Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 15  All

Author Topic: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity  (Read 96849 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #225 on: September 04, 2013, 06:06:43 pm »
0

I kind of like the suggestion of costing Indulgence at $6 (thus competing with Harem and Hoard, for instance), but maybe only because that makes it an

expensive
VP-chip–granting
Treasure
with non-Attack interaction.
Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3249
  • Respect: +5459
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #226 on: September 04, 2013, 06:17:34 pm »
+1

I think I'm coming around to the possible fixes of either removing the +1 Buy or making the reward +1 VP, but I still think I'd prefer trying it with +$1 rather than +$2 first. Nobody seems to have weighed in on that proposed change.

One tweaked version that I thought about is

Original:
Quote
Indulgence
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
Worth $2. +1 Buy. When you play this, the player to your left names a card in the Supply costing between $3 and $6. If you buy that card this turn, +2VP.

Tweaked:
Quote
Tweaked Indulgence
Types: Treasure
Cost: $4
Worth $1. +1 Buy. When you play this, the player to your left names a cost between $3 and $6. If you buy a card with that cost this turn, +1VP.

Maybe that's too many alterations all at once?  The original might be boring in practice since, despite the VP tokens, who wants to keep buying awful card?  Ideally you want to be able to build a decent, if suboptimal, deck -- but have the VP tokens make up for that deficit in quality.  Your opponent throwing a carrot towards costs rather than specific cards gives you more to work with which might allow you to have more fun playing it.  To compensate, it is scaled back to being a Copper and only giving a single VP.  Also, being a $4 card means that its opportunity cost isn't as steep.

Also, I like that with Tweaked Indulgence priced at $4, there will always be at least one card at each of those permissible costs:  Silver, Tweaked Indulgence, Duchy, Gold.  Of course, if you fished TI out of the Black Market, there may be no $4 in the Supply.  But probably there will be, and if there isn't, then just don't buy the TI.
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

Nic

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 138
  • Respect: +85
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #227 on: September 04, 2013, 06:22:15 pm »
0

Now, about Indulgence, SirPeebles points out (and this is one of the great comparisons I've seen about dominion cards) that buying ONE card named makes this effectively harem with a buy. So, it has to be a worse card than you'd want normally, so if it were only once, then that's okay. But you know, I think that on the whole, the ability to do it more than once outweighs that (especially with the +buy), so it has to be a stronger AND cheaper card than harem. Okay, harem isn't a world-beater, so maybe this isn't game-breaking, but it doesn't give me good feelings. And I guess my point, in the larger scheme of things, about always buying the named card, isn't so much about it being too strong as about it not making an interesting decision - and actually largely reducing the interestingness of the decisions you have to make, at least relative to the other cards. So it's boring, in a way, because it's too strong.

It's not quite the same.  In the one case you have Harem and X, where X is something useful that you bought because you wanted it.  In the other case you have Indulgence and X, where X may very well be something useless which you bought because it came with 2VP.

Yeah. I like Peebles' comparison, but it misses the opportunity cost. Even Harem + "When you gain this, gain a Chancellor" wouldn't really cut it; you actually have to forgo buying another Silver or Oasis or even a more expensive engine part in order to put that crappy card in your deck and collect your winnings. That's why I really want to see more playtesting and less eyeballing the benefits. I want to hear Fragasnap's opinion of it on a TfB board and I'd like to know whether you think it would add or detract from a Chancellor/Rats board with bad/no trashing. I'll try my best to get something going this weekend as well and I'll report back in a dedicated thread.

EDIT:

I really like the card as it is, and I think that if it turns out to be a very situational card or hilarious when you play them in multiples, then it won't be out of place with some of the official $5 cards. I certainly don't think it's anywhere near Rebuild level, and I feel like the carrot for buying an unhelpful card is well balanced. I think the numbers should stay where they are until someone who's actually played it can give me a detailed reason why.

Tweaked:
Quote
Tweaked Indulgence
Types: Treasure
Cost: $4
Worth $1. +1 Buy. When you play this, the player to your left names a cost between $3 and $6. If you buy a card with that cost this turn, +1VP.

Maybe that's too many alterations all at once?  The original might be boring in practice since, despite the VP tokens, who wants to keep buying awful card?  Ideally you want to be able to build a decent, if suboptimal, deck -- but have the VP tokens make up for that deficit in quality.  Your opponent throwing a carrot towards costs rather than specific cards gives you more to work with which might allow you to have more fun playing it.  To compensate, it is scaled back to being a Copper and only giving a single VP.  Also, being a $4 card means that its opportunity cost isn't as steep.

Also, I like that with Tweaked Indulgence priced at $4, there will always be at least one card at each of those permissible costs:  Silver, Tweaked Indulgence, Duchy, Gold.  Of course, if you fished TI out of the Black Market, there may be no $4 in the Supply.  But probably there will be, and if there isn't, then just don't buy the TI.
That being said, this is the best alternative yet and the only variant so far that I would have voted for.
If it's just too powerful in multiples, extending the range to $2-$6 would be another effective nerf for the original or the tweaked version.
« Last Edit: September 04, 2013, 06:43:57 pm by Nic »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #228 on: September 04, 2013, 06:27:27 pm »
+1

I think I'm coming around to the possible fixes of either removing the +1 Buy or making the reward +1 VP, but I still think I'd prefer trying it with +$1 rather than +$2 first. Nobody seems to have weighed in on that proposed change.

One tweaked version that I thought about is

Original:
Quote
Indulgence
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
Worth $2. +1 Buy. When you play this, the player to your left names a card in the Supply costing between $3 and $6. If you buy that card this turn, +2VP.

