Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard  (Read 5414 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Rush_Clasic

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 297
  • never knows best
  • Respect: +80
    • View Profile
Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard
« on: July 25, 2012, 03:21:59 pm »
+2

Junkyard (3)
Victory
2 VP
-----
When you trash this card, you may put it in your discard pile.



  • Even tracks of land filled with waste are useful in the right royal hands.
  • I've had a lot of complicated ideas floating around in my head of late. I made this almost entirely because I wanted it to be simple.
  • Alternate VP cards are interesting in that they're almost always inherently good to buy. The circumstances of when and how you gain them might change, but the fact that they earn you VP means that they'll be worthwhile, even if only in the late game. This makes them prime for minor or quirky effects, like with this card.
  • Is this more of a Tunnel or a Great Hall? That standard sets how much VP this grants (or if it should cost more). The ability is marginal (though useful), so I pushed it toward the former.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2012, 04:01:57 pm by Rush_Clasic »
Logged

rinkworks

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +938
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard
« Reply #1 on: July 25, 2012, 03:45:54 pm »
0

Expecting to see something like this in Dark Ages.  The problem is that it's useless on boards without trash-for-benefit cards, of which there are currently not a huge number, but if there IS such a card in Dark Ages, then it will have plenty of enablers to go with it.

Of course, 2 VP for $3 isn't bad anyway (see also: Tunnel, which can be a good buy even without discarders).  Apprentice would be a great enabler, as you could green without choking.  Other TFB cards like Remodel, Salvager, etc, might not really produce enough value to buy these up and risk them not lining up right.  Finally, Bishop plus this card might easily result in a degenerate game where Bishop manages to earn lots of VP without actually consuming cards and advancing the game toward an end state.  I don't know if that one combo is enough to axe the card or not.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2012, 03:48:28 pm by rinkworks »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard
« Reply #2 on: July 25, 2012, 03:46:21 pm »
0

I don't believe this should be a Reaction card. Reaction cards allow you to reveal a card outside the context that you'd normally be able to do so. Treasury, for instance, isn't a Reaction because it's already revealed by being in play. Conversely, cards that you discard are not implicitly revealed, so Tunnel does have to be a Reaction.

Cards that you trash are immediately public knowledge and implicitly revealed, so there's no reason to make Junkyard a Reaction.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2012, 03:47:43 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

Rush_Clasic

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 297
  • never knows best
  • Respect: +80
    • View Profile
Re: Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard
« Reply #3 on: July 25, 2012, 04:03:49 pm »
0

Expecting to see something like this in Dark Ages.  The problem is that it's useless on boards without trash-for-benefit cards, of which there are currently not a huge number, but if there IS such a card in Dark Ages, then it will have plenty of enablers to go with it.

Of course, 2 VP for $3 isn't bad anyway (see also: Tunnel, which can be a good buy even without discarders).  Apprentice would be a great enabler, as you could green without choking.  Other TFB cards like Remodel, Salvager, etc, might not really produce enough value to buy these up and risk them not lining up right.  Finally, Bishop plus this card might easily result in a degenerate game where Bishop manages to earn lots of VP without actually consuming cards and advancing the game toward an end state.  I don't know if that one combo is enough to axe the card or not.

I feel that's more of Bishop's problem than Junkyard's. Then again, it did come first and my reaction is at least partially based on defending my design.

I don't believe this should be a Reaction card. Reaction cards allow you to reveal a card outside the context that you'd normally be able to do so. Treasury, for instance, isn't a Reaction because it's already revealed by being in play. Conversely, cards that you discard are not implicitly revealed, so Tunnel does have to be a Reaction.

Cards that you trash are immediately public knowledge and implicitly revealed, so there's no reason to make Junkyard a Reaction.

Remnant of an older version that did require reacting. *edits OP*

rinkworks

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +938
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard
« Reply #4 on: July 25, 2012, 04:25:17 pm »
+3

I feel that's more of Bishop's problem than Junkyard's. Then again, it did come first and my reaction is at least partially based on defending my design.

