Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Rubberbanding cards?  (Read 5200 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Fangz

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 260
  • Respect: +13
    • View Profile
Rubberbanding cards?
« on: August 09, 2011, 09:33:04 am »
0

Dominion games have a tendency to snowball. Maybe there should be cards designed to help players who are behind to make a comeback? Some ideas:

Revolutionary $5
Action
Each other player reveals their hand. If they reveal a province, gain a gold, putting it into your hand.

Mercenary $5
+1 Action
Discard any number of treasures from your hand. For each you discard, +$1, +1 card.

Counselor $3
+1 card, +1 action, discard your deck.
Action-Reaction
If an opponent buys a victory card, draw two cards, discard counselor. All players put their deck in the discard pile.

The deck discard ability being good at players improving their deck, but bad for players on the winning run trying to pick up lots of victory cards.
Logged

Superdad

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 161
  • Respect: +2
    • View Profile
Re: Rubberbanding cards?
« Reply #1 on: August 09, 2011, 10:08:21 am »
0

Revolutionary seems like a pile to me. It needs to do something else by itself, like +1 card/+1 action.

On the whole though, I like the idea of cards you can audible to based on the current gamestate.

What about a reverse counting house for opponent VP cards? I.e.

Land Tax
$5
All players take all Victory Cards in their discard pile and place them on the top of their deck in any order.


FWIW, Rabble is a bit of a rubber band card. It is much stronger as your opponent greens.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2011, 10:12:59 am by Superdad »
Logged

kazztawdal

  • Salvager
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 63
  • Respect: +7
    • View Profile
Re: Rubberbanding cards?
« Reply #2 on: August 09, 2011, 12:29:15 pm »
0

I would ban Counselor outright in meatspace games, just for the sheer amount of shuffling it would require.
Logged

rinkworks

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +938
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Rubberbanding cards?
« Reply #3 on: August 24, 2011, 02:22:12 pm »
0

Mercenary $5
+1 Action
Discard any number of treasures from your hand. For each you discard, +$1, +1 card.

This one seems really interesting, but what was the reason for limiting it to treasure cards?  Seems like this would promote Big Money strategies at the expense of action chains.  I can see excluding victory cards, as then it wouldn't be a rubber band card, but why not actions and curses too?

I think I'd like an "any card" or "non-victory card" version.  It's like Cellar + Secret Chamber, which is a pretty slick idea.
Logged

sherwinpr

  • Spy
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 85
  • Respect: +31
    • View Profile
Re: Rubberbanding cards?
« Reply #4 on: August 24, 2011, 04:08:39 pm »
0

What if we changed Mercenary to this (to favor helping weaker players out):

Discard any number of Coppers, Estates, and Curses from your hand.  For each card you discard, +1 card.  For each Copper you discard, $+1.

No idea if it's balanced.
Logged

rinkworks

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +938
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Rubberbanding cards?
« Reply #5 on: August 24, 2011, 10:54:57 pm »
0

A post-playtesting follow-up.  I played a version of Mercenary that allows you to discard any number of non-victory cards.  It's exciting and interesting at $5, capable of being very strong but not so reliably strong that it dominates.  It's a gamble discarding Silvers this way, because you can get back green cards for them, resulting in a net loss.  But sometimes it works.  Discarding Golds this way, however, is probably a mistake.  It also makes colliding terminals useful.  As intended, the card weakens as the quality of your deck improves.

Where it really comes alive is in large hands, as you'd expect.  I tried it in a heavy Tactician/Envoy game played some pretty long turns discarding upwards of a dozen cards for +$12, redrawing 12 cards including another Mercenary, and doing it all over again.  It's even good just for setting up the Tactician turn in the first place, as it lets you accrue some money to spend before the Tactician discards your hand.  Very powerful, but I lost that game anyhow, probably for lack of any source of +Buy beyond what the Tactician itself offers.  (Also because I was dithering around trying to get megaturns instead of, you know, trying to win.)

Even better was a test game with an Alchemist stack.  I built a deck with lots of Alchemists, two Potions, two Mercenaries, and a smattering of Silver along with the initial Coppers.  One Wharf and a Hamlet or two got me the +Buys I needed.  First the Alchemists would draw most of my deck, then the Mercenaries would discard it twice over, with the Hamlets and Wharf providing +Buys as they came up.  I took care not to use Mercenary on the last Potion, lest the Alchemists get shuffled back in.

