Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [All]

Author Topic: Showdown  (Read 26428 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

StickaRicka

  • Pearl Diver
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12
  • Danish Dude
  • Respect: +6
    • View Profile
Showdown
« on: July 30, 2013, 08:52:28 am »
+4

Are you the right guy to defend Dominion's honor?

The Dice Tower is starting a new podcast, and they specifically ask for someone to verbally defend what we all know, that is, why Dominion is the best deck-builder out there.

http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1010613/dicetower-showdown-podcast-opinionated-gamers-wa

I just though one of you guys might have a substantial knowledge about boardgames in general (and deckbuilders in particular) as well as the ability to discuss like a politician!

Good luck =)

/Christian
Logged
Years ago, my mother used to say to me, she'd say "In this world, Elwood, you can be oh so so smart, or oh so pleasant." Well, for years I was smart... I recommend pleasant. You may quote me.

Tables

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2816
  • Build more Bridges in the King's Court!
  • Respect: +3347
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #1 on: July 30, 2013, 09:46:37 am »
+39

We'd want someone good at making arguments, good at articulating themselves clearly, very knowledgeable about Dominion... someone like a lawyer running a Dominion strategy site would be perfect, I think.
Logged
...spin-offs are still better for all of the previously cited reasons.
But not strictly better, because the spinoff can have a different cost than the expansion.

TWoos

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 149
  • Respect: +89
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #2 on: July 30, 2013, 10:09:50 am »
0

Even though I think Dominion is the best deck-builder, I'd rather see opinions from people who think it isn't.

I like the deck-building style of play, and I'd like to know which others are worth trying.
Logged

Archetype

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 992
  • Suffers from Fancy Play Syndrom
  • Respect: +690
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #3 on: July 30, 2013, 10:19:49 am »
0

As much as I love listening to the Dice Tower (nearly all podcasts in the network and their video reviews) and how awesome I think it would be to go on, there are much more experienced people out there to represent the community. Robz is the one who first came to mind since he does videos and is a news reporter, but having theory go on would be awesome.
Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7096
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9411
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #4 on: July 30, 2013, 12:04:26 pm »
0

Someone on that thread suggested Netrunner is a deck building game.  Has the average intelligence at BGG dropped?
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #5 on: July 30, 2013, 12:15:24 pm »
+1

I'm definitely unqualified, since I have very little experience with other deckbuilders. I've played the Star Trek DBG once (had a terrible time), and I've played Quarriors once (it seemed promising).

How many people out there have played a bunch of these deckbuilders (at least half a dozen times each) AND think Dominion is the best one? I can only speak for myself, but because Dominion is so great, I've had little incentive to try most of the others, especially since I haven't heard great things about most of them.
Logged

Archetype

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 992
  • Suffers from Fancy Play Syndrom
  • Respect: +690
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #6 on: July 30, 2013, 12:37:35 pm »
0

As far as 'pure' deckbuilders go (the physical building of the deck being the core of the game) other than Dominion I've only played Puzzle Strike and Ascension. Puzzle Strike is a Sirlin game so its not as good as what it copies. Ascension I've only played by iOS, but it has a far more casual feel compared to Dominion. I prefer Dominion over both of them by far, but I've only tried three of, like, 20 deckbuilders. I know some people enjoy Thunderstone, and Tom raves about the Marvel Legendary Deckbuilding game quite a bit. But I think the general consensus is that Dominion is better as far as 'pure' deckbuilders go.
Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3249
  • Respect: +5459
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #7 on: July 30, 2013, 01:05:52 pm »
+2

I played the Lord of the Rings deckbuilder, and it was awful.  Whoever made it demonstrated essentially no understanding of game design.  It was like Dominion, except that every card was worth victory points, and generally the strongest card were worth the most.  This sets up a game-ruining positive feedback loop right where Dominion has a negative feedback loop (your deck usually grows weaker when you score points).  To make matters worse, the supply constantly cycles like black market, providing ample randomness which is then magnified by the aforementioned feedback loop.   :'(
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3431
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2706
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #8 on: July 30, 2013, 01:47:17 pm »
0

We'd want someone good at making arguments, good at articulating themselves clearly, very knowledgeable about Dominion... someone like a lawyer running a Dominion strategy site would be perfect, I think.

I fit none of these criteria at all...
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

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3603
  • Respect: +6121
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Showdown
« Reply #9 on: July 30, 2013, 01:54:37 pm »
+13

We'd want someone good at making arguments, good at articulating themselves clearly, very knowledgeable about Dominion... someone like a lawyer running a Dominion strategy site would be perfect, I think.

<3

Thanks for bringing my attention to this!  I contacted them.  Though as LastFootnote pointed out, I haven't played that many other deckbuilders -- certainly none even close to the same degree as Dominion.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #10 on: July 30, 2013, 02:26:50 pm »
+9

Here's a question: how many of the deckbuilders out there have a Dominion-style card supply? By this I mean a supply that consists of several piles of (usually) identical cards. It seems like most deckbuilders (Thunderstone, Ascension, Star Trek, apparently Lord of the Rings) have a card supply that constantly cycles, which presents two "problems".

First, it means that it's much harder to have a long-term strategy. You have very little control over whether the cards you need will be available to purchase when you [need/can afford] them. I'm a big fan of tactical play and making the most of what's handed to me (Kingdom Builder rules!), but it's best when you can pair that tactical acumen with a coherent strategy.

Second, it makes each play of the game feel more samey. Sure, you may have a big deck with over 50 unique cards, which is a lot of variety. You shuffle the deck, and the order these cards become available makes each game play differently. Perhaps you won't get through the entire deck in most games, so you may never see certain cards in every game. I can name another game that meets all these characteristics: Uno.

The fact that Donald X. games in general (and Dominion in particular) don't include every card in each game is huge. No two games of Uno are ever going to feel as different as a King's Court engine is from a Duke slog. I'd argue that this, not the deckbuilding mechanic, is the defining characteristic of Dominion and the thing that gives the game such incredible staying power. It also makes it easier to make and sell expansions. Imagine if Dominion only had two sets with 100 Kingdom cards per set, but only 1 to 3 copies of each. It'd be a worse game AND wouldn't have made nearly as much money! Yet this is a mechanic that most subsequent deckbuilders chose not to incorporate. Go figure!
« Last Edit: July 30, 2013, 02:35:43 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4381
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Showdown
« Reply #11 on: July 30, 2013, 03:17:32 pm »
+3

I have played a number of games of thunderstone, quarriors, and Legendary, not any others I can think of off the top of my head. Also not sure if I can do this time-wise, whatnot, etc. Well anyway, discuss.

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2644
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3388
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #12 on: July 30, 2013, 03:29:07 pm »
+6

I would gladly and happily defend Dominion's honor.

Not knowing what I am talking about has never stopped me from doing a media appearance before... but unfortunately, I'm not super acquainted with other deck builders. I've played Ascension, I don't like it very much. I've played Settlers, Agricola, Caylus, and Carcassonne enough to assert that Dominion is better, but those aren't deck builders, so.

Simplicity X variance is Dominion's strength, I would say. it's elegantly easy to play, but significantly different every time. It's beginner friendly, because those initial two games where you have no idea what you are doing only last like 15 minutes each. Compare to Agricola, which I do really, really like, but it took almost an hour to explain the rues and about 3 and a half hours to play, and of course the person who had played before won and we were totally lost. And Agricola is pretty great, but Dominion is much more replayable. Every game is so different! We are still obsessed with it years later! (Again, I know Agricola isn't a deck builder, it's just the game I learned most recently).
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.

jsh357

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2577
  • Shuffle iT Username: jsh357
  • Respect: +4340
    • View Profile
    • JSH Gaming: Original games
Re: Showdown
« Reply #13 on: July 30, 2013, 03:38:49 pm »
0

Every other deckbuilder I have played so far completely misses the mark, the worst I've played being Miskatonic School for Girls.  Ascension comes closest to being a neat game to me, but man, I can't think of any reason I'd want to play it over Dominion.
Logged
Join the Dominion community Discord channel! Chat in text and voice; enter dumb tournaments; spy on top players!

https://discord.gg/2rDpJ4N

DG

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4074
  • Respect: +2624
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #14 on: July 30, 2013, 06:39:51 pm »
+1

If you were to list up a few other deck builders and ask what was wrong with them, I'm sure plenty of people will post up some bad comments. It's the internet after all.

Most of the deck builders have tried to add a fantasy or sci-fi theme thinking it immediately improves the game. In fact the more modest theme of Dominion is more accessible and allows Dominion to be a gateway game.

