Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 188 189 [190]  All

Author Topic: Interview with Donald X.  (Read 791908 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

NoMoreFun

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1515
  • Respect: +1114
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #4725 on: September 20, 2019, 05:17:33 am »
+1

Speaking of which, do you generally aim to design cards where the pile would feasibly be emptied in at least some games?
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5493
  • Respect: +22131
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #4726 on: September 20, 2019, 01:57:01 pm »
+3

Speaking of which, do you generally aim to design cards where the pile would feasibly be emptied in at least some games?
It's not a concern. It doesn't come up either; with 5 players that's just 2 copies each, and there are very few cards you'll overwhelmingly stop at one of.
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1515
  • Respect: +1114
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #4727 on: September 20, 2019, 06:50:23 pm »
0

Quote
There are very few cards you'll overwhelmingly stop at one of.
That's the sort of thing you could test with statistics. I am guessing that from the base set, Chapel and Moneylender don't often get bought more than once - but I'm just guessing.

Do you still design cards around 5 and 6 player games, even after the new Intrigue? My assumption was that there was a general acknowledgement that it doesn't really work so it was being phased out, but from the previous response, it isn't?

What % of players do you anticipate will buy an extra set of base cards so they can play 5-6 player games?
Logged

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3387
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2644
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #4728 on: September 20, 2019, 08:01:45 pm »
+2

Speaking of which, do you generally aim to design cards where the pile would feasibly be emptied in at least some games?
It's not a concern. It doesn't come up either; with 5 players that's just 2 copies each, and there are very few cards you'll overwhelmingly stop at one of.

inb4 Awaclus
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

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5493
  • Respect: +22131
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #4729 on: September 21, 2019, 01:25:18 pm »
+2

Quote
There are very few cards you'll overwhelmingly stop at one of.
That's the sort of thing you could test with statistics. I am guessing that from the base set, Chapel and Moneylender don't often get bought more than once - but I'm just guessing.
There aren't so many playtest games played to really know what's going on from statistics, and well here we are despite that, it didn't work out so badly.

There are statistics on the discord (type e.g. "!stats chapel").

Do you still design cards around 5 and 6 player games, even after the new Intrigue? My assumption was that there was a general acknowledgement that it doesn't really work so it was being phased out, but from the previous response, it isn't?
I try to aim the game at 3 players, so that I'll get as close as possible to working well with 2-4. I don't want to mess up 5, but if I haven't messed up 4 I probably haven't messed up 5. I don't care at all about 6. We do support 5-6 with components though, e.g. 6 Tavern mats.

What % of players do you anticipate will buy an extra set of base cards so they can play 5-6 player games?
I do not anticipate a particular number there. It's also possible to buy the current Big Box to support 5-6.
Logged

pubby

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 335
  • Respect: +524
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #4730 on: November 03, 2019, 03:26:41 am »
+1

On reddit you mentioned wanting to update some cards, but being unable to do so because RGG couldn't sell the product. Is there any chance you could bring these updated cards to the online implementation, similar to what you did with the errata?
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5493
  • Respect: +22131
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #4731 on: November 04, 2019, 05:15:50 pm »
+2

On reddit you mentioned wanting to update some cards, but being unable to do so because RGG couldn't sell the product. Is there any chance you could bring these updated cards to the online implementation, similar to what you did with the errata?
Not without them being physical too - the online game is the online version of the physical game. The online game could conceivably have a promo that couldn't be a physical card.

The issue with, let's give as an example dropping the reaction from Fool's Gold, is, that if we don't sell it separately some people will be mad, and if we do it's a horrible product, that most players would have no interest in buying. I haven't really discussed it at length with Jay. Obv. for online play it's great, you just immediately have whatever fixes. We move the +Buy from Margrave to Cache and it's nothing but positive, except for people worried that it causes trouble for whatever tournament that's going on right then. But we have to match the physical game.