Seriously?  I'm not saying that Bishop-Junkyard is so broken that it's a big deal, but the onus is on fan cards to be compatible with the official game, not vice versa.

Of course nothing says you can't make a fan card that is specifically designed NOT to be used with some specific official card.
But the usual and presumed design goal of a fan card is to work with the official cards.  Conversely, the design goal of an official card is only to work with the other official cards.  It's therefore always the fan card's problem if there's a broken combo between the two.  If Guilds comes out next year with cards that break fan cards that work now, that's still the fan card's problem.
Logged

Rush_Clasic

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 297
  • never knows best
  • Respect: +80
    • View Profile
Re: Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard
« Reply #5 on: July 25, 2012, 04:45:48 pm »
0

I feel that's more of Bishop's problem than Junkyard's. Then again, it did come first and my reaction is at least partially based on defending my design.

Seriously?  I'm not saying that Bishop-Junkyard is so broken that it's a big deal, but the onus is on fan cards to be compatible with the official game, not vice versa.

Of course nothing says you can't make a fan card that is specifically designed NOT to be used with some specific official card.
But the usual and presumed design goal of a fan card is to work with the official cards.  Conversely, the design goal of an official card is only to work with the other official cards.  It's therefore always the fan card's problem if there's a broken combo between the two.  If Guilds comes out next year with cards that break fan cards that work now, that's still the fan card's problem.

That comment was more tongue-in-cheek than anything. That is to say, I find VP token cards to be often referenced as potentially problematic for their "never-ending-game" syndrome, and that they restrict design space because of that, but that the problem is more idealistic than actual, and my card doesn't actually seem to break the game because of this interaction. So, not seriously. But were a card in the actual game severely detrimental to future design, I would call it out.

As for goals, I think fan cards can have many goals beyond the ones you stated (though those are probably the most direct goals).
« Last Edit: July 25, 2012, 04:47:18 pm by Rush_Clasic »
Logged

rinkworks

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +938
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard
« Reply #6 on: July 25, 2012, 05:00:57 pm »
0

I feel that's more of Bishop's problem than Junkyard's. Then again, it did come first and my reaction is at least partially based on defending my design.

Seriously?  I'm not saying that Bishop-Junkyard is so broken that it's a big deal, but the onus is on fan cards to be compatible with the official game, not vice versa.

Of course nothing says you can't make a fan card that is specifically designed NOT to be used with some specific official card.
But the usual and presumed design goal of a fan card is to work with the official cards.  Conversely, the design goal of an official card is only to work with the other official cards.  It's therefore always the fan card's problem if there's a broken combo between the two.  If Guilds comes out next year with cards that break fan cards that work now, that's still the fan card's problem.

That comment was more tongue-in-cheek than anything. That is to say, I find VP token cards to be often referenced as potentially problematic for their "never-ending-game" syndrome, and that they restrict design space because of that, but that the problem is more idealistic than actual, and my card doesn't actually seem to break the game because of this interaction. So, not seriously. But were a card in the actual game severely detrimental to future design, I would call it out.

As for goals, I think fan cards can have many goals beyond the ones you stated (though those are probably the most direct goals).

Strongly disagree that neverending-game-syndrome is more ideal than actual.  It's a real danger, just one that isn't taken very seriously because we have three official VP cards that demonstrably don't tend to lead to this.  That doesn't mean it isn't a hazard a new VP token card needn't bother negotiating.  The official cards don't tend to lead down that road because that was a hazard Donald did take seriously.

Again, I'm absolutely not saying that Bishop+Junkyard is broken.  But I think that's a real possibility, and I don't think you can just wave that concern away by speculating that it won't be that bad.  You can't know until you playtest enough games that you get a feel for how it works and can put into words why it's not a problem.

