced.

Kestrel: Trash all Treasure's AND a Curse? Seems a little harsh when you can just rush these end game for tons of points. Unbalanced.

Plover: If it's Point System was Spoonbill's, and kept it's ability, this should be fine, but still situational.

Oystercatcher: Too hard to tell if it's balanced or not. Just like Osprey, this needs to be tested.

Yellowlegs: Too similar to Border Village. I think there's a card similiar to this in the Secret History.

Sandpiper: Ehh, a little too unbalanced. The math works it out that it will never cost more more than a Province and give less points. Like the mechanic though.

Tern: Seems balanced. Pretty bland though.

Puffin: Ends up being worth 8 points. And for 9, not too bad. Like the Duchy and Estate snag too. Good Card.

Macaw: I think the Silver trash/not trash effects need to be flip-flopped.

Hummingbird: Bishop in Victory form.

Kingfisher: Adds an element of politics to the game. I like it! It may be because I like playing those kind of games with friends. But online with 3+ players, things could get ugly.

Pelican: I'm too stupid to understand the wording on this card.

Waxwing: A little overpriced. The game usually ends by the Provinces running out in 2p

Woodpecker: Good in engines, terrible in BM

Flycatcher: Seems like the strategy to buy up these + a shifter, and keep cycling till the game ends..if it ends.

Bluebird: Might be alright if not for the Platinum thing. It adds another price bracket, and makes obtaining Bluebird easier. Interesting concept though.

Vireo: So this gets you a duchy. 6VP for $6 Makes it much too unbalanced. I like Puffin better personally.

Bunting: Too unbalanced. Pipit's a better version of this idea.

Lark: In my mind, this is too weak. I'd almost always take Island over this.

Nuthatch: I'd probably buy this if the card you gained was an Estate instead of a Curse.

Warbler: Another card I'm in love with. A great solution to the "Treasure card Victory". Seems balanced.

To me, there are really only a few cards that really stand out, and are unique. The rest are either victory cards with an action card's effect slapped on or cards that are too unbalanced by being either too strong or too weak.

Hope my card wins though, it's unique, but a lot of these cards are so much better ;D
Logged

rspeer

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 469
  • Respect: +877
    • View Profile
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #48 on: July 11, 2012, 04:06:51 am »
0

Ibis
$3 - Victory
1 VP
Worth another 1 VP for every 3 tokens on your [This Card] mat.
--
Setup: Each player has his own [This Card] mat. At the start of a player's Clean-up, he gains a token on his [This Card] mat for each unused Buy.

Introduces too much extra stuff to keep track of, and it's too good.

Quote
Spoonbill
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every two differently named cards in the trash, rounding down.

Useless on too many boards.

Quote
Osprey
$5 - Victory
Worth 1 VP per [This Card] in your deck.
--
Can only be bought if you have at least 1 Action Card in play.

I guess that's one way to say "don't just rush this with money". But it still doesn't actually want an engine. It seems the plan would be to buy a few random actions (Woodcutter, Militia, and so on would be nice), and rush those delicious quadratic victory points anyway.

Quote
Kestrel
$6 - Victory
8 VP
--
When you gain this, trash all treasures you have in play and gain a Curse.  If you do not gain a Curse, place [This Card] on top of your deck.

This and a few other cards here seem to create a game of inverse chicken at the end of the game. You want to jump for Kestrels, because they're so good. But if you trash your treasures too early, you stall and let your opponent slowly get the rest of the provinces. Unless they jumped for Kestrels too.

Quote
Plover
$5 - Victory
This card is worth 1 VP for every 5*P cards in the trash (round down).
(P = number of players)
--
When you gain this, trash up to 4 cards from your hand.

Sounds too weak.

Quote
Yellowlegs
$7 - Victory
2 VP
--
When you gain this, gain a card costing less than this.
More interesting than the ones that just gain more Victory cards.