A Few Acres of Snow - Excellent but with a winning move for one side.
Puzzle Strike - Play a computer game if you want to crush gems.
Rune Age - Not enough variation of scenarios/races in the game box.
Thunderstone - One of the worst matching of mechanics to theme that I've seen ever in a game. Badly written rules.
Ascension - Random draws to the available draft made it too opportunist.
Quarriors - Lose every time with bad rolls.
Miskatonic School for Girls - No control over your deck so not much of a deck builder.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2013, 06:42:52 pm by DG »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #15 on: July 30, 2013, 07:01:16 pm »
+2

Puzzle Strike -- blatantly ripped off a design done by a Dominion fan with no credit given (source).
Logged

Synthesizer

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 100
  • Respect: +31
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #16 on: July 31, 2013, 02:42:17 am »
+4

Here's a question: how many of the deckbuilders out there have a Dominion-style card supply? By this I mean a supply that consists of several piles of (usually) identical cards. It seems like most deckbuilders (Thunderstone, Ascension, Star Trek, apparently Lord of the Rings) have a card supply that constantly cycles, which presents two "problems".

First, it means that it's much harder to have a long-term strategy. You have very little control over whether the cards you need will be available to purchase when you [need/can afford] them. I'm a big fan of tactical play and making the most of what's handed to me (Kingdom Builder rules!), but it's best when you can pair that tactical acumen with a coherent strategy.

Second, it makes each play of the game feel more samey. Sure, you may have a big deck with over 50 unique cards, which is a lot of variety. You shuffle the deck, and the order these cards become available makes each game play differently. Perhaps you won't get through the entire deck in most games, so you may never see certain cards in every game. I can name another game that meets all these characteristics: Uno.

The fact that Donald X. games in general (and Dominion in particular) don't include every card in each game is huge. No two games of Uno are ever going to feel as different as a King's Court engine is from a Duke slog. I'd argue that this, not the deckbuilding mechanic, is the defining characteristic of Dominion and the thing that gives the game such incredible staying power. It also makes it easier to make and sell expansions. Imagine if Dominion only had two sets with 100 Kingdom cards per set, but only 1 to 3 copies of each. It'd be a worse game AND wouldn't have made nearly as much money! Yet this is a mechanic that most subsequent deckbuilders chose not to incorporate. Go figure!

I'm not interested in appearing on the podcast but I'll add this for the one who eventually does go on:

My first deckbuilder was actually Ascension, a game I still love (and it's the only other deckbuilder I played). The three main reasons that Dominion sees more table time have nothing to do with variety but:
1. My friends are really put off by the theme in Ascension. "this looks like Magic"
2. Because of the continuously varying supply, the first few games have a lot of card exlaining DURING THE GAME (rather than before the game as is the case with Dominion)
3. Ascension gets worse with more players

First two are obvious, third I'll get to later.

Other than also having the deckbuilding mechanic, the "feel" of the game is different and the games are tough to compare as  a result. An analogy:
In football (which is called soccer in some backward countries :p) the players and the coaches have a completely different perspective. The coaches analyze the conditions, their own tools (i.e. player skills) and the tools of the opponents before the game, and decide on a strategy taking into account all this. Once the game is going, their influence on the game is very limited; they are allowed just 3 substitutes, and can give some further instructions to their players. Sometimes bad or good luck happens (lucky goals, injuries, bookings, etc.) and they have to adjust accordingly. But if any really major adjustments are required, there is only so much they can do.
For the players on the other hand, they go in with the instructions of the coach (a general strategy), but once the game gets going, for them it is more of a moment-by-moment game; stuff happens, they have to respond, to which the opponent responds, etc. A small error; an unlucky referee call; fouls; getting under the opponent's skin - that is the game for the players.

I'd say Dominion is more similar to what the coach experiences, while Ascension is more similar to what the players experience.

In Dominion, you look at the board, decide what to do, and do it. Even though you do have to take into account what the opponent might do and/or does, often when you have to seriously adjust, either due to bad draws or due to the opponent choosing a strategy you didn't identify earlier or due to just having picked a bad strategy, it's an uphill battle. Also, there is very little you can do to stop your opponent from doing their thing - you have attacks, but which attacks are available was known before the game even started; card denial is limited to winning the split; sometimes you can flexibly open preparing for either slog or rush; and then you have Duchy dancing and three-pile-control.

In Ascension, you play more on a turn by turn basis - you grind the margins, each turn you try to find the balance between scoring more points than your opponent, making your opponent score less than you on his next turn (card denial is HUGELY important), and cutting your losses to set yourself up for more point scoring later (either gambling on favourable center row draws or buying cards that allow you to control the center row). Go with the flow, continuously adjust to the current conditions and to the opponent.

Both are a different beast, I like both.

Then I return to the >2 players problem of Ascension:
Inherently, each turn you're trying to do better than the player who went before you, and you're trying to set things up so things suck for the player after you. In two player games, the player before and after you is the very same player, so it's all fine and dandy. With more than two, however, you respond to one player, while making a third player respond to you. Your influence on any other players is negligible. This means that the player who sits behind the worst player has a distinct advantage. Which sucks.

For 4 (or 6) player games they did come up with a fix: TEAM GAMES! In this you play in player order A1-B1-A2-B2, and add the scores for team A and team B at the end of the game (but each player has a separate deck during the game!). You can choose to pay extra to send the card you bought to your team mates deck rather than your own. This sounds awesome, but since everybody I play with wants to play Dominion, I haven't been in the position to try it. Oh well. It's not like I'm not having fun with Dominion. My 5 province - 2 Duchy HoP megaturn of two days ago certainly was enjoyable...:)
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #17 on: July 31, 2013, 03:30:25 am »
0

In a quick search, the earliest listing for Ascension I see on BGG is from 2010 (not counting a different non-deck-building game of the same name from 1982).  Dominion is from 2008.  Am I missing the original listing?  It's hard to tell because they all seem to have a tagline in the name.  I am fairly certain that Dominion was the very first deck building game.

Edit: to make the rest of your post more succinct, you seem to be saying that Dominion is more strategic while Ascension is more tactical.  Having not played Ascension, I have no idea if this is true.  But I'd say that Dominion has plenty of tactics in it as well.

Edit 2: Oh wait, you said YOUR first, not THE first.  My bad.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2013, 03:38:42 am by eHalcyon »
Logged

Synthesizer

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 100
  • Respect: +31
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #18 on: July 31, 2013, 03:47:53 am »
0

In a quick search, the earliest listing for Ascension I see on BGG is from 2010 (not counting a different non-deck-building game of the same name from 1982).  Dominion is from 2008.  Am I missing the original listing?  It's hard to tell because they all seem to have a tagline in the name.  I am fairly certain that Dominion was the very first deck building game.

Edit: to make the rest of your post more succinct, you seem to be saying that Dominion is more strategic while Ascension is more tactical.  Having not played Ascension, I have no idea if this is true.  But I'd say that Dominion has plenty of tactics in it as well.

Edit 2: Oh wait, you said YOUR first, not THE first.  My bad.

And in fact, Justin Gary (Designer of Ascension) totally gave credit to DXV for inventing the deckbuilding mechanic. Something along the line of, "I love Magic draft, but I love the draft bit actually a bit more than the actual Magic playing bit, then I played Dominion, totally loved it, and decided to make my own deckbuilding game". Can't be bother to look for the quote though. But I just wanted to add this tidbit of information before anybody got their panties in a twist.
Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4787
  • Respect: +3412
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #19 on: July 31, 2013, 04:13:47 am »
+1

What Dominion does best is keeping it simple without scaring away the players.

I knew of Magic and knew it wasn't for me. Of course because it's a money sink, but the fantasy theme didn't do it for me.
Dominion with its very light medieval theme was accessible enough and most of the cards were pretty straightforward.
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

D Bo

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 213
  • Respect: +93
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #20 on: July 31, 2013, 09:30:17 am »
0

Most of the deck builders have tried to add a fantasy or sci-fi theme thinking it immediately improves the game. In fact the more modest theme of Dominion is more accessible and allows Dominion to be a gateway game.

Eminent Domain falls into this category as far as adding the sci-fi theme to it. I've only played it a couple times and it is a decent game, but I know the theme created some dynamics that the casual gamer may not really enjoy. My wife was nice enough to try it with me but the space theme seemed to be tough for her to get past, and made it less fun for her to really understand the rules. I enjoy it more than Ascension personally, but it feels like I will need to play it WAY more than I played Dominion before I got hooked, or completely understood the game. I find myself referring to the rulebook quite often to verify whether I'm cheating...

Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #21 on: July 31, 2013, 09:35:00 am »
+1

Here's a question: how many of the deckbuilders out there have a Dominion-style card supply? By this I mean a supply that consists of several piles of (usually) identical cards. It seems like most deckbuilders (Thunderstone, Ascension, Star Trek, apparently Lord of the Rings) have a card supply that constantly cycles, which presents two "problems".


Thunderstone doesn't have a cycling supply; it works the same as Dominion. You might be thinking of Epic Thunderstone, which is a popular variant.
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

PitzerMike

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 131
  • Longtime Pearldiver
  • Respect: +110
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #22 on: July 31, 2013, 09:46:01 am »
0

The only other deckbuilder I've played was Thunderstone.
The cards and theme looked pretty but I didn't like the gameplay and mechanics at all.