Sorry to take your flippant remark seriously -- it's hard to pick up on tone online.
Logged

Rush_Clasic

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 297
  • never knows best
  • Respect: +80
    • View Profile
Re: Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard
« Reply #7 on: July 25, 2012, 05:33:33 pm »
0

Strongly disagree that neverending-game-syndrome is more ideal than actual.  It's a real danger, just one that isn't taken very seriously because we have three official VP cards that demonstrably don't tend to lead to this.  That doesn't mean it isn't a hazard a new VP token card needn't bother negotiating.  The official cards don't tend to lead down that road because that was a hazard Donald did take seriously.

I meant that the neverending-game-syndrome isn't that great a threat with the VP token cards in existence, not overall. As y'all pointed out with that Vampire card I made, forcing the game to slow down while providing VP tokens is hazardous, which was something I overlooked with that design.

Again, I'm absolutely not saying that Bishop+Junkyard is broken.  But I think that's a real possibility, and I don't think you can just wave that concern away by speculating that it won't be that bad.  You can't know until you playtest enough games that you get a feel for how it works and can put into words why it's not a problem.

Until I playtest, though, all I have is speculation. I'm glad you brought up Bishop; it wasn't a trash card I had in mind when making this design (I was thinking of the Remodel family and Swindler mostly). But the situations where you can survive off of Bishoping away Junkyard without emptying piles and hope to win the game seem minimal. Nothing can replace playtesting, but that doesn't mean intuition and debate can't figure a lot of things out.

Sorry to take your flippant remark seriously -- it's hard to pick up on tone online.

Meh... I should have used a smiley. That's what they're there for.  :P

Mecherath

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 56
  • Respect: +9
    • View Profile
Re: Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard
« Reply #8 on: July 25, 2012, 08:18:58 pm »
0

To chime in a little, the +2 VP +$1 you get from a Bishop + Junkyard combo doesn't seem much more risky for a degenerative state than the +1VP +$2 that monument gives you.  It takes two cards to set up, and your opponent surely trimming their deck down.  Could be trouble with a mirror, but with Bishop around, a golden deck would be faster I think.  Since discarding the Junkyard is optional, you could even switch gears partway.
Logged

rinkworks

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +938
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard
« Reply #9 on: July 26, 2012, 08:14:47 am »
0

To chime in a little, the +2 VP +$1 you get from a Bishop + Junkyard combo doesn't seem much more risky for a degenerative state than the +1VP +$2 that monument gives you.  It takes two cards to set up, and your opponent surely trimming their deck down.  Could be trouble with a mirror, but with Bishop around, a golden deck would be faster I think.  Since discarding the Junkyard is optional, you could even switch gears partway.

Mathematically speaking, you get twice the VP bonus (thus twice the incentive not to break a Bishop-Junkyard cycle), half the buying capability to enable breaking out of the cycle, and 25% fewer other cards in your hand to do something with.  So it seems more than four times riskier to me.  What I don't know is if even that is enough to worry about.  The risk on Monument is small, and four times something small might still be small.
Logged

DStu

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2627
  • Respect: +1490
    • View Profile
Re: Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard
« Reply #10 on: July 26, 2012, 08:37:11 am »
+1

I would also guess it's small. Even smaller than 4 times Monuments, because of other reasons.

We have an asymptotical problem here. There are stronger targets for Bishop for a long time that give you more VPs. So you can't go Bishop-Junkyard from the beginning, because that will let your opponent go for some Golden Deck variante, that let's them win. And even in short term, you will probably want to deviate from Junkyard-Bishop.

