Print

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

[brokoli]

Related to this.

Saboteur : I love this card and I hope I'm not the only one. Sab could've been boring if it was powerful, fortunatelly it isn't. Donald's words disappoints me, I really think this card is fine and I don't understand why people hate it more than Mountebank or Witch.

Precisely, I'm surprised not to see Mountebank-Witch in the list. They are overpowered and just kill any kind of fun engine the game can have. They lengthen the game a lot and make it boring. I don't see this problem with Sea Hag, Torturer or Young witch : Sea Hag is not really good for BM (unlike witch-mountebank), Torturer is an engine-card so it is still interesting, and Young witch always have a bane.

Personally, another card I really don't like is Alchemist. What's the point ? You are essentially playing each turn Alchemist-alchemist-alchemist-alchemist-play treasures-buy alchemist-put all alchemists on top and repeat...

[Drab Emordnilap]

Precisely, I'm surprised not to see Mountebank-Witch in the list. They are overpowered and just kill any kind of fun engine the game can have.

If a board where Witch/Mountebank is worth going for, often times the fun engine is "Build an engine to play your attack more often.

And what does overpowered really mean, when everyone has equal access to the card? Do you think they should cost 6?

And if you're concerned about them slowing down games, Sea Hag is a much bigger offender for that. It starts cursing sooner and hurts both player's economies, since it doesn't provide any resources.

[Schneau]

My least favorite card is probably Governor. It's just too strong. It tries to balance things that are too powerful by giving opponents bonuses, which just speeds up the game too much. I think it's a great example of how it's a often bad idea to nerf a strong card by giving opponent bonuses.

[SirPeebles]

My least favorite card is probably Governor. It's just too strong. It tries to balance things that are too powerful by giving opponents bonuses, which just speeds up the game too much. I think it's a great example of how it's a often bad idea to nerf a strong card by giving opponent bonuses.

I think this was to fit the Puerto Rico theme as a promo card.  I've never played Puerto Rico, but my understanding is that each turn when you choose something, all other players get some small benefit too.  It's a great mechanic for a board game like that, as a way to keep players engaged when it's not your turn.

I think the bigger "problem" with Governor is that its three choices synergize way too nicely into a strategy all in itself.  That tends to lead to relatively boring yet quick rush games.

A similar card is IGG.  I feel that the IGG Duchy rush is an unintended consequence of emptying two piles at once.

[WanderingWinder]

Related to this.

Saboteur : I love this card and I hope I'm not the only one. Sab could've been boring if it was powerful, fortunatelly it isn't. Donald's words disappoints me, I really think this card is fine and I don't understand why people hate it more than Mountebank or Witch.

Precisely, I'm surprised not to see Mountebank-Witch in the list. They are overpowered and just kill any kind of fun engine the game can have. They lengthen the game a lot and make it boring. I don't see this problem with Sea Hag, Torturer or Young witch : Sea Hag is not really good for BM (unlike witch-mountebank), Torturer is an engine-card so it is still interesting, and Young witch always have a bane.

Personally, another card I really don't like is Alchemist. What's the point ? You are essentially playing each turn Alchemist-alchemist-alchemist-alchemist-play treasures-buy alchemist-put all alchemists on top and repeat...

Overpowered: Like, because they are more powerful? SOMETHING has to be most powerful. I guess you are arguing for outliers, but there are a couple of issues: 1. These cards are actually ignorable a non-negligible percentage of the time. They really are. Moreover, they do NOT totally stop you from going for engines. In fact, they *help* certain kids of engines, though they of course hurt others. Like... every other card, basically.
Finally, I reject the non-evidenced position that the only thing fun about the game is playing engines. If this were true, the whole game is designed badly, because you can do more to make big money strategies weak. But I think the game is designed quite well (not that there aren't *some* flaws)

[AJD]

I feel that the IGG Duchy rush is an unintended consequence of emptying two piles at once.

I mean, I dunno... the on-gain curser didn't have to be a Copper-like treasure.

[LastFootnote]

I feel that the IGG Duchy rush is an unintended consequence of emptying two piles at once.

I mean, I dunno... the on-gain curser didn't have to be a Copper-like treasure.

Hmm, if it had been a Victory card, it wouldn't have emptied two piles at once when it ran out. Not that I'm advocating that specific change.

[SirPeebles]

Hmm, if it had been a Victory card, it wouldn't have emptied two piles at once when it ran out. Not that I'm advocating that specific change.

I've thought of that, but then you'd usually run out of curses.  Assuming that most games have 3 or 4 players.