I feel you don't really get to make a lot of decisions in Thunderstone. After being dealt your hand all you ever do is calculate if you can defeat one of the monsters with the cards you were dealt. If yes you do, if no you can either use your turn to trash a card or buy something new in the village.
Unlike Dominion you can't really trim your deck down to the point where you have a reliable engine and you get the feeling you have your deck under control. So instead you just get dealt random junk every turn and try to do your best with it. Your deck gets bloated more and more along the way because defeated monsters (=VP cards) go directly to your deck.
So overall my impression is that it severely lacks strategy. Maybe I just didn't get it, so if there's a Thunderstone fan somewhere around here maybe they can enlighten me?

EDIT: Also the rules are horribly complicated. Dominion is much more elegant in that regard as you can derive pretty much every rule in the game from a few well-defined axioms.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2013, 09:54:48 am by PitzerMike »
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #23 on: July 31, 2013, 10:09:50 am »
+2

The only other deckbuilder I've played was Thunderstone.
The cards and theme looked pretty but I didn't like the gameplay and mechanics at all.

I feel you don't really get to make a lot of decisions in Thunderstone. After being dealt your hand all you ever do is calculate if you can defeat one of the monsters with the cards you were dealt. If yes you do, if no you can either use your turn to trash a card or buy something new in the village.
Unlike Dominion you can't really trim your deck down to the point where you have a reliable engine and you get the feeling you have your deck under control. So instead you just get dealt random junk every turn and try to do your best with it. Your deck gets bloated more and more along the way because defeated monsters (=VP cards) go directly to your deck.
So overall my impression is that it severely lacks strategy. Maybe I just didn't get it, so if there's a Thunderstone fan somewhere around here maybe they can enlighten me?

EDIT: Also the rules are horribly complicated. Dominion is much more elegant in that regard as you can derive pretty much every rule in the game from a few well-defined axioms.

I don't like Thunderstone as much as Dominion, but I think you're wrong about being unable to create a Dominion-style deck. What I've noticed is that while I'm not good at "dungeon crawl" type games in general, my skill at Dominion has carried over to Thunderstone to the point that I can win games using deck-building skills I learned from Dominion. While it's true that you can't ever build a completely reliable engine where you draw your deck every turn, for example, there are a fair number of trashing cards, and if those are available, you can make a quite-thin deck.

Basically what I've done in the past couple games is spend a really long time just going to the village. Just trashing cards, gaining XP if there's any card that gives XP from the village, and getting just a couple power cards in my deck. Then, when I'm several points behind because everyone else has been going to the dungeon, I hit the dungeon. And at this point I have a deck that can take out my choice of monster with almost any hand I'm dealt. I'll often only have 12 cards in my deck at this point, so I'll be seeing my whole deck every other turn. Even if I can only reliably kill something every other turn, that's better than other players who are becoming bloated with low-vp monster cards and I overtake them.
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

qmech

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1918
  • Shuffle iT Username: qmech
  • What year is it?
  • Respect: +2320
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #24 on: July 31, 2013, 10:20:03 am »
+1

Here's a question: how many of the deckbuilders out there have a Dominion-style card supply? By this I mean a supply that consists of several piles of (usually) identical cards. It seems like most deckbuilders (Thunderstone, Ascension, Star Trek, apparently Lord of the Rings) have a card supply that constantly cycles, which presents two "problems".


Thunderstone doesn't have a cycling supply; it works the same as Dominion. You might be thinking of Epic Thunderstone, which is a popular variant.

Thunderstone is really a hybrid, since you should probably count the Dungeon as part of the supply.
Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7096
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9411
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #25 on: July 31, 2013, 10:24:23 am »
+13

The main problem of other deck building games is this: in order to not be Dominion, they had to do something new, or add something different, or change a mechanic, major or minor.  Sometimes that change of mechanic is all right; sometimes it was a disaster.  And sometimes (I'm looking at you, Tanto Cuore and Puzzle Strike), the change wasn't really enough to justify a new game.

But that means that each of these new games must be directly compared to the simplicity and replayability of Dominion, and it's very, very hard to top that.

----

So I'm looking at a few things on BGG right now.  I'm going to list the major "Deck/Pool Building" games by number of ratings here; games with few ratings are unlikely to have been played by many people, and can reasonably be ignored for purposes of this discussion.  The number in parentheses is the rank on BGG; I'm also ignoring anything below rank 2000 because, really, that's a sign of being actually bad.  (For comparison, "We Didn't Playtest This At All," a game that is actively trying to be bad, is ranked 2248.)

This list might be useful to whoever attempts to go on the podcast.

Dominion (17)
Thunderstone (217)
Quarriors (298)
Mage Knight (9)
Starcraft Board Game (175)
Ascension (262)
Blood Bowl Team Manager (134, what the hell is this?)
Eminent Domain (264)
A Few Acres of Snow (96)
Nightfall (601)
Friday (216)
Rune Age (437)
Legendary (169)
Yggdrassil (352)
Core Worlds (309)
Scarab Lords (1849)
Puzzle Strike (595)
Arcana (1517)
Resident Evil (1163)
DC Comics (670)
Copycat (685)
Eaten by Zombies (1814)
Fzzzt (1619)
Star Trek: TNG (1125)
Tanto Cuore (976) (*)
Penny Arcade (1367)
Arctic Scavengers (1556)
Briefcase (1897)
Fantastiqa (1234)

OK, I'm going to stop there, because I've not even vaguely heard of anything below that other than expansions to games listed above.  OK, let me take a look at ones I've played, and ones I know a bit about even if I haven't played them.

I've played those in bold above: Dominion, Thunderstone, Quarriors, Ascension, Eminent Domain, and (by coercion) Resident Evil.  I'll talk about each of those separately, and the mechanics change(s) they added.

----

Ascension made the two most basic changes possible: the cards are always the same but randomized, and none of your cards are dead--VP are separate.  This leads to two problems.  First, it's essentially impossible to plan a strategy; you have no idea which cards will appear in the row, so you have to build your strategy around what other players choose, and what comes up at random.  It's a tactical game.  Second, because there are no cards that decrease the power of your deck, there is no inherent slowdown; in fact, many of the most powerful and expensive cards also increase your score, creating positive rather than negative feedback.

Thunderstone made a number of mechanical changes.  None of your cards are dead, though many don't lend you much power; some of your cards can level up as in an RPG; you have multiple options for how you will play each turn.  One option increases your deck power, while the other earns you points and experience.  Note that, once again, there are no dead cards; every purchase or combat adds some value to your deck, which means positive feedback again.  In addition, Thunderstone tries, I think, to be too much "not like Dominion," which means they added all this fiddly stuff (light, XP, the Thunderstone itself) that don't so much enhance the game as distinguish it from Dominion.  I think it's safe to say that a mechanic that doesn't enhance the game is a bad mechanic.

Quarriors takes the basics of Dominion and puts them on dice, then adds combat and--once again--separates victory points from the "deck," making positive feedback again the norm.  (I'm sensing a theme here!)  It generates more random "hands" by having you roll dice each time, which is interesting but not really an exciting change.

Resident Evil is the most Dominion-like of all of these, to the point that it comes very close to being a pure clone, right down to certain costs.  Sure, you have a character with special powers, and you have combat (which uses your main resource in different ways), but when your main resource is in 10, 20, and 30 denominations that cost 0, 30, and 60 respectively, it's really really hard not to immediately look at what other cards are directly copied from Dominion (Answer: a lot.)

Eminent Domain is one of my favorite games right now, and of the games I've played here it's the one that introduces completely different mechanics while maintaining some of the elegance of Dominion.  While no cards are actively bad, as you gather basic cards (and you're forced to do so!) your deck becomes clogged, as the only way to do much is to have multiples of the same card type in your hand.  This gets alleviated by the fact that, unlike other deck builders, EmDo allows you to keep cards from turn to turn.  Those two mechanics changes make for a very different game dynamic in terms of deck management; and because they're truly new, EmDo is simpler than, say, Thunderstone, while still being utterly different from Dominion.  The fact that much of what you do is outside your deck makes it much less of a "pure" deck builder.

----

Of the rest of the games on that list, what I know are only tidbits.  I've heard Nightfall is somewhat comparable to Thunderstone.  I've heard the ST:TNG game is insanely complex.  I've heard that both it and the Penny Arcade game suffer from what I call competitive co-op syndrome: the game is cooperative yet, for some reason, there are conditions that make one person the "winner."  I've heard good things about Legendary and Nightfall, and quite a mix about A Few Acres of Snow (like a terrible imbalance).

Several of the games (Ascension in particular, but also AFAOS and I believe Arctic Scavengers) lack the equal-access aspect of Dominion.

OK, that's my (counts) probably at least 20 cents.  Anyone know much about the other games?
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

PitzerMike

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 131
  • Longtime Pearldiver
  • Respect: +110
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #26 on: July 31, 2013, 10:33:02 am »
0

I don't like Thunderstone as much as Dominion, but I think you're wrong about being unable to create a Dominion-style deck. What I've noticed is that while I'm not good at "dungeon crawl" type games in general, my skill at Dominion has carried over to Thunderstone to the point that I can win games using deck-building skills I learned from Dominion. While it's true that you can't ever build a completely reliable engine where you draw your deck every turn, for example, there are a fair number of trashing cards, and if those are available, you can make a quite-thin deck.