So you have a five-card hand Bishop-JY-X-Y-Z.  If X-Y-Z contains an Estate or an Curse, you can trash this for the same benefit as JY, and improve your hand by buying a Copper.
-> worst case is Bishop-JY-C-C-C, you can trash a Copper for -1VP*, and buy a Silver.
-> hand is Bishop-JY-C-C-S, trash a Copper for -1VP, buy a Silver
-> hand is Bishop-JY-C-S-S, trash a Junkyard for -2VP, buy a Gold
-> hand is Bishop-C-S-S-G, trash a Silver for +-0VP, buy a Gold
-> hand is Bishop-C-S-G-G,  trash Gold + play Golden deck with Gold for +2VP OR trash Silver and buy Province + play Golden deck with Province for +5VP

So in 4 turns with in total -4VP compared to trashing JY you get to a golden Deck, which does +2VP/turn compared to JY-Bishop for some time, and transition into trashing Provinces with one turn +5VP and +3VP/turn afterwards.

So maybe there could be problems with Village+2Bishop+2JY, it's certainly harder to come away from this, but I think 1Bishop+JY is not stable if you want to play optimally, or only under rare conditions (both player have nearly identical points, and both player could end the game quickly if one player invest into the transition to a better deck)

Edit: *all VP-values relative to trashing and keeping JY with Bishop
« Last Edit: July 26, 2012, 08:41:52 am by DStu »
Logged

Ozle

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3625
  • Sorry, this text is personal.
  • Respect: +3360
    • View Profile
Re: Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard
« Reply #11 on: July 26, 2012, 10:55:00 am »
0

I would give this card a benefit when it is trashed instead, or as well as its current power.
Something small, like +$1 or +1 Card. and then bump its price up.
Logged
Try the Ozle Google Map Challenge!
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=7466.0

Sullying players Enjoyment of Innovation since 2013 Apparently!

Rush_Clasic

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 297
  • never knows best
  • Respect: +80
    • View Profile
Re: Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard
« Reply #12 on: July 26, 2012, 11:36:19 am »
0

I would give this card a benefit when it is trashed instead, or as well as its current power.
Something small, like +$1 or +1 Card. and then bump its price up.

That's a bit against the whole spirit of the card. The question, then, is whether or not that spirit is worthwhile. I think it is; it's a quirky ability on a card that has natural reasons to want to be bought.

rinkworks

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +938
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard
« Reply #13 on: July 26, 2012, 12:13:17 pm »
0

I kind of agree.  On the other hand, I can sympathize with the idea of bumping the price up, even without adding special abilities.  It's one of those cards where the power is determined by the cost, rather than the cost being determined by the power.  Farmland is another good example:  It's probably not really worth $6, except for the fact that a $6 price tag lets you upgrade Farmlands into Provinces.  Or Border Village:  a $6 Border Village is way stronger than a $5 Border Village than has exactly the same text on it.

Right now, here are some of the interactions:

(1) Upgrade/Remodel/Expand into a $4/$5/$6 card.  The combo is that you can do this while keeping the 2 VP victory card.  For Upgrade, you'd almost always want to trash the card, because outside of Gardens/Silk Road, it's no help in the endgame, and early on you'd probably want to actually trash the Junkyard.  But Remodel/Expand lets you get free Duchies, so that's cool.  On the other hand, this would also be possible with a higher price tag.  At $4 in particular, Upgrade becomes a lot more useful.

(2) Apprentice to +3 cards.  My guess is that this is one of the best combos with the current card.  But upon closer inspection, what does it do really?  If you have an Apprentice and a Junkyard in your hand, that consumes 2 card slots, for which using the combo will give you 3, resulting in a net gain of only 1 Card.  That's not huge, considering that it took colliding two distinct cards in your hand to achieve it, and you don't even get the deck-slimming benefit that Apprentice normally also gives you.  Well, of course you can still trash the Junkyard if you want to.  But in the endgame, the benefit probably isn't big enough to aim for.  It's more of a benefit that's simply nice to have if you had other reasons to buy Apprentices and Junkyards previously.

(3) Bishop to +2 VP.  I already expressed my (very tentative) reservations about this particular interaction, and raising the cost of Junkyard would only make that danger greater.   So here's a compelling argument not to raise the cost.