It was a very effective strategy but took possibly too long to set up (setting up Alchemists alone takes some time) and more vulnerable to greening than you'd think.  Before long, the first Mercenary would do fine, but often I'd have a mostly green hand for the second to work with, if I even managed to find it at all.  After these test games, I'm convinced the "non-victory card" clause is crucial to keeping the card's power in check.  Although I've probably made it sound overpowered in these large-hand games, you really don't get very many big turns before it starts to peter out.

Under more ordinary circumstances, with average hand sizes, it feels like an average $5.  You probably don't want to buy one all the time, especially in heavy trashing games or rush (Gardens/Duke/etc) games, but it makes a competitive $5 card in most other decks.  In large hands, it shines in the way that Bank and Forge do, but once you start greening, it's not long before you wish that Mercenary was a Secret Chamber instead.

In other words, it works precisely as intended and is probably nicely balanced.  Thanks for the idea.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2011, 10:57:05 pm by rinkworks »
Logged

Fangz

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 260
  • Respect: +13
    • View Profile
Re: Rubberbanding cards?
« Reply #6 on: August 25, 2011, 10:57:28 am »
0

Cool, thanks!

Possibly it might do with a limit on the number of cards discarded (e.g. discard up to 4 non-victories cards ... or maybe up to 3 non-victories would be better), to make it not too powerful with tactician, maybe?
« Last Edit: August 25, 2011, 11:00:52 am by Fangz »
Logged

rinkworks

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +938
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Rubberbanding cards?
« Reply #7 on: August 25, 2011, 11:08:40 am »
0

Maybe.  I only played one Tactician game with it, which is much too small a sample size.  But my current thought is that it's not a problem -- it's just a powerful combo, like Black Market/Tactician is.  May or may not be the best one on any given board.   It helps that, as I said, the effectiveness of the card drops like a rock once you start to green.

I'll probably try it out some more later.  If I have any further observations, I'll post them here.
Logged

rinkworks

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +938
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Rubberbanding cards?
« Reply #8 on: August 25, 2011, 10:06:32 pm »
0

Ok, yeah, it needs a limit on the number of cards you can discard.  I played a game with King's Court and Wharf.  This combo:

King's Court - King's Court - Wharf - Wharf - King's Court - Wharf - Mercenary - Mercenary

...meant cycling all the non-victory cards in my deck six separate times.  By the end, I had earned 77 coins and more buys than I needed to suck up 7 Colonies.  Granted, King's Court + Wharf is a game winner anyway, exponentially so when you triple them up that way.  But Mercenary is what provided all the coins.  Since I hadn't started greening by that point, Mercenary's path was clear.  The rubber band effect was, shall we say, a bit too extreme.

I wonder what a good limit on the number of cards is, though, and if it will still be worth $5 after it's capped.
Logged

Deadlock39

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1722
  • Respect: +1758
    • View Profile
Re: Rubberbanding cards?
« Reply #9 on: August 25, 2011, 11:12:02 pm »
0

A good nerf might be to set aside those cards, get the +$s and +cards and then discard them after so you can't draw the cards you discarded right back into your hand.

It might not be enough, but it could work.

Thisisnotasmile

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1493
  • Respect: +676
    • View Profile
Re: Rubberbanding cards?
« Reply #10 on: August 26, 2011, 04:21:53 am »
0

Not really sure why "This is an 8-card (3 unique) combo that costs a minimum of $46 to set up and can win the game in one turn" is a problem when there are already published cards which can do exactly the same thing with a 5-card (2 unique) combo costing a total of $26 and a 4-card (3 unique) combo which can put your opponent in an indefinite pin for $23 or even $21 if you use Militia instead of Goons.

Coincidentally, all of these combos start King's Court - King's Court.
Logged

rinkworks

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +938
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Rubberbanding cards?
« Reply #11 on: August 26, 2011, 10:31:07 am »
0

Well, maybe you're right.  But three counterarguments:

(1) Donald said if he'd spotted the KC-KC-Goons-Masq pin, he'd have nerfed it, which suggests that stumbling upon something comparably powerful with a custom card should probably be nerfed.

(2) The KC-KC-Goons-Masq pin is very specific.  Only one of the cards (Goons) can be substituted and then only by very limited options.  With the KC/Wharf/Mercenary combo I tried, there are much more options that can simulate a similar effect.  Council Room, Envoy, Smithy, Torturer, Rabble, and others can all draw astronomical amounts of cards with KC, which is all that is really required here to make the combo work.  (The next-turn effect of Wharf is less important if you have an engine that draws your deck the whole time anyway.)  The +Buy can come from Council Room, or any number of other cards that can easily slip into the draw engine as an accessory, like Worker's Village, Hamlet, Pawn, etc.  With the stronger drawers, I suspect King's Court isn't even necessary, and Throne Room would work just as well.