Basically what I've done in the past couple games is spend a really long time just going to the village. Just trashing cards, gaining XP if there's any card that gives XP from the village, and getting just a couple power cards in my deck. Then, when I'm several points behind because everyone else has been going to the dungeon, I hit the dungeon. And at this point I have a deck that can take out my choice of monster with almost any hand I'm dealt. I'll often only have 12 cards in my deck at this point, so I'll be seeing my whole deck every other turn. Even if I can only reliably kill something every other turn, that's better than other players who are becoming bloated with low-vp monster cards and I overtake them.

Very interesting, thank you!
Maybe it also gets better with later expansions.
I think I only played vanilla + the first expansion or something.
Which do you have?
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #27 on: July 31, 2013, 12:09:46 pm »
+1

I don't like Thunderstone as much as Dominion, but I think you're wrong about being unable to create a Dominion-style deck. What I've noticed is that while I'm not good at "dungeon crawl" type games in general, my skill at Dominion has carried over to Thunderstone to the point that I can win games using deck-building skills I learned from Dominion. While it's true that you can't ever build a completely reliable engine where you draw your deck every turn, for example, there are a fair number of trashing cards, and if those are available, you can make a quite-thin deck.

Basically what I've done in the past couple games is spend a really long time just going to the village. Just trashing cards, gaining XP if there's any card that gives XP from the village, and getting just a couple power cards in my deck. Then, when I'm several points behind because everyone else has been going to the dungeon, I hit the dungeon. And at this point I have a deck that can take out my choice of monster with almost any hand I'm dealt. I'll often only have 12 cards in my deck at this point, so I'll be seeing my whole deck every other turn. Even if I can only reliably kill something every other turn, that's better than other players who are becoming bloated with low-vp monster cards and I overtake them.

Very interesting, thank you!
Maybe it also gets better with later expansions.
I think I only played vanilla + the first expansion or something.
Which do you have?

I only own the first base set, but the last few games I played were on a friend's set, which included cards from a bunch of sets (it was also the Epic variant). From everything I've heard, base-set only has all sorts of rules and balance issues, and they've come a long way in fixing that in later expansions. Also, there's the new Thunderstone Advance, which isn't just an expansion but a complete re-release. But as a whole, I think people who really like it like it for the theme / the dungeon crawl aspect, not as much as a deck-building game.
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

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #28 on: July 31, 2013, 12:17:25 pm »
+1

Thunderstone made a number of mechanical changes.  None of your cards are dead, though many don't lend you much power; some of your cards can level up as in an RPG; you have multiple options for how you will play each turn.  One option increases your deck power, while the other earns you points and experience.  Note that, once again, there are no dead cards; every purchase or combat adds some value to your deck, which means positive feedback again.

I'm pretty sure this is incorrect. Some monsters are only worth VP; not anything else.  Unless you're counting the XP you get as a positive influence for your deck, which you could.
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

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3249
  • Respect: +5459
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #29 on: July 31, 2013, 12:22:12 pm »
+2

It may be worth pointing out that it isn't really fair to compare these other deck builders to Dominion, at least not the Dominion most of us likely have in mind: namely,  Dominion + eight expansions + promos, totaling over 200 kingdom cards and costing hundreds of US dollars retail.  Many of us were reintroduced to plain Base Dominion when we stingily played on Goko, and it is not remotely as engaging or deep long term.
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #30 on: July 31, 2013, 12:36:25 pm »
0

FWIW, the positive feedback might be something that some people enjoy.  It can be fun to become an unstoppable juggernaut.

I watched a recent Dice Tower review for the Thunderstone starter set and they described a mechanic for keeping cards like you (Kirian) described for Eminent Domain.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #31 on: July 31, 2013, 12:41:29 pm »
+2

It may be worth pointing out that it isn't really fair to compare these other deck builders to Dominion, at least not the Dominion most of us likely have in mind: namely,  Dominion + eight expansions + promos, totaling over 200 kingdom cards and costing hundreds of US dollars retail.  Many of us were reintroduced to plain Base Dominion when we stingily played on Goko, and it is not remotely as engaging or deep long term.

But I think base-only Dominion is only a boring game when compared to all-sets Dominion, or perhaps when having spent insane amounts of time on this forum and playing thousands of games on Iso where we because so good at Dominion that base is almost solved. I played a LOT of base-only Dominion before this forum and before Iso, and never got sick of it.
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

Archetype

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 992
  • Suffers from Fancy Play Syndrom
  • Respect: +690
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #32 on: July 31, 2013, 12:48:49 pm »
0

I'd rather play Ascension over base-Dominion. But the addition of expansions is really what pushes it over for me.
Logged

Ratsia

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 168
  • Respect: +113
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #33 on: July 31, 2013, 04:07:21 pm »
+2

I'm going to list the major "Deck/Pool Building" games by number of ratings here; games with few ratings are unlikely to have been played by many people, and can reasonably be ignored for purposes of this discussion.
It seems I've played eleven of those, even though it always feels like I'm not that familiar with deck-builders as a genre; after all, I've never tried even Ascension or Legendary, two of the games that often get mentioned besides Dominion.

Quote
Blood Bowl Team Manager (134, what the hell is this?)
It's crap and it's perhaps a bit of stretch to call it a deck-builder. Everyone starts with a deck of BB players and during the game gets a few more and often gets rid of a few bad ones, but building the deck is not really the core of the game. Also, it has a lot of other components as well.

Some other games on that list are perhaps still a bit further away from "proper" deck-builders, such as Fizzzt!.

Quote
Eaten by Zombies (1814)
This one is actually quite funny, a kind of reverse deck-builder where the decks get gradually worse and worse. It's almost like playing a Dominion game where some external power constantly plays cursers and cards like Saboteur. Unfortunately it's not really that balanced.
Logged

Tables

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2816
  • Build more Bridges in the King's Court!
  • Respect: +3347
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #34 on: July 31, 2013, 04:30:49 pm »
+4

I'd note that you don't really need all the expansions to make Dominion a great game. One expansion is really enough to have a lot of variety, two is ample for a fun game. The fact you have a huge choice of expansions beyond that if you want to go deeper is a pure positive.
Logged
...spin-offs are still better for all of the previously cited reasons.
But not strictly better, because the spinoff can have a different cost than the expansion.

GeronimoRex

  • Navigator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 78
  • Respect: +49
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #35 on: July 31, 2013, 04:43:32 pm »
+1

I'd note that you don't really need all the expansions to make Dominion a great game. One expansion is really enough to have a lot of variety, two is ample for a fun game. The fact you have a huge choice of expansions beyond that if you want to go deeper is a pure positive.

I'd agree strongly... We started with the Big Box (base/alchemy/prosperity) and that was really more than we needed. We've since been gifted Seaside and Dark Ages, but neither is really necessary... I've borrowed other sets so I've got familiarity with most of the cards.

I'd guess that for most regular gamers, 3 sets (Base/Prosperity/other big set) would keep them happy virtually forever, and would provide enough possible game variants to keep Dominion a mainstay for years... of course, since there are more sets, we're all going to want them, but that doesn't mean they are a necessary add to ensure fun and strategic gaming.

I include Prosperity with base as the two most "necessary" sets because I feel like the option of Plat/Col add some of the greatest strategic variance to the boards... The same kingdom w and w/o Plat/Col can play radically differently and require totally different strategies... also, I've found a lot of more casual gamers appreciate the slightly slower pace of Plat/Col games. On their own, I think base/Prosp need something else to shake up the overall set of available kingdom cards, but whether that is Seaside/Hinterlands/Dark Ages doesn't really matter in terms of long term enjoyment and replayability.
Logged

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2644
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3388
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #36 on: July 31, 2013, 05:37:01 pm »
+1

I'd note that you don't really need all the expansions to make Dominion a great game. One expansion is really enough to have a lot of variety, two is ample for a fun game. The fact you have a huge choice of expansions beyond that if you want to go deeper is a pure positive.

Yes, emphatically agreed. Actually, it can be a whole lot of fun for regular players just two mix two sets, even simple sets. Intrigue and Hinterlands together are really a whole lot of fun.
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2587
  • Respect: +2479
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #37 on: July 31, 2013, 05:50:09 pm »
0

IRL I own the base set, 3 large expansions, and cornucopia. there are two small expansions and two large that I don't own, but really, I don't think buying them would add a whole lot. They all have fun cards and mechanics that would be cool to play with of course, but I mean, I'm never going to get bored of games with the ones I own. plus, if I got another expansion I'd need a new storage solution! right now I can fit them all in the base set box. I don't really enjoy my goko games hosted by someone who has all the expansions any more than an IRL game with 5 expansions.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12847
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Showdown
« Reply #38 on: July 31, 2013, 06:22:04 pm »
0

I'd note that you don't really need all the expansions to make Dominion a great game. One expansion is really enough to have a lot of variety, two is ample for a fun game. The fact you have a huge choice of expansions beyond that if you want to go deeper is a pure positive.