[flies]

Minion is probably my most hated card.  Any card where you just have to race to get as many as possible is annoying, but combine that with a decent attack and the propensity for long turns and you've got something that isn't all that fun to play. 

[jsh357]

My least favorite cards are Tournament, Governor, and Margrave.  Don't really need to explain the first one.

Generic Governor games are the most boring and unbalanced-feeling games in Dominion after the first couple of times.  I liked the idea of the card at first, but it seems like it's just way too good a lot of the time when not much else is going on and very easy to fall behind the Governor leader.  It's one of the few cards I will purposefully veto unless I know Colonies might appear, in which case Governor usually becomes more balanced and I'm perfectly fine with it.  This is really nitpicky, but I also don't personally enjoy games that only last ~11 turns as you can't really get a good deck going in that time.  Not saying I need an engine every game, as a close BM game can be fun too, but Governor just takes away the potential for many boards to be entertaining.  I cringe whenever I have $5 and it's the best option available.

Discarding to Margrave on Isotropic is incredibly annoying, especially if you are using a touchpad.  (I don't mind the card otherwise.  I realize this is a stupid reason to hate on it)  There's a lot of AP involved for the opponent as well.  In person, it usually runs smoothly enough though.

[^_^_^_^]

My most hated would have to be Torturer . Why? Because it screws up my mind T_T
2nd most hated is probably Mountebank Why? Because I can hate it.
Most hated non-attacker is Chancellor. Why? Because I can't love it, like it, use it, abuse it, let alone buy it. The only thing left is hating it.

[DWetzel]

Ghost Ship.  I, possibly irrationally, hate it more than life itself.

It just bogs down games, self-contributes to bogging down games, snowballs fairly well (if someone gets an early lucky one, you're going to be hard-pressed to recover if you can't luckily get one soon yourself), and offers no useful decisions.

[brokoli]

1. These cards are actually ignorable a non-negligible percentage of the time.

Non-negligible ? Ok, we have gardens, trader, lighthouse, masquerade... but even, Witch and mountebank are too often dominant, really.

they do NOT totally stop you from going for engines. In fact, they *help* certain kids of engines, though they of course hurt others. Like... every other card, basically.

What kind of engines ? I don't see...
And when witch is on the board, most of the time you'll play double-witch big money. And all funny strategies you could have played are killed by this damn curser.
I mean, witch-mountebank games are interesting sometimes, but they tend to be dominant almost every games they appear on, and that's not fun. I think dominion really needs more defenses for these attacks.

Finally, I reject the non-evidenced position that the only thing fun about the game is playing engines. If this were true, the whole game is designed badly, because you can do more to make big money strategies weak. But I think the game is designed quite well (not that there aren't *some* flaws)

Ok, but about witch... how often can you play a village-witch engine ? I regret above all the lack of strategic depth in this card... and it creates mirror games.

[^_^_^_^]

*sees someone arguing about an attack being bad for the game*

http://dominionstrategy.com/2011/12/27/your-guide-to-beating-attacks/


Honestly, though, I see no reason to conclude that Witch is OP. There are rarely times where someone can go double Witch against an opponent going Ambass/Ambass for example.

[dondon151]

I think you're viewing engines too narrowly. Of course engines are slowed down by cursing, but a reasonable deck that can get Curses + other cards into hand and trash them without too much penalty will eventually overtake Witch-BM.

Personally, Duke is one of my least favorite cards. In Duke game, losing the Duchy split 5-3 means that you've basically lost the game.

[Polk5440]

Black Market is my least favorite card. I don't like the fact that only one copy of each card is available. But even more than that, I HATE being able to play Treasures outside of the buy phase. I view Action-Buy-Cleanup as fundamental to the game and it bothers me that Black Market messes so much with that clean delineation.

I also don't like most of the Alchemy cards (esp. Familiar and Possession), but when playing in person, I like it a lot better when we play 5 cards from Alchemy, 5 from another set. Then, I don't mind so much. Potions are just not worth the hassle, and are not that fun for me.

I don't like that a lot of the attacks (Witch, Sea Hag, Ambassador) are go-to cards so often more so than disliking the cards themselves. Pirate Ship is one of my favorite attacks because it's not a go-to card nearly as often. 

I don't mind Treasure Map and similar cards very much at all. Cards with more variance are fine with me as long as they are not go-tos. I used to love Tournament and Governor, but lately, because it is so hard to find alternate strategies that defeat them, like them less and less. There is still a lot of strategy in how to optimally implement Tournament and Governor, but it would be nice to have more kingdoms where buying them at all is a trap.... hmmmm.... sounds like something to work on for the kingdom design challenge!!

