Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]  All

Author Topic: What would make Scout better?  (Read 32512 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4371
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #125 on: June 12, 2013, 02:41:09 pm »
+2

I don't think scout drawing itself makes it better, on average. I mean, if you are playing multiple scouts on the same turn, you are probably seeing mostly the same cards (or at least partially the same cards), and this weakens the efficacy of later scouts.

Scout with a VP would be much more playable, but still bad.

I agree that Scout as a VP card worth 0 VP is not enough, and that 1 VP makes it more viable. What do you think of the other suggestions, or do you have any suggestions of your own to bring Scout into its own?
I wouldn't. I mean, maybe I would kill it to make room for another card, but I wouldn't try to salvage it. (I would indeed Salvager it in many cases though ;))

Dsell

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1290
  • He/Him
  • Respect: +929
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #126 on: June 12, 2013, 02:41:51 pm »
0

Why not just make it +1 card if you did not draw any cards in the previous step?  That way you only get to choose one of your next four cards if none of them are Victory cards.  Similar to Cartographer, but only 4 cards instead of five and you can't discard copper, curses or bad actions for your next turn.  But you do get to draw one card after reordering in the case that you missed Victory cards.

I guess this would make the case when Scout misses better than when it hits, but oh well.

I suppose the main objection I have to this is that it tends to be better in the absence of green, which is a complete role reversal for Scout.  I feel that a tweak of Scout ought to enhance the idea of successfully navigating through a densely green deck.

I do agree with this. But in the absence of a consensus on that front, this does give it a very interesting alternate use. Still, I'd like to try to find something that actually makes it good at what it's supposed to do.
Logged
"Quiet you, you'll lynch Dsell when I'm good and ready" - Insomniac


Winner of Forum Survivor Season 2!

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 7369
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10382
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #127 on: June 12, 2013, 02:57:53 pm »
+1

I think it would be more interesting to find some non-vanilla perk rather than tack on +$1.  What if Scout had a Highway effect, lowering the cost of Duchies while in play?  Scouts would then help one construct the green dense decks in which they thrive.  This might not be enough of a buff though.

Generally, I agree that interesting effects are better than vanilla effects, but Scout already has a pretty unique effect: pulling a bunch of Victory cards into your hand and re-ordering the rest. I think tacking +$1 onto it is just the cleanest way to bring it up to a reasonable $4 card without changing how it plays.
Logged

PSGarak

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 135
  • Respect: +160
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #128 on: June 12, 2013, 08:33:49 pm »
0

Ok, so we've discussed adding +$ and +cards. Let's cover +actions and +buy, for symmetry's sake.

+Actions: Oddly enough, the overall strategic impact is kind of thematic. Compared to a regular village, it makes your Smithies more powerful by clearing out the chafe it would have drawn. Probably too similar to Wandering Minstrel, but interesting to compare: Wandering Minstrel favors an engine based around terminal actions, Village Scout provides a boost to engines that draw treasures. Or something.

+Buy: I'd say this works out ok. Buy is not usually very powerful, but it is also not very common, and being non-terminal +buy (with minor benefit) would give scout a use outside of its main identity. More importantly, most decks that end up VP-dense also want lots of +buy support. Adding +buy would make scout a decent support card for a Duchy or Gardens strategy, but probably not enough to enable it on its own.
Logged

jonts26

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2746
  • Shuffle iT Username: jonts
  • Respect: +3657
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #129 on: June 12, 2013, 09:32:08 pm »
0

I think, if we want to make scout occasionally viable while retaining its positive synergy with green cards maybe add a secret chamber for green cards effect. 'You may discard any number of victory cards' +1$ per card discarded.'

Actually that's probably a touch too strong since in draw your deck engines this would basically be a nonterminal $4. Maybe make it a choose one (reveal and draw green or discard green for $).
« Last Edit: June 12, 2013, 09:40:34 pm by jonts26 »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9178
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #130 on: June 12, 2013, 10:12:57 pm »
+3

What if you just give it more reach and control?

Scout
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal up to 5 cards from the top of your deck. Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand. Put the other cards on top of your deck in any order.