Quote
Kingfisher
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every 2 cards in the supply pile with the [This Card] token on it (rounded down).
--
When you gain this, you may move the [This Card] token to a Kingdom supply pile of your choice.
--
Setup: Place the [This Card] token on the [This Card] supply pile.

Sounds too swingy, given that the decision of how much it is worth is entirely made by whoever gains the last one.

Quote
Woodpecker
$4 - Victory
Worth 5 VP minus 1 for every three treasures in your deck (round up), but not less than 0.
--
When you buy this, you may trash a treasure card from play and from your hand.

Seems like an easy way to get 5 VP for $4, even at the beginning of the game, unless I'm missing something.

Quote
Flycatcher
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP for every three [This Card] tokens you have.
--
In games using this, you may gain a [This Card] token at the end of any turn in which you shuffled your deck.

I don't like the extra tokens, but I do like VP for shuffling.

Logged

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5477
  • Respect: +2860
    • View Profile
Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 2!
« Reply #49 on: July 11, 2012, 12:31:24 pm »
0

Loon
$4 - Victory
Worth 1 VP per territory token on [This Card]'s supply pile.
--
Whenever a player buys a Province, put a territory token on [This Card]'s supply pile.
Whenever a player buys a [This Card], remove a territory token from [This Card]'s supply pile.
Could create a decent metagame, but I suspect this is actually too strong as is. If one player rushed them early game, your opponent is basically stuck since he can't start gaining provinces without powering these up. So both players will end up rushing these early, and then the game will degenerate somewhat.
[/quote]
No man, that's the best part! If one guy rushes them all or nearly all early on, you can buy Duchies and another pile to end the game on piles.  If you bought a Province or two during the rush, switch to Duchies, you only need Loons, Duchies, and another pile to run out.  I think that's balanced, albeit on a hairpin.  Sometimes the super Loons rush will be correct like you say, but it will be something you have to determine, not a duh thing.

Quote
Quote
Flamingo
$2 - Victory
Worth 2 VP if you have more Estates than [This Card]s.
--
When you buy this, +$1, +1 Buy.
The +$1/+buy clause I think kills this card. I get the idea is to buy one of these and then use the extra buy to nab an estate, but it's way too easy to just drain this pile for the leading player.
The card counters that 3 piling at the same time though.  The player who doesn't spend 7$ on not-vp, which is already tough in a game with VP tension, is further punished by 4 VP of disadvantage.
Spending 9$ on uselessness is at least more of a barrier to entry than IGG, where you empty an additional pile basically for free because you buy a card you wanted anyway, one that is worth some VP to boot. 
Even without the mechanic's built in protection, I don't think "In games using this, you may spend 9$ when two piles are empty to immediately end the game" is a game ruining mechanic, it just recharacterizes the board the way many cards recharacterize a board and emphasizes pilesize management and maintaining VP parity. 




Quote
Quote
Oystercatcher
$6 - Victory
Worth 10 VP, minus 2 VP for every 5 non-Victory cards in your deck (rounded down).
--
When you buy this, you may trash a card from your hand.
Maybe balanced? Hard to tell. I would find it very hard to keep track of the value of this card during the game, moreso than other variable VP cards. Also with the current wording, this thing can go quite negative with a large deck.
Should be the same as Gardens.  You should know how many victory cards are in your deck, because presumably you count victory cards anyway.  (If your plan is to count minion splits and what's left in your reshuffle instead, then you're leaving VP count to chance and don't care what Oystercatcher is worth anyway)
After a reshuffle, you can count the cards in your deck, subtract the victory cards that you should be remembering, and now you know what your Oystercatcher are worth.
It doesn't matter if it goes negative or not.  If you bought 0 point Oystercatchers your odds of winning are very, very bad to start with, -2 point Oystercatchers just subtract VP from a deck that we already know was terribly mismanaged and poorly planned.  That's not much difference.  A "but not worth than 0 VP" clause would be unnecessary words on the card.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7  All
 

Page created in 0.093 seconds with 20 queries.