(4) Salvager to +1 Buy, +$3.  This might let you gain another Junkyard, or push you over the top for a Province, without actually losing the fuel it operates on.  That's pretty strong!  On the other hand, you're still using two card slots to achieve that, which is a mere $1.5 per card.  A couple of Silvers would have earned more money, albeit without the extra Buy.

(5) Trader to 3 Silvers.  This is actually a big deal.  Maybe better than the Apprentice combo, ultimately.  But the window of opportunity for actually using the combo is small:  too late, and you won't be able to use the Silvers you get.  Too early, and that might mean you bought a Junkyard too early.  Or if your whole strategy was to get an early Trader and an early Junkyard and flood yourself with Silver, then you're unlikely to be able to actually USE the combo very much, since every time you use Trader, you decrease the likelihood that Trader and Junkyard will collide again.  Moreover, using Trader on an actual Silver nets you two Silvers anyhow, so Trader on Junkyard is a mere one extra Silver.  It just doesn't seem worth it unless you can hit that narrow window in the early endgame.


As I said at the outset, I'm expecting Dark Ages to have a card that does something like this.  I don't know what form it will take, but I'd take a 60-40 bet that the idea will be there in some form -- along with enablers that would also enable Junkyard.  So it might be good to take a wait-and-see approach before making any decisions about what to do with Junkyard.

But based on the current set of cards, I have wonder if something like 4 VP for $6 would make for more interesting combo potential.  The combos will be bigger, and it'll be a bigger deal that you don't lose the card's VP.  Those are numbers off the top of my head, but you see where I'm going.
« Last Edit: July 26, 2012, 12:15:10 pm by rinkworks »
Logged

Powerman

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 766
  • Respect: +605
    • View Profile
Re: Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard
« Reply #14 on: July 26, 2012, 12:46:10 pm »
0

Golden deck of KC-Bishop-Junkyard-Junkyard-Junkyard sounds pretty good!
Logged
A man on a mission.

One Armed Man

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 410
  • Respect: +88
    • View Profile
Re: Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard
« Reply #15 on: July 26, 2012, 01:03:11 pm »
0

What if this card had: Junkyard cost 3
2 VP
When you trash this, gain a copy of it.
That would solve golden deck concerns, but it would weaken the late-game potential of the card. I like the original better.
Logged

Rush_Clasic

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 297
  • never knows best
  • Respect: +80
    • View Profile
Re: Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard
« Reply #16 on: July 26, 2012, 01:57:10 pm »
0

As I said at the outset, I'm expecting Dark Ages to have a card that does something like this.  I don't know what form it will take, but I'd take a 60-40 bet that the idea will be there in some form -- along with enablers that would also enable Junkyard.  So it might be good to take a wait-and-see approach before making any decisions about what to do with Junkyard.

But based on the current set of cards, I have wonder if something like 4 VP for $6 would make for more interesting combo potential.  The combos will be bigger, and it'll be a bigger deal that you don't lose the card's VP.  Those are numbers off the top of my head, but you see where I'm going.

I like the analysis. I suppose the question that leads to is "Does this want to be a central combo piece, or an occasional enabler?" I think the latter is where it'd like to be given the variety of things this can pull. I'd definitely want to try it at a variety of costs, but it feels potentially limiting to other designs the bigger you make it.

One Armed Man

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 410
  • Respect: +88
    • View Profile
Re: Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard
« Reply #17 on: August 16, 2012, 09:53:38 am »
0

Elements of this card were used on a Dark Ages card, particularly one costing 4 instead of 3, opening up even more room for Trash-for-benefit insanity.
Logged

Mecherath

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 56
  • Respect: +9
    • View Profile
Re: Clasic_Cards #10 - Junkyard
« Reply #18 on: August 18, 2012, 12:06:31 am »
0

Yeah, and Fortress puts itself back into your hand, not just the discard pile.  It's amazing what new cards from Donald X can do to the Fan card design space.  I think this one is a lot more viable now.  Nice call.
Logged
Pages: [1]
 

Page created in 0.054 seconds with 20 queries.