(3) Although it took $46 to set up that exact combo, maybe almost half of the cards for it I bought just one turn earlier, as the engine was already firing.

Still, I take your point.  Maybe this is just appropriately powerful as opposed to brokenly powerful.  But it clearly needs more testing than I thought it needed, so I wanted to make sure to tentatively revoke my prior approval of the card.
Logged

rinkworks

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +938
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Rubberbanding cards?
« Reply #12 on: August 26, 2011, 10:33:48 am »
0

A good nerf might be to set aside those cards, get the +$s and +cards and then discard them after so you can't draw the cards you discarded right back into your hand.

It might not be enough, but it could work.

That's a good idea.  I kind of don't like the aesthetics of it -- I liked that the original card was essentially Cellar + Secret Chamber -- but it might be a more satisfactory way of nerfing it than a fixed cap.
Logged

Deadlock39

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1722
  • Respect: +1758
    • View Profile
Re: Rubberbanding cards?
« Reply #13 on: August 26, 2011, 02:48:35 pm »
0

I just realized that, in the situation you posted, my suggestion only halves it's power if you are smart.

If you have 2 KC'ed Mercenaries, 10 cards to feed them, and nothing in your draw/discard, you originally would get $60 by discarding and redrawing them 6 times.  With my suggestion, you can still discard 5 and draw nothing, and then discard 5 and draw 5 each subsequent time for $30.  limiting it to 3 or 4 might be a better idea.

Maybe limit it to only Copper?

rinkworks

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +938
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Rubberbanding cards?
« Reply #14 on: September 14, 2011, 02:13:16 pm »
0

A good nerf might be to set aside those cards, get the +$s and +cards and then discard them after so you can't draw the cards you discarded right back into your hand.

It might not be enough, but it could work.

That's a good idea.  I kind of don't like the aesthetics of it -- I liked that the original card was essentially Cellar + Secret Chamber -- but it might be a more satisfactory way of nerfing it than a fixed cap.

A follow-up report, following much Mercenary playtesting:  I don't know why I didn't catch on sooner, but this Mercenary card is a killer even with a 3-card limit.  I tried a 4-card limit first, but it was still amassing huge amounts.  A 3-card limit is better, but often that's all you can (or want to) discard anyway.  Look at it like this:  If you discard 3 cards for $3, get a replacement 3 cards, and still have an action afterwards, that's the equivalent of Gold.  Now, if you draw Mercenary with a better-than-average hand, you'll probably be replacing those good cards with weaker cards, so the effect is muted somewhat.  But the converse happens just as often:  not only do you get the $3, but you get better cards in your hand than you started with.

I should clarify that the average case is that you draw slightly worse replacement cards.  Why?  Because you can't discard Victory cards, but you might get Victory cards back.  However, this is not a significant danger except in the first few turns and after you start greening.  Moreover, this disadvantage is also muted by the fact that you can choose which cards to discard or not.  You discard your Coppers and probably Silvers.  You keep the Platinums.

I have two ideas for how to balance the card, and I'm not much fond of either.  Both of them require a 3-card limit.  The first idea is to raise the cost to $6.  I probably slightly prefer this one, but I don't like how the $6 cost hurts its rubberbanding quality.  A player who is behind, and will therefore benefit from it slightly more, may have a hard time getting to $6.

The second idea is to remove the +1 Action.  As a terminal, it's okay if it often earns more than Gold does at a cheaper cost.  Harvest is exactly such a card:  frequently a terminal $3, sometimes even $4, and sometimes less.  Bunker's monetary yield has a similar though broader spread:  net +$3 is the average, with more and less possible depending on how much better or worse the replacement cards are.

But as a terminal, the card loses its Cellar-like quality and becomes a terminal drawer.  Pretty radical change, really, and I'm not sure I like it.  But the only way I can think of to keep it as a $5 non-terminal is to drop the discard limit to 2 cards.  Maybe that's even the right solution, but offhand it strikes me as a little silly.

Edit:  And now, after a couple more games, a non-terminal $5 3-card-limit Mercenary feels fine, as I was getting weaker replacement hands often enough to temper it.  Perhaps the difficulty I'm having here is just that the card is more situational than it seems.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2011, 02:29:51 pm by rinkworks »
Logged
Pages: [1]
 

Page created in 0.052 seconds with 21 queries.