The first change is subtle -- it reveals up to X cards.  That gives you a way to control the reshuffle.  The second change is just increasing X from 4 to whatever feels appropriate.  I put 5 in the above example, but it could be more.  This could get into a lot of AP though.

The main idea is to make Scout better at what it does, which is pulling green out of future hands.  A different buff could make the effect more consistent:

Scout
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal 4 non-Victory cards.  Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand.  Put the other cards on top of your deck in any order.

This version guarantees that the next hand will have no more than 1 Victory card in it.  There is one super power combo though -- this is "draw your deck" if you have no more than 3 non-Victory cards.  Buy Harems, trash Coppers.  Still, it would be hard to create such a deck, and it does require Harem, Scout and a trasher.
Logged

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3431
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2702
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #131 on: June 13, 2013, 12:32:07 am »
0

The main idea is to make Scout better at what it does, which is pulling green out of future hands.  A different buff could make the effect more consistent:

Scout
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal 4 non-Victory cards.  Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand.  Put the other cards on top of your deck in any order.

This version guarantees that the next hand will have no more than 1 Victory card in it.  There is one super power combo though -- this is "draw your deck" if you have no more than 3 non-Victory cards.  Buy Harems, trash Coppers.  Still, it would be hard to create such a deck, and it does require Harem, Scout and a trasher.

I buy two King's Courts, three Bridges, a New Scout, revealing every card in my deck.  I put the two King's Courts and three Bridges on top.
Logged
If you're wondering what my avatar is, watch this.

Check out my logic puzzle blog!

   Quote from: sudgy on June 31, 2011, 11:47:46 pm

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9178
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #132 on: June 13, 2013, 12:37:14 am »
0

The main idea is to make Scout better at what it does, which is pulling green out of future hands.  A different buff could make the effect more consistent:

Scout
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal 4 non-Victory cards.  Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand.  Put the other cards on top of your deck in any order.

This version guarantees that the next hand will have no more than 1 Victory card in it.  There is one super power combo though -- this is "draw your deck" if you have no more than 3 non-Victory cards.  Buy Harems, trash Coppers.  Still, it would be hard to create such a deck, and it does require Harem, Scout and a trasher.

I buy two King's Courts, three Bridges, a New Scout, revealing every card in my deck.  I put the two King's Courts and three Bridges on top.

Again, requires trashing away all non-Victory cards, and you still have to play the Scout without any of the combo cards in hand.  And it only works up to 4 cards, in this case.  Pretty sure Inn would be much better to set up the KC-Bridge megaturn.
Logged

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3431
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2702
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #133 on: June 13, 2013, 12:43:50 am »
0

The main idea is to make Scout better at what it does, which is pulling green out of future hands.  A different buff could make the effect more consistent:

Scout
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal 4 non-Victory cards.  Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand.  Put the other cards on top of your deck in any order.

This version guarantees that the next hand will have no more than 1 Victory card in it.  There is one super power combo though -- this is "draw your deck" if you have no more than 3 non-Victory cards.  Buy Harems, trash Coppers.  Still, it would be hard to create such a deck, and it does require Harem, Scout and a trasher.

I buy two King's Courts, three Bridges, a New Scout, revealing every card in my deck.  I put the two King's Courts and three Bridges on top.

Again, requires trashing away all non-Victory cards, and you still have to play the Scout without any of the combo cards in hand.  And it only works up to 4 cards, in this case.  Pretty sure Inn would be much better to set up the KC-Bridge megaturn.

You don't need to trash all non-Victory cards, with three estates you still aren't

OOOHHHHHH I thought it said until you reveal 4 victory cards, put them in hand, and discard the rest :P
Logged
If you're wondering what my avatar is, watch this.

Check out my logic puzzle blog!

   Quote from: sudgy on June 31, 2011, 11:47:46 pm

NoMoreFun

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1746
  • Respect: +1507
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #134 on: June 13, 2013, 05:56:51 am »
0


Scout
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal 4 non-Victory cards.  Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand.  Put the other cards on top of your deck in any order.

This version guarantees that the next hand will have no more than 1 Victory card in it.  There is one super power combo though -- this is "draw your deck" if you have no more than 3 non-Victory cards.  Buy Harems, trash Coppers.  Still, it would be hard to create such a deck, and it does require Harem, Scout and a trasher.