Yes, emphatically agreed. Actually, it can be a whole lot of fun for regular players just two mix two sets, even simple sets. Intrigue and Hinterlands together are really a whole lot of fun.
True. I have Guilds and Base on Goko and playing with just those two sets has been great so far. Though, I won't turn down a chance to play with all of the expansions either.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4787
  • Respect: +3412
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #39 on: August 01, 2013, 02:59:49 am »
0

I'd note that you don't really need all the expansions to make Dominion a great game. One expansion is really enough to have a lot of variety, two is ample for a fun game. The fact you have a huge choice of expansions beyond that if you want to go deeper is a pure positive.

Yes, emphatically agreed. Actually, it can be a whole lot of fun for regular players just two mix two sets, even simple sets. Intrigue and Hinterlands together are really a whole lot of fun.
I think it depends on how often you play. If you play thousands of games online like WW does, things can get samey fast enough that you really want all the sets. If you just play in real life, you can make do with fewer expansions.
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4381
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Showdown
« Reply #40 on: August 01, 2013, 07:15:43 am »
+2

FWIW, I think I'd still be pretty happy playing just base, at least for a few thousand games.

thespaceinvader

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 641
  • Respect: +120
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #41 on: August 01, 2013, 08:50:39 am »
0

Eaten By Zombies probably ought to be on the list - though, to my mind, it's not particularly good mostly because it is very lacking in numbers of cards, and a few bits of writing are nowhere near as tight as I'd like.

Thunderstone's OK.  Epic Thunderstone is more adventurey, but less deckbuildingy because it has a lot less control over what will be available at any given time.  I've not played Thunderstone Advanced yet, but I understand it to be an improvement.

It's definitely possible to get a solid engine going in Thunderstone; the difficulty is that a combat engine tends to suck in the village, and vice versa, so you're bad at half the game if you're good at the other, and you really do need both to win.

The real thing that makes Dominion awesome is the simple core rules, and the copious expansions that break them in controlled, reaonsably balanced, interesting ways.
Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4787
  • Respect: +3412
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #42 on: August 02, 2013, 02:34:39 am »
0

FWIW, I think I'd still be pretty happy playing just base, at least for a few thousand games.
Really, don't you think you're just going through the motions most of the time with base?

For me the cutoff point would likely be 100 games or so, not 1000+.
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

Polk5440

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1708
  • Respect: +1788
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #43 on: August 02, 2013, 12:41:39 pm »
0

Anyone respond to the original BGG post so Dice Tower knows we are trying to find someone?

It would be a shame if a non-f.ds person was picked to defend Dominion's honor.
Logged

Tables

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2816
  • Build more Bridges in the King's Court!
  • Respect: +3347
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #44 on: August 02, 2013, 01:54:45 pm »
0

theory said he PM'd them, didn't he?
Logged
...spin-offs are still better for all of the previously cited reasons.
But not strictly better, because the spinoff can have a different cost than the expansion.

Polk5440

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1708
  • Respect: +1788
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #45 on: August 02, 2013, 02:47:25 pm »
0

theory said he PM'd them, didn't he?

Ah, missed that post.
Logged

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2644
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3388
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #46 on: August 04, 2013, 12:33:18 am »
0

theory said he PM'd them, didn't he?

Well, I formally volunteer, but would absolutely yield to someone who is better informed about other deck building games.
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.

Ratsia

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 168
  • Respect: +113
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #47 on: August 04, 2013, 09:56:20 am »
+1

Sometimes that change of mechanic is all right; sometimes it was a disaster.
(clipped a lot)
and--once again--separates victory points from the "deck," making positive feedback again the norm.  (I'm sensing a theme here!)
Related to these, I just remembered that Trains was not on your list, due to too few ratings (not surprisingly, given that it was originally released only in Japanese and shipping it to Europe/US cost a ton of money). It's one of the better deck-builders, and in particular the new mechanic is easy to pinpoint and it is actually a good one. It's otherwise very standard Dominion-like deck-builder with a set of "kingdom" cards chosen amongst a larger set and fixed money and VP cards that are always available, but it adds spatial dimension. Besides the cards it has a separate map where the players can lay track and build stations (well, lay cubes) to expand their railway network that must always be connected.

Effectively the map provides an alternative way to score, one where the players are directly fighting against each other to reach the cities first. The spatial constraint is an interesting addition to Dominion since it encourages, to a degree, early scoring and makes it possible to prevent another player from scoring certain locations. Even though the map is separate every action that lays track or builds stations also adds "confusion" cards in the deck, which prevents the positive feedback of many other games.

The spatial dimension is such a clever addition that the basic mechanics of Trains might be argued to beat those of Dominion, especially since it does not notably add complexity; one can explain the whole map part of the game in a few seconds and building on the map is anyway simply one of the actions written in the cards. However, as a game it is not as good due to lack of variety (no expansions yet, besides extra maps), and I would be a bit surprised if it was equally well balanced; can't say for sure since I've only played it for a few games.

Nevertheless, I still strongly recommend everyone to try it if given a chance.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2013, 09:57:31 am by Ratsia »
Logged

sitnaltax

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +490
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #48 on: August 04, 2013, 10:55:18 am »
+7

I've actually played quite a few of these games. Here are some quick rundowns if it's still relevant:

A couple overall comments: First, I think the fundamental strength of Dominion is that the game is about trying to get the right cards into your hand each turn, and the way you do this is build your deck. All of the cards either do something good (Gold, Sea Hag), or work to change the way you draw cards (Village, Lab, Smithy), or both. Most of the first-generation clones had the cards do "something exciting" . But it turns out that if you combine deckbuilding with cards that don't change your deck or hand, you're just creating a slow action-drafting game and the fact that you have five different cards each turn doesn't matter.

Second, for whatever reason every designer's first instinct when messing with Dominion is to add a second currency (and usually call it "fighting"). In theory, I guess this could be interesting. In practice I haven't seen a game yet where it added much. (I'm still not enamored of the Potion-cost cards in Dominion, either.) But it lets you have a thing called "fighting" and there are definitely consumers who respond well to that, judging based on what Kickstarters succeed.

Thunderstone: I played this once and liked it a lot. I played it a few more times and liked it noticably less each time. It takes way too long and the interactions between the cards are very blunt. The first edition also had weird card layout and questionable balance. They released an entire overhauled game, Thunderstone Advance, which is better, but has the same fundamental weaknesses and definitely still takes too long on the table. Remember in the introduction where I complained about not being able to do much to make the cards in your hand work together? Well, Thunderstone Advance came up with a Band-Aid rule that lets you spend your turn to discard as much as you want and draw up to your hand size. It's better than nothing, I guess.

Arctic Scavengers: The idea of having every card be able to do one of several things to varying abilities is a neat idea, but I don't think the pieces work well together. One of the actions is called "fighting," which gets people excited. They would be much less excited about the mechanism if you called it what it is, which is a "blind bid". There's a second currency, medicine, but you can't just buy it; you have to get lucky digging through the "junk pile". Yes, imagine if half the cards in Dominion had Potion costs and the only way to get Potion was through the Black Market. Luckily there are cards that let you look at more Black Market cards!

Nightfall: OK, it's Dominion with directed attacks and the goal is to get the most Curses into the other players' decks. Sound good? You can only play one action a turn, except that there's this arbitrary "chaining" mechanism that allows you to play more as long as you can match the colors of cards played by you or the player previous in turn order. The next time someone complains about Dominion's theme, ask them what the hell the colored moons in Nightfall have to do with anything.

Despite my dislike of the game, Nightfall had a really interesting deckbuilding innovation that I admire. You get an initial deck of low-powered cards, which span most of the game mechanisms in an easily understood way, and trash themselves when you play them. This helps novices get a grasp of the game easily, and provides a built-in transition from "starting deck" to "midgame deck" without having to explicitly introduce cards that mess with your deck. I like that. I'm much less impressed by the idea of drafting individual supply piles before the game begins. In theory it leads to different, asymmetric decks during the game; in practice it requires you to make the most important decisions before the game begins.

Ascension: At its heart this is a very basic Dominion clone with two changes: a second currency, which is fighting of course, and buying cards from a rotating, not fixed, supply. I thought the game was thin, but it seems to have a strong following, so I am still waiting for the long-anticipated Android version so I can give it a shot. I think it's definitely best with two players, where your choices to buy or not buy from the center are much more strongly related to your outcome.

Quarriors: I think this is a fine game in that it lives up to what it says on the tin, and what it says on the tin is "The Game of Uber Strategic Hexahedron Monster Combat Mayhem!". The idea of having multiple cards that refer to the same die is brilliant. The game itself has a lot of luck, but you signed up for that when you walked in, and there's a fair amount of strategy in choosing between your different purchasing options, too. I highly recommend the advanced variant in which you can buy two dice a turn and to score a die, you must cull that die--it makes the blunt strategy of "always buy the most expensive thing available" less dominant.