Ideally people wouldn't get mad and I could fix more cards. We snuck a few fixes in on the grounds that they were important for some reason and mostly didn't matter (the big one is the Masquerade pin fix, but also e.g. "you may" on Moneylender). Dropping the reaction from Fool's Gold is a lot more noticeable.
Logged

ipofanes

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1392
  • Shuffle iT Username: ipofanes
  • Respect: +717
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #4732 on: November 11, 2019, 02:52:05 am »
+1

How come that Projects, Landmarks and Events don't delve too deep into the realm of attacks/hurting opponents? (I can only think of Annex, Tax which hurts everyone alike, and Cathedral as a self-attack when gone wrong.) Which considerations played a role before dismissing landmarks like "Any player can discard a gold during their action phase for <Militia effect>"?
Logged
Lord Rattington denies my undo requests

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 8102
  • Respect: +8885
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #4733 on: November 11, 2019, 10:32:59 am »
+1

How come that Projects, Landmarks and Events don't delve too deep into the realm of attacks/hurting opponents? (I can only think of Annex, Tax which hurts everyone alike, and Cathedral as a self-attack when gone wrong.) Which considerations played a role before dismissing landmarks like "Any player can discard a gold during their action phase for <Militia effect>"?

The fact that cards like Moat and Lighthouse would be worthless as protection against such things comes to mind as one obvious reason.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

Wizard_Amul

  • Coppersmith
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 46
  • Respect: +42
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #4734 on: November 11, 2019, 11:17:50 am »
0

How come that Projects, Landmarks and Events don't delve too deep into the realm of attacks/hurting opponents? (I can only think of Annex, Tax which hurts everyone alike, and Cathedral as a self-attack when gone wrong.) Which considerations played a role before dismissing landmarks like "Any player can discard a gold during their action phase for <Militia effect>"?

The fact that cards like Moat and Lighthouse would be worthless as protection against such things comes to mind as one obvious reason.

This is a pretty good reason. Masquerade is already kind of one exception to an "attack" not being able to be countered, though.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 8102
  • Respect: +8885
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #4735 on: November 11, 2019, 11:44:34 am »
0

How come that Projects, Landmarks and Events don't delve too deep into the realm of attacks/hurting opponents? (I can only think of Annex, Tax which hurts everyone alike, and Cathedral as a self-attack when gone wrong.) Which considerations played a role before dismissing landmarks like "Any player can discard a gold during their action phase for <Militia effect>"?

The fact that cards like Moat and Lighthouse would be worthless as protection against such things comes to mind as one obvious reason.

This is a pretty good reason. Masquerade is already kind of one exception to an "attack" not being able to be countered, though.

As is IGG; but I've seen a lot of newer players confused in thinking that they should be able to reveal Moat when someone buys in IGG.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2019, 11:49:05 am by GendoIkari »
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5493
  • Respect: +22131
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #4736 on: November 11, 2019, 01:45:41 pm »
+2

How come that Projects, Landmarks and Events don't delve too deep into the realm of attacks/hurting opponents? (I can only think of Annex, Tax which hurts everyone alike, and Cathedral as a self-attack when gone wrong.) Which considerations played a role before dismissing landmarks like "Any player can discard a gold during their action phase for <Militia effect>"?
By Annex you meant Raid?

I tried to get attacks into the Events; I didn't so much for Projects or Landmarks because that isn't so true to what they are. Landmarks are about VP and are already interactive. Projects give you an ability and well sure it could be an attack, but that isn't where they were aimed. Events though sounded like a good fit for attacking.

One issue is that some optional attacks are political. There's an Event that Militias, in a 4-player game. I could buy it. The player to my right just bought it, so I'd only be attacking Kevin. Well, is he winning? Another issue is, it's not so fun to be attacked every turn. It happens naturally eventually if you have enough players or you can draw your deck, but I don't want to push that, I want to delay it. Raid dodges these issues by having the upside be conditional, and by being bad. It's not like I want bad attacking Events though.

I tried some other attack Events, including a Locusts attack in Adventures. They didn't work, and hey I didn't need them to. It was fine not to have any, and I managed Raid anyway. Attacks are hard, and Events didn't solve any problems they have.
Logged

ipofanes

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1392
  • Shuffle iT Username: ipofanes
  • Respect: +717
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #4737 on: November 12, 2019, 07:55:46 am »
0

How come that Projects, Landmarks and Events don't delve too deep into the realm of attacks/hurting opponents? (I can only think of Annex, Tax which hurts everyone alike, and Cathedral as a self-attack when gone wrong.) Which considerations played a role before dismissing landmarks like "Any player can discard a gold during their action phase for <Militia effect>"?
By Annex you meant Raid?

Yes, sorry. I am a bit uncertain about some English card names.

Logged
Lord Rattington denies my undo requests
Pages: 1 ... 188 189 [190]  All
 

Page created in 0.178 seconds with 20 queries.