You could make it "reveal 4 actions or treasures" to make it less kingdom dependent and a good response to Curses.
It seems better than cartographer, but that card is a lot more flexible.  I think this is the best fix I've seen (the 1VP, +$1 variants are nice cards, but self comboing isn't scout's game).
Logged

shMerker

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 357
  • Respect: +389
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #135 on: June 13, 2013, 01:16:43 pm »
0

Advisor.
Logged
"I take no responsibility whatsoever for those who get dizzy and pass out from running around this post."

kn1tt3r

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 585
  • Respect: +278
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #136 on: June 20, 2013, 08:12:28 am »
0

Like Donald suggested in his recent Secret History, Scout could work as it is as an Action-Victory card with value 1-2 VP probably. It would suddenly find other Scouts as well, which makes you want even MORE Scouts. Gasp.
Logged

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5477
  • Respect: +2851
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #137 on: June 20, 2013, 12:55:36 pm »
0

Action Victory card worth 1 VP would be perfect IMO. 

It would be sometimes better than Great Hall, sometimes not.


Chaining loads of them would not be a game breaking strategy.  In the perfect ultimate smoothest scout deck they would be 1 VP Islands with 1 extra carry capacity, that is, each one making itself invisible and making two other green cards invisible.  That's gonna be o.k.
Logged

Matt_Arnold

  • Thief
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 90
  • Designer of "Overworld" by Magic Meeple Games.
  • Respect: +47
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #138 on: June 21, 2013, 12:29:28 pm »
0

I like it, but what if you're thinking too small? The way to buff Transmute is not to give it an on-gain +1 Buy, but to eliminate Herbalist and fuse it with Potion.

Elixir. Cost: $4. Type: Treasure.
"Choose one: Put this or any Treasure from your hand on top of your deck. Or: +1 Potion, +1 Buy.
-----------------------
Setup: Use this supply in place of Potion."

No more mana screw. Now all of Alchemy is fixed, not just Transmute. You're welcome. ;)
« Last Edit: June 21, 2013, 12:56:34 pm by Matt_Arnold »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9178
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #139 on: June 21, 2013, 01:00:51 pm »
0

I like it, but what if you're thinking too small? The way to buff Transmute is not to give it an on-gain +1 Buy, but to eliminate Herbalist and fuse it with Potion.

Elixir. Cost: $4. Type: Treasure.
"Choose one: Put this or any Treasure from your hand on top of your deck. Or: +1 Potion, +1 Buy.
-----------------------
Setup: Use this supply in place of Potion."

No more mana screw. Now all of Alchemy is fixed, not just Transmute. You're welcome. ;)

Suddenly, Alchemist stacks are permanent (Minion aside).
Logged

Matt_Arnold

  • Thief
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 90
  • Designer of "Overworld" by Magic Meeple Games.
  • Respect: +47
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #140 on: June 21, 2013, 01:05:06 pm »
0

I like it, but what if you're thinking too small? The way to buff Transmute is not to give it an on-gain +1 Buy, but to eliminate Herbalist and fuse it with Potion.

Elixir. Cost: $4. Type: Treasure.
"Choose one: Put this or any Treasure from your hand on top of your deck. Or: +1 Potion, +1 Buy.
-----------------------
Setup: Use this supply in place of Potion."

No more mana screw. Now all of Alchemy is fixed, not just Transmute. You're welcome. ;)

Suddenly, Alchemist stacks are permanent (Minion aside).
Oh, it's worse than that, my friend. The name of this card is "Elixir".

The new point of Alchemist, if you have Elixirs, is to be a Lab that brings Elixir into the game so you can "Scheme" your Golds.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2013, 01:16:44 pm by Matt_Arnold »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9178
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #141 on: June 21, 2013, 01:15:57 pm »
0

I like it, but what if you're thinking too small? The way to buff Transmute is not to give it an on-gain +1 Buy, but to eliminate Herbalist and fuse it with Potion.

Elixir. Cost: $4. Type: Treasure.
"Choose one: Put this or any Treasure from your hand on top of your deck. Or: +1 Potion, +1 Buy.
-----------------------
Setup: Use this supply in place of Potion."