Puzzle Strike: Of the games that could reasonably be called Dominion clones, this one is definitely my favorite. This is because I think it actually keeps the good parts, while introducing interesting innovations. The Action cards (chips) have different colors and many effects that provide +Actions only give you actions of a specific color. There is lots of drawing and Actions with interesting effects, which makes the mix of chips you have very relevant. The primary innovation is the victory condition--as you attack your opponent, you bring them closer to losing and yourself farther away--but the closer you are to losing in this way, the more chips you draw, which lets you either buy big chips or (hopefully) play your big combo. The second innovation is the character chips, which lead to an asymmetric game. For advanced players, the way you play a board will definitely depend on both your and your opponent's characters.

This is not to say there aren't weaknesses. First, the game was clearly designed exclusively as a 2p game. The 3-4p rules just don't work with the "unbalanced seesaw" pacing and victory conditions. The game has been through three editions, with the chips changing in each, and has earned some IMHO justified criticism for not bothering to get it right the first time. (Remember the story about one pile ending Dominion, and the dominant Duchy-rush strategy that some playtester showed off? That's the sort of mistake the pre-nerf Combine was, and good development should have caught it.)

Eminent Domain: This game is its own animal. The deckbuilding and play are completely different than any of the Dominion-like games I've talked about above, and yet the deckbuilding still works and is important. You get only one Action a turn, and almost nothing gives you any more--then you also get a Role, which allows you to play any number of matching cards in your hand to increase the effect. But when you take a Role, everyone else can play the matching effect too! Eminent Domain has a rhythm which takes some getting used to but I really enjoy it.

Mage Knight: The deckbuilding is only a small part of this adventure/exploration game, and I wouldn't really want to talk about it in a discussion of deckbuilding games. I thought the player interaction was pretty minimal, and I found myself wanting to play solo--because the puzzle of a single turn is fascinating, but the downtime between turns was pretty extreme. But it's big, bulky, and fiddly, and what I really want is to play this on PC or tablet.

By the way, Ratsia, thank you for your quick review of Trains. It's been on my radar as something I want to try. I have high hopes, but then I had high hopes for a lot of these games.

Edit: because I do all my best game thoughts in the shower...

Friday: This is a cool solitaire game. You need to line up your cards to pass a series of challenges. When you pass a challenge, you add the challenge card to your deck--turn it upside and it's an in-hand power. The trouble is that your deck starts out very, very bad. When you fail a challenge, you lose HP, but you are allowed to cull the bad cards that helped you fail. I enjoyed the game and admire the design, but like Mage Knight, I want to play solitaire games like this with electronic aid.

Core Worlds: A lot of people like this game, but I'm not one of them. The fact that you see each card only a small number of times limits the interest of the deckbuilding aspect, and the interactions are blunt. (There are Robot cards, cards that give Robot bonuses, and an endgame card that gives you points for having Robots.) The fact that there is a game arc is interesting, but the five different-deck phases make it feel a bit forced. Also, this game is long, in the 90-120 minute range.

Fantastiqa: Of all the games listed here, this is the one I dislike the most strongly. There are not one, not two, not three, but NINE different currencies, all of which are exactly identical. The game is built with this lavish fantasy theme, but swords work the same way as wands work the same way as spiderwebs. You use your currencies to wander around a tiny board picking up cards in a way that doesn't matter. The quests that come up are random, and require you to get 2-3 each of 2-3 different currencies. The way you get these to line up in your hand is, you sit at the appropriate destination and use the action that lets you pass your turn and discard only the cards you don't want until you've drawn everything you need. Some of the art is very attractive and well-chosen public-domain art, which is the game's best redeeming feature. Unfortunately, this is marred by the iconography and other graphic elements, which are awful horrible clip art; this is particularly jarring when juxtaposed against the lavish paintings used elsewhere.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2013, 02:23:41 pm by sitnaltax »
Logged

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1102
  • Respect: +2144
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #49 on: August 04, 2013, 06:23:33 pm »
+10

Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #50 on: August 04, 2013, 06:37:23 pm »
+3

I have no idea how well Puzzle Strike actually plays, but Sirlin gets huge negative points from me because he ripped off Puzzle Strike's chip design from someone at BGG.
Logged

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3431
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2706
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #51 on: August 04, 2013, 06:40:15 pm »
0

I have no idea how well Puzzle Strike actually plays, but Sirlin gets huge negative points from me because he ripped off Puzzle Strike's chip design from someone at BGG.

Wait, that wouldn't work for deck-inspection...
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: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #52 on: August 04, 2013, 06:49:56 pm »
0

I have no idea how well Puzzle Strike actually plays, but Sirlin gets huge negative points from me because he ripped off Puzzle Strike's chip design from someone at BGG.

Wait, that wouldn't work for deck-inspection...

Yeah, chips probably don't work well for a few different mechanics.  You'd probably need privacy screens because big hands would be hard to handle as well.  For deck inspection, you probably pull out a chip and either leave it out in their "discard" or set it aside to be their "next draw".
Logged

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3431
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2706
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #53 on: August 04, 2013, 06:58:06 pm »
0

The whole chip idea for deckbuilding is fine, but it doesn't work for Dominion...  I wonder why the guy did it...
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

mail-mi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1298
  • Shuffle iT Username: mail-mi
  • Come play some Forum Mafia with us!
  • Respect: +1364
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #54 on: August 04, 2013, 07:00:27 pm »
0

The whole chip idea for deckbuilding is fine, but it doesn't work for Dominion...  I wonder why the guy did it...
You could have a draw bag and a discard bag.
Logged
I currently imagine mail-mi wearing a dark trenchcoat and a bowler hat, hunched over a bit, toothpick in his mouth, holding a gun in his pocket.  One bead of sweat trickling down his nose.

'And what is it that ye shall hope for? Behold I say unto you that ye shall have hope through the atonement of Christ and the power of his resurrection, to be raised unto life eternal, and this because of your faith in him according to the promise." - Moroni 7:41, the Book of Mormon

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3431
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2706
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #55 on: August 04, 2013, 07:05:55 pm »
0

The whole chip idea for deckbuilding is fine, but it doesn't work for Dominion...  I wonder why the guy did it...
You could have a draw bag and a discard bag.

But what about things on top of your deck?
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

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7096
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9411
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #56 on: August 04, 2013, 07:42:57 pm »
0

The whole chip idea for deckbuilding is fine, but it doesn't work for Dominion...  I wonder why the guy did it...

It worked just fine for base Dominion as I recall.  However, the advent of Courtyard pretty much killed that ability.
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

mail-mi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1298
  • Shuffle iT Username: mail-mi
  • Come play some Forum Mafia with us!
  • Respect: +1364
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #57 on: August 04, 2013, 07:48:41 pm »
0

The whole chip idea for deckbuilding is fine, but it doesn't work for Dominion...  I wonder why the guy did it...
You could have a draw bag and a discard bag.

But what about things on top of your deck?
You could have a small "deck" of chips that represent the top of your deck.
Logged
I currently imagine mail-mi wearing a dark trenchcoat and a bowler hat, hunched over a bit, toothpick in his mouth, holding a gun in his pocket.  One bead of sweat trickling down his nose.

'And what is it that ye shall hope for? Behold I say unto you that ye shall have hope through the atonement of Christ and the power of his resurrection, to be raised unto life eternal, and this because of your faith in him according to the promise." - Moroni 7:41, the Book of Mormon

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1856
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #58 on: August 04, 2013, 08:05:55 pm »
+1

He mentioned somewhere that if you know the top card(s) of your deck, you'd just put the subsequent drawn chips in a small stack next to your draw bag.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #59 on: August 04, 2013, 08:08:02 pm »
0

I'm not sure the original creator's intention behind using chips.  Might have just been for fun.  But other people have found the chips better than cards for people who have trouble shuffling due to disability or illness.
Logged

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3431
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2706
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #60 on: August 04, 2013, 08:11:01 pm »
0

The whole chip idea for deckbuilding is fine, but it doesn't work for Dominion...  I wonder why the guy did it...

It worked just fine for base Dominion as I recall.  However, the advent of Courtyard pretty much killed that ability.

Well, there's the Spy and Bureaucrat...
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

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2849
  • Respect: +1559
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #61 on: August 04, 2013, 08:21:10 pm »
0

The whole chip idea for deckbuilding is fine, but it doesn't work for Dominion...  I wonder why the guy did it...

It worked just fine for base Dominion as I recall.  However, the advent of Courtyard pretty much killed that ability.
Spy?
Logged

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3431
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2706
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #62 on: August 04, 2013, 08:33:09 pm »
0

The whole chip idea for deckbuilding is fine, but it doesn't work for Dominion...  I wonder why the guy did it...

It worked just fine for base Dominion as I recall.  However, the advent of Courtyard pretty much killed that ability.
Spy?

The whole chip idea for deckbuilding is fine, but it doesn't work for Dominion...  I wonder why the guy did it...

It worked just fine for base Dominion as I recall.  However, the advent of Courtyard pretty much killed that ability.

Well, there's the Spy and Bureaucrat...
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

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1856
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #63 on: August 04, 2013, 08:40:17 pm »
0

He mentioned somewhere that if you know the top card(s) of your deck, you'd just put the subsequent drawn chips in a small stack next to your draw bag.