[WanderingWinder]

1. These cards are actually ignorable a non-negligible percentage of the time.

Non-negligible ? Ok, we have gardens, trader, lighthouse, masquerade... but even, Witch and mountebank are too often dominant, really.

Well, how often is too often, and how dominant is dominant? It's a matter of taste, but it's not so much about specific cards countering them. You bring up some good examples here, but... I would say you don't want to buy any given curser in let's say 30% of games. Now, about half of these are because there's another curser available that's better, but apart from this, you have rushes, slogs, some soft counters, and really strong engines which can trash through. Not to mention dozens of other strategies that shrug curses off (really fast things, or also something like chancellor/stash which is REALLY impervious to cursing).

they do NOT totally stop you from going for engines. In fact, they *help* certain kids of engines, though they of course hurt others. Like... every other card, basically.

What kind of engines ? I don't see...
And when witch is on the board, most of the time you'll play double-witch big money. And all funny strategies you could have played are killed by this damn curser.

Really not the case. Most of the time implies >50%, and I would say the number is closer to 30%.

I mean, witch-mountebank games are interesting sometimes, but they tend to be dominant almost every games they appear on, and that's not fun. I think dominion really needs more defenses for these attacks.

Well, fun is of course a matter of opinion, and you certainly don't have to play the game, like the game, play the game without the attacks, whatever. But I would like to say that it's possible to play engines and do wacky things with these cards, and even not do too badly in the process. And I think it's actually even quite fun to beat these simple things with some good refinement.

Finally, I reject the non-evidenced position that the only thing fun about the game is playing engines. If this were true, the whole game is designed badly, because you can do more to make big money strategies weak. But I think the game is designed quite well (not that there aren't *some* flaws)

Ok, but about witch... how often can you play a village-witch engine ? I regret above all the lack of strategic depth in this card... and it creates mirror games.

Village-witch engine? About never. How often can you play Village-moat? There's not enough card-draw there. However, you CAN certainly transition from witch into some kind of engine, and get some utility.


Anyway, mostly popping in to get an example game in where in the face of mountebank, I go engine. Not that I ignored mountebank, but going to engine after was very good for me. http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201212/02/game-20121202-132633-6554669f.html

[Donald X.]

Precisely, I'm surprised not to see Mountebank-Witch in the list.

I just covered the cards ARTjoMS put on the poll. http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=63.0

[Tables]

According to the favourite card list, my least favourites were:
Hunting Party   152.5
Witch   152.5
Sea Hag   152.5
Familiar   152.5
Mountebank   156
Ill-Gotten Gains   156
Jack of all Trades   156

(Number is position)

Now, of those, I think I rated Hunting Party too high, and Familiar too low. Hunting Party really surprised me that it wasn't right near the bottom, it's such a dire card to play. In real mechanics, it's not much better than Philosopher's Stone (srsly), and in play it's part of the dominant and boring strategy so often that it's just incredibly un-fun. The rest of them are vaguely near the bottom, or not far enough away that I care.

[dondon151]

I've come to appreciate Jack more as a card that's occasionally pretty darn good for engine-building. It's a great BM enabler, but no one has Masquerade on their least favorite lists...

[DStu]

1. These cards are actually ignorable a non-negligible percentage of the time.

Non-negligible ? Ok, we have gardens, trader, lighthouse, masquerade... but even, Witch and mountebank are too often dominant, really.

they do NOT totally stop you from going for engines. In fact, they *help* certain kids of engines, though they of course hurt others. Like... every other card, basically.

What kind of engines ? I don't see...

I've lost more than once to some engine-maniac who ignored the Witches for first to trash and build up an engine, just to buy the Witches later, beat me 6-4 in the Curse split and has a clean deck and an engine at this point in contrast to my double-WitchMoat with 6 Curses in the deck.

[DStu]

Precisely, I'm surprised not to see Mountebank-Witch in the list.

I just covered the cards ARTjoMS put on the poll. http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=63.0

FTFY
Edit: FTFM

[toaster]

I don't hate Ambassador nearly as much as I used to, but I still don't particularly care for the card.  It many games, it simply introduces a "pre-game" tug-of-war, with the player who wins that battle going to on to smother their opponent.

I do, however, find it quite satisfying to correctly skip Ambassador and win on the few games where it's best to leave it alone.

[Ozle]

MOAT!

[SirPeebles]

Province.  I can't tell you how many games I've lost because my opponent got more of these than I did.