No more mana screw. Now all of Alchemy is fixed, not just Transmute. You're welcome. ;)

Suddenly, Alchemist stacks are permanent (Minion aside).
Oh, it's worse than that, my friend. The name of this card is "Elixir".

The new point of Alchemist, if you have Elixirs, is to be a Lab that brings Elixir into the game so you can "Scheme" your Golds.

Oops, name change. Right!
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 7369
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10382
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #142 on: June 21, 2013, 02:25:12 pm »
0

Why are we suddenly talking about Transmute? The way to "fix" Transmute is to play games with more than 1 or 2 Alchemy cards. Case closed.
Logged

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2636
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3351
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #143 on: June 21, 2013, 02:27:45 pm »
0

Transmute is a terrible card, but because of its cost, there are times where you will pick one up just because you have a Potion but not enough cash for other stuff. Such times are infrequent, sure. But I don't really think Transmute needs a "fix," because there are circumstances where you buy it.
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7857
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #144 on: June 21, 2013, 03:06:05 pm »
+3

Have Scout pick up Victory cards and Transmutes.  Duh.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 7369
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10382
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #145 on: June 21, 2013, 03:16:03 pm »
0

Transmute is a terrible card, but because of its cost, there are times where you will pick one up just because you have a Potion but not enough cash for other stuff. Such times are infrequent, sure. But I don't really think Transmute needs a "fix," because there are circumstances where you buy it.

I think it's more complex than that. If Transmute is the only Potion card on the table, buying a Potion is barely ever worth it because you're probably only buying one Transmute and then you have a dead Potion. If there are, say, 4 Alchemy cards on the table, Transmute often becomes a hot ticket and I'll often sacrifice my first Potion buy on a Transmute even if I could have gotten an Apothecary, for example. I won't pass up a Familiar for it, but you get the idea. Exchanging Estates for Gold isn't just powerful in its own right, but it frees up your buys for powerful Action cards (especially Potion-cost Actions).
Logged

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2636
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3351
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #146 on: June 21, 2013, 03:51:00 pm »
0

Transmute is a terrible card, but because of its cost, there are times where you will pick one up just because you have a Potion but not enough cash for other stuff. Such times are infrequent, sure. But I don't really think Transmute needs a "fix," because there are circumstances where you buy it.

I think it's more complex than that. If Transmute is the only Potion card on the table, buying a Potion is barely ever worth it because you're probably only buying one Transmute and then you have a dead Potion. If there are, say, 4 Alchemy cards on the table, Transmute often becomes a hot ticket and I'll often sacrifice my first Potion buy on a Transmute even if I could have gotten an Apothecary, for example. I won't pass up a Familiar for it, but you get the idea. Exchanging Estates for Gold isn't just powerful in its own right, but it frees up your buys for powerful Action cards (especially Potion-cost Actions).

Passing up an Apothecary for a Transmute feels like it's *almost* always never a good idea.

I agree that Transmute gets better with more Alchemy cards. Scout actually gets better with more Intrigue cards, too. This actually makes more sense for Intrigue, though, which you can play by itself, than Alchemy, which you can't.
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.

flies

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 629
  • Shuffle iT Username: flies
  • Statistical mechanics of hard rods on a 1D lattice
  • Respect: +348
    • View Profile
    • ask the atheists
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #147 on: June 21, 2013, 04:00:53 pm »
0

how about this: give it a cellar effect for victory cards.  To the normal text, add at the end, discard any number of victory cards, then draw that many cards.  CellarScout/Tunnel anyone?
Logged
Gotta be efficient when most of your hand coordination is spent trying to apply mascara to your beard.
flies Dominionates on youtube

NoMoreFun

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1746
  • Respect: +1507
    • View Profile
Re: What would make Scout better?
« Reply #148 on: June 22, 2013, 07:45:39 am »
+1

Transmute is easily fixed imo

Transmute
Action - $P
(Same effect)
---
When you gain this, +1 Buy

Its only problem is its opportunity cost really. Estate->Gold is powerful, as is Action->Duchy in the late game. This fix makes Copper->Transmute better too.

The only rules problem is fixing what happens if you gain a Transmute when it isn't your turn (with Jester etc.)
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]  All
 

Page created in 0.097 seconds with 22 queries.