Seriously, guys.
Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3249
  • Respect: +5459
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #64 on: August 04, 2013, 09:13:27 pm »
0

I have no idea how well Puzzle Strike actually plays, but Sirlin gets huge negative points from me because he ripped off Puzzle Strike's chip design from someone at BGG.

Wow.  I've seen that linked many times, but I always assumed that the image was only a photoshop making fun of Puzzle Strike being a clone of Dominion.  Now that I see the "secret history" of Puzzle Strike, I am appalled.
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

shMerker

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 357
  • Respect: +389
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #65 on: August 04, 2013, 09:38:36 pm »
+3

I'm not sure the original creator's intention behind using chips.  Might have just been for fun.  But other people have found the chips better than cards for people who have trouble shuffling due to disability or illness.

Or they just don't like shuffling. It can add significantly to playtime so it makes sense that someone would be motivated to cut down on it as much as possible.
Logged
"I take no responsibility whatsoever for those who get dizzy and pass out from running around this post."

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5477
  • Respect: +2860
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #66 on: August 04, 2013, 10:43:23 pm »
0

I've probably played Puzzle Strike more extensively than anyone else on the forum.  So if that is somehow seen as the most likely adversary, hit me up. 
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #67 on: August 04, 2013, 10:45:21 pm »
0

Maybe it would be helpful to ask Tom Vasel what other deck builders are most likely to be discussed, to allow any potential guest to prepare (or judge their own qualifications).
Logged

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5477
  • Respect: +2860
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #68 on: August 04, 2013, 11:04:50 pm »
+2

Here's a link to the thread that caused me to quit Puzzle Strike:
http://www.fantasystrike.com/forums/index.php?threads/why-is-bank-screw-deliberately-included-in-this-game.5455/#post-162420

Rather ironically, Dominion is far more suited to competitive play because a best out of three Puzzle Strike match is wildly inaccurate.  Game one is heavily affected by who gets hit hardest by bank screw, even an expert will lose if they have two character chips with "+1 action, only for red chips", and the bank has no red chips.

After the RNG picks a winner for game one, it's like breaking serve.  The player who lost the most recent game gets to swap out one card from the bank with any other card in existence.  (The character with Throne Room as a character chip might bring Bridge in, for a real example).  So the second and third games will usually go to the guy with the edge, making tournament games essentially best of 1.

I tried playing in Puzzle Strike tournaments, it was not satisfying at all.  I got knocked out by a guy who bought 3 f******ing Copper turn 2, and I promise you, no, it's not a thing.
Logged

Mole5000

  • Alchemist
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 37
  • Respect: +44
    • View Profile
    • Geometric Games
Re: Showdown
« Reply #69 on: August 05, 2013, 07:23:22 am »
+3

I've played Quarriors and Ascension.  Both of them add an extra level of randomness that I find unappealing.  Getting a bad draw of dice in Quarriors and then rolling sucky is like a one-two punch of fuck you from lady luck.

EDIT: With Quarriors I feel there's a really stellar game that just isn't there as it stands.  Ascension I just found way too random in 4 player - there's a chance it could improve a lot as a 2 player game.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2013, 12:12:12 pm by Mole5000 »
Logged

Tables

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2816
  • Build more Bridges in the King's Court!
  • Respect: +3347
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #70 on: November 27, 2013, 09:14:18 pm »
0

Does anyone know if this actually ended up happening, and if so, where I can find it? I had a look at the BGG thread, and there's a single episode up there which has TS3 vs. Eclipse and Resistance vs. Mafia, but I don't see an episode 2 linked anywhere.
Logged
...spin-offs are still better for all of the previously cited reasons.
But not strictly better, because the spinoff can have a different cost than the expansion.

Archetype

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 992
  • Suffers from Fancy Play Syndrom
  • Respect: +690
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #71 on: November 28, 2013, 01:48:04 am »
0

Does anyone know if this actually ended up happening, and if so, where I can find it? I had a look at the BGG thread, and there's a single episode up there which has TS3 vs. Eclipse and Resistance vs. Mafia, but I don't see an episode 2 linked anywhere.
ITunes has a total of 6 episodes listed. I've only ever listened to the two you named. I don't know if the Dominion has happened yet, but I'll be really bummed out if someone from here didn't go and represent the game. The Resistance vs. Mafia one was really interesting.

Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4787
  • Respect: +3412
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #72 on: November 28, 2013, 04:07:56 am »
0

But Resistance vs Mafia is easy.

Resistance: No one gets eliminated, groups up to 10.
Mafia: Elimination puts players more on edge, facilitates larger groups.
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

Archetype

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 992
  • Suffers from Fancy Play Syndrom
  • Respect: +690
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #73 on: November 28, 2013, 11:12:50 am »
+1

But Resistance vs Mafia is easy.

Resistance: No one gets eliminated, groups up to 10.
Mafia: Elimination puts players more on edge, facilitates larger groups.
Resistance: No Mod, IRL has more proof than "I'm Town, I'm Town, I'm Town", no elimination
Mafia: Elimination, players could lose interest if they're just a Vanilla Townie.

My general opinion is that I'd play Resistance with <10 people and Mafia with 11+.
Logged

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2644
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3388
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #74 on: November 28, 2013, 11:20:27 am »
+1

Yeah, I mean it's no contest. Resistance is a better game for a small number of people, and mafia is better for a lot of people.

I also think mafia is better online and Resistance is better in person.
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.

Schneau

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1174
  • Shuffle iT Username: Schneau
  • Respect: +1461
    • View Profile
    • Rainwave
Re: Showdown
« Reply #75 on: November 29, 2013, 09:03:54 am »
0

I've heard the first 4 or 5 episodes, and no Dominion.
Logged

Schneau

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1174
  • Shuffle iT Username: Schneau
  • Respect: +1461
    • View Profile
    • Rainwave
Re: Showdown
« Reply #76 on: December 24, 2013, 07:54:24 pm »
+1

Well, they came out with the Dominion vs. All Other Deckbuilders episode. Is anyone from here on it? I didn't recognize either of the names of the guys defending Dominion, and no one has mentioned Dominion Strategy yet, which is disappointing. You can listen to the episode here and vote on it here. It would be great to rock the poll and show how much the Dominion community cares more than any other deckbuilder's community.
Logged

heron

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1055
  • Shuffle iT Username: heron
  • Respect: +1183
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #77 on: December 24, 2013, 11:02:46 pm »
+6

"It felt to me as if it had been designed in its entirety and then split into it's expansions..."
I wonder why it feels that way?  :P

"The people who really like dominion haven't stuck around through all of these expansions..."
You know, except for us.

"Ascension's two currency thing is so amazingly innovative."
Oh wait dominion did that first.

(Just my thoughts)
« Last Edit: December 24, 2013, 11:26:40 pm by heron »
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3603
  • Respect: +6121
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Showdown
« Reply #78 on: December 25, 2013, 02:10:30 am »
+1

They didn't even bother contacting me.  I don't really put much stock into these things any more, most are pretty amateurishly done.
Logged

tolenmar

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 121
  • Respect: +45
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #79 on: December 25, 2013, 09:55:32 am »
+2

Most of these are pretty amateur, but Tom Vasel and Dice Tower have been around for a while, and they have a pretty good production going. I usually look at their reviews before I buy anything.

Having said that, I really didnt agree with most of what the con's said in that podcast.  I've tried to get into thunderstone and ascension, but they just don't do it for me.
Logged

Tables

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2816
  • Build more Bridges in the King's Court!
  • Respect: +3347
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #80 on: December 25, 2013, 02:28:20 pm »
+1

I've never really enjoyed Dice Tower. It's a shame that they didn't get anyone from F:DS, especially theory, who would have been basically the perfect person to defend the game. Judging by the poll, it won anyway, though.
Logged
...spin-offs are still better for all of the previously cited reasons.
But not strictly better, because the spinoff can have a different cost than the expansion.

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5477
  • Respect: +2860
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #81 on: December 25, 2013, 07:38:15 pm »
+3

I've never really enjoyed Dice Tower. It's a shame that they didn't get anyone from F:DS, especially theory, who would have been basically the perfect person to defend the game. Judging by the poll, it won anyway, though.
Dominion has the best sales.  Dominion probably didn't win due to people making an informed decision about how it compares to other deckbuilders.  It would have, but it probably didn't.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12847
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Showdown
« Reply #82 on: December 25, 2013, 08:10:28 pm »
0

I've never really enjoyed Dice Tower. It's a shame that they didn't get anyone from F:DS, especially theory, who would have been basically the perfect person to defend the game. Judging by the poll, it won anyway, though.
Dominion has the best sales.  Dominion probably didn't win due to people making an informed decision about how it compares to other deckbuilders.  It would have, but it probably didn't.
Good point. I certainly voted for Dominion even though it's the only deckbuilder I've played.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4787
  • Respect: +3412
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #83 on: January 02, 2014, 05:36:17 am »
+2

"It felt to me as if it had been designed in its entirety and then split into it's expansions..."
I wonder why it feels that way?  :P

"The people who really like dominion haven't stuck around through all of these expansions..."
You know, except for us.

"Ascension's two currency thing is so amazingly innovative."
Oh wait dominion did that first.

(Just my thoughts)
Well, expansions aside, the two currency thing is not so innovative in Dominion as Potions are very, very limited.

The only interesting thing about having two currencies is that there should be a point where you want to cross over from amassing the first to amassing the second.

Say the currencies are coins and swords, you'll want coins first to buy stuff that gets you swords and later you want those swords to get points. That's basically how two currencies work and what they try to accomplish. If you mix things up early you can only afford either bad coin cards or bad sword cards and that won't get you anywhere fast. So the sole purpose of multiple currencies is to force you to switch gears.

Dominion solves this aspect by making you buy green cards and the good part about that is that you can still use your regular currency to keep buying stuff while you're buying green cards as well, so you have less "junk" (wrong currency) during the end game, only the green cards you bought (and possible junk your opponent gave you).
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12847
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Showdown
« Reply #84 on: January 02, 2014, 07:17:21 am »
+1

"It felt to me as if it had been designed in its entirety and then split into it's expansions..."
I wonder why it feels that way?  :P

"The people who really like dominion haven't stuck around through all of these expansions..."
You know, except for us.

"Ascension's two currency thing is so amazingly innovative."
Oh wait dominion did that first.

(Just my thoughts)
Well, expansions aside, the two currency thing is not so innovative in Dominion as Potions are very, very limited.

The only interesting thing about having two currencies is that there should be a point where you want to cross over from amassing the first to amassing the second.

Say the currencies are coins and swords, you'll want coins first to buy stuff that gets you swords and later you want those swords to get points. That's basically how two currencies work and what they try to accomplish. If you mix things up early you can only afford either bad coin cards or bad sword cards and that won't get you anywhere fast. So the sole purpose of multiple currencies is to force you to switch gears.

Dominion solves this aspect by making you buy green cards and the good part about that is that you can still use your regular currency to keep buying stuff while you're buying green cards as well, so you have less "junk" (wrong currency) during the end game, only the green cards you bought (and possible junk your opponent gave you).
Or, you can use two currencies in the game to force players to choose between the sword strategy and the coin strategy. Additionally, it's possible that the cheap coin cards and the cheap sword cards are good enough to make a mid range strategy sometimes viable.

But in actuality, there are more currencies in Dominion than just two: cards are kind of a currency in many ways (increasing your deck size by 1 is a cost that most cards have, decreasing your hand size by 1 is a cost that most cards have when you play them), actions and buys are currencies too, etc. The things you can do are limited, and $ and P costs aren't the only thing limiting it.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Archetype

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 992
  • Suffers from Fancy Play Syndrom
  • Respect: +690
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #85 on: January 02, 2014, 02:06:13 pm »
+4

In my opinion, the things that make Dominion my favorite deck builder are:
A) Negative feedback via victory cards
B) The "one action" that actually makes you monitor what you're putting into your deck
Logged

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: Showdown
« Reply #86 on: January 02, 2014, 06:54:01 pm »
+3

In my opinion, the things that make Dominion my favorite deck builder are:
A) Negative feedback via victory cards
B) The "one action" that actually makes you monitor what you're putting into your deck
B is especially critical.  The one action rule has a profound effect on overall strategy that can make certain cards function drastically differently depending on the kingdom.  As I think of it, this cliche (for us) is one of the things that makes Dominion so great: the cards work together in such interesting ways that vary a lot depending on what else is available.

The rotating supply track of games like Ascension severely limit the depth of the strategy space and hence the replayability.  That may or may not matter to you.  (I'm not saying games can't be compared, just that it depends on your criteria.)
Logged
Gotta be efficient when most of your hand coordination is spent trying to apply mascara to your beard.
flies Dominionates on youtube

Archetype

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 992
  • Suffers from Fancy Play Syndrom
  • Respect: +690
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #87 on: January 02, 2014, 11:43:34 pm »
0

In my opinion, the things that make Dominion my favorite deck builder are:
A) Negative feedback via victory cards
B) The "one action" that actually makes you monitor what you're putting into your deck
B is especially critical.  The one action rule has a profound effect on overall strategy that can make certain cards function drastically differently depending on the kingdom.  As I think of it, this cliche (for us) is one of the things that makes Dominion so great: the cards work together in such interesting ways that vary a lot depending on what else is available.

The rotating supply track of games like Ascension severely limit the depth of the strategy space and hence the replayability.  That may or may not matter to you.  (I'm not saying games can't be compared, just that it depends on your criteria.)
Exactly. That's why I think Dominion is the best "pure" deckbuilder. What I've seen is designers taking Dominion, stripping it of its "1 Action" mechanism and then throwing in a bunch of other stuff. In Ascension's case it includes adding in the 2nd currency, rotating suppy, and different "races" or whatever they are. It does add another layer of strategy, but it removes the depth.

To create a successful competitor to Dominion I think designers should instead try to remove some other minor mechanics, but leave in the "1 Action" and "The closer you are to winning, the slower your deck". I think that's the sort of game that should be paired against Dominion.
Logged

Drab Emordnilap

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1832
  • Shuffle iT Username: Drab Emordnilap
  • Luther Bell Hendricks V
  • Respect: +1886
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #88 on: January 03, 2014, 12:47:36 pm »
0

In my opinion, the things that make Dominion my favorite deck builder are:
A) Negative feedback via victory cards
B) The "one action" that actually makes you monitor what you're putting into your deck
B is especially critical.  The one action rule has a profound effect on overall strategy that can make certain cards function drastically differently depending on the kingdom.  As I think of it, this cliche (for us) is one of the things that makes Dominion so great: the cards work together in such interesting ways that vary a lot depending on what else is available.

The rotating supply track of games like Ascension severely limit the depth of the strategy space and hence the replayability.  That may or may not matter to you.  (I'm not saying games can't be compared, just that it depends on your criteria.)
Exactly. That's why I think Dominion is the best "pure" deckbuilder. What I've seen is designers taking Dominion, stripping it of its "1 Action" mechanism and then throwing in a bunch of other stuff. In Ascension's case it includes adding in the 2nd currency, rotating suppy, and different "races" or whatever they are. It does add another layer of strategy, but it removes the depth.

To create a successful competitor to Dominion I think designers should instead try to remove some other minor mechanics, but leave in the "1 Action" and "The closer you are to winning, the slower your deck". I think that's the sort of game that should be paired against Dominion.

So, Puzzle Strike then?
Logged

Archetype

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 992
  • Suffers from Fancy Play Syndrom
  • Respect: +690
    • View Profile
Re: Showdown
« Reply #89 on: January 03, 2014, 01:42:34 pm »
+3

In my opinion, the things that make Dominion my favorite deck builder are:
A) Negative feedback via victory cards
B) The "one action" that actually makes you monitor what you're putting into your deck
B is especially critical.  The one action rule has a profound effect on overall strategy that can make certain cards function drastically differently depending on the kingdom.  As I think of it, this cliche (for us) is one of the things that makes Dominion so great: the cards work together in such interesting ways that vary a lot depending on what else is available.

The rotating supply track of games like Ascension severely limit the depth of the strategy space and hence the replayability.  That may or may not matter to you.  (I'm not saying games can't be compared, just that it depends on your criteria.)
Exactly. That's why I think Dominion is the best "pure" deckbuilder. What I've seen is designers taking Dominion, stripping it of its "1 Action" mechanism and then throwing in a bunch of other stuff. In Ascension's case it includes adding in the 2nd currency, rotating suppy, and different "races" or whatever they are. It does add another layer of strategy, but it removes the depth.

To create a successful competitor to Dominion I think designers should instead try to remove some other minor mechanics, but leave in the "1 Action" and "The closer you are to winning, the slower your deck". I think that's the sort of game that should be paired against Dominion.

So, Puzzle Strike then?
An original game, so most likely not one by Sirlin.
Logged

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: Showdown
« Reply #90 on: January 10, 2014, 10:58:54 am »
+1

just listened to this.  Overall, the defenders of Dominion did terribly.  The first issue taken up in the discussion is theme.

Dominion's theme is super weak, and any attempt to defend it is totally pointless.  I mean, yeah, there's kind of a theme, but it really has very little to do with what makes the game great.  Defending Dominion's theme just makes it look awful.  If it were me, I'd just say, "If theme is important to you, then Dominion is probably not going to appeal to you.  Dominion's appeal to casual players is its replayability, which is made possible by the thing that appeals to hardcore strategy gamers: its strategic depth."

The really disappointing thing about the conversation is that there was essentially no discussion of what makes Dominion fun to play, which is figuring out how the cards work together.  I mean, there's more than just that, but that's what Dominion has over all other deck builders, and the issue was entirely left out of the discussion.  For this reason, the discussion missed the core issue and was disappointing.
Logged
Gotta be efficient when most of your hand coordination is spent trying to apply mascara to your beard.
flies Dominionates on youtube
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [All]
 

Page created in 0.11 seconds with 20 queries.