Tweaked:
Quote
Tweaked Indulgence
Types: Treasure
Cost: $4
Worth $1. +1 Buy. When you play this, the player to your left names a cost between $3 and $6. If you buy a card with that cost this turn, +1VP.

Maybe that's too many alterations all at once?  The original might be boring in practice since, despite the VP tokens, who wants to keep buying awful card?  Ideally you want to be able to build a decent, if suboptimal, deck -- but have the VP tokens make up for that deficit in quality.  Your opponent throwing a carrot towards costs rather than specific cards gives you more to work with which might allow you to have more fun playing it.  To compensate, it is scaled back to being a Copper and only giving a single VP.  Also, being a $4 card means that its opportunity cost isn't as steep.

Also, I like that with Tweaked Indulgence priced at $4, there will always be at least one card at each of those permissible costs:  Silver, Tweaked Indulgence, Duchy, Gold.  Of course, if you fished TI out of the Black Market, there may be no $4 in the Supply.  But probably there will be, and if there isn't, then just don't buy the TI.

Hmm, I've never been a big fan of "name a cost". I'd almost rather have something like "The player to your left names a card in the Supply costing between $3 and $6 that you don't have in play" as a way to prevent the player from repeatedly naming, say, Chancellor.

In general, I'd like to playtest the current name-a-card version. It might actually be a fun challenge to try to build a deck around the cards you end up buying.
« Last Edit: September 04, 2013, 06:29:04 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

Schneau

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1174
  • Shuffle iT Username: Schneau
  • Respect: +1461
    • View Profile
    • Rainwave
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #229 on: September 04, 2013, 07:28:30 pm »
+1

I think I'm coming around to the possible fixes of either removing the +1 Buy or making the reward +1 VP, but I still think I'd prefer trying it with +$1 rather than +$2 first. Nobody seems to have weighed in on that proposed change.

Discussing proposed changes (and in fact, this much discussion of one card) seems a bit premature considering voting just started today.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #230 on: September 04, 2013, 07:55:09 pm »
+4

I think I'm coming around to the possible fixes of either removing the +1 Buy or making the reward +1 VP, but I still think I'd prefer trying it with +$1 rather than +$2 first. Nobody seems to have weighed in on that proposed change.

Discussing proposed changes (and in fact, this much discussion of one card) seems a bit premature considering voting just started today.

What other cards do people like?  Let's talk about this one for a bit:

Quote
Villa
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. Play up to 2 Treasures from your hand. Draw until you have 4 cards in hand.

Some people find it scary to play Treasures during the action phase.  I think it's pretty neat.  That is already Black Market's schtick, but this card does it uniquely by only having you play up to two.  That's enough to attempt some cute tricks with Quarry and maybe some other Treasures (Philosopher's Stone before you draw a bunch of cards, Diadem before you use up actions, Royal Seal to top-deck gained cards).  It also combines hand-size reduction and fixed draw in a way that doesn't seem too powerful.
Logged

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2644
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3388
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #231 on: September 04, 2013, 08:03:18 pm »
0

I worry that it is maybe too strong.
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4381
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #232 on: September 04, 2013, 08:07:42 pm »
+2

Now, about Indulgence, SirPeebles points out (and this is one of the great comparisons I've seen about dominion cards) that buying ONE card named makes this effectively harem with a buy. So, it has to be a worse card than you'd want normally, so if it were only once, then that's okay. But you know, I think that on the whole, the ability to do it more than once outweighs that (especially with the +buy), so it has to be a stronger AND cheaper card than harem. Okay, harem isn't a world-beater, so maybe this isn't game-breaking, but it doesn't give me good feelings. And I guess my point, in the larger scheme of things, about always buying the named card, isn't so much about it being too strong as about it not making an interesting decision - and actually largely reducing the interestingness of the decisions you have to make, at least relative to the other cards. So it's boring, in a way, because it's too strong.

It's not quite the same.  In the one case you have Harem and X, where X is something useful that you bought because you wanted it.  In the other case you have Indulgence and X, where X may very well be something useless which you bought because it came with 2VP.
Well, I covered this when I said it has to be a worse card than you'd want normally. But also like I said before, I think the ability to get extra VP (especially considering the +buy) outweighs this. If you use the effect once, it's probably not as good as harem, because you got a worse card; but you will probably use it more than once, so I think it's better. So there will be some boards you don't use it well; ok, fine.

Just because a card is weaker than a card which is fine on average doesn't mean it's too strong. Too strong arises when it makes decisions less interesting, because you just have a formulaic strategy. It's why people don't like e.g. rebuild.

So this card isn't game-destroyingly powerful, but I think it is less interesting than it could or should be. However, I like the concept, and I feel like it can be modified - after requisite testing - to become a very very interesting and choice-inspiring card. Right now it makes some sorta good choices (though sometimes trivial) for the player doing the naming, but less for the buy after a card has been named. I would like some alteration to make that different. I think a 4-cost treasure making $1 looks interesting, or only giving one VP makes it interesting, or... it doesn't really matter, that is a testing issue. So I am going through a long thing about I don't like it *as is* not because I think (in this case) that the concept is inherently unbalanced, but because I think it is now. Perhaps I shouldn't because it can change, and the concept is the important thing. But that is my go-to thing on card evaluation.

Quote
The new Golden Decks:

KC-KC-Beggar-Beggar-Palladium

and

KC-KC-GoldenTouch-GoldenTouch-GoldenTouch  ;)

Palladium is a treasure, but I suppose that still works.
The second one just trashes a card and puts a Gold on top... even if you KC it, it just replaces the topdecked Gold.  So...?
So, the palladium example... you have a 4 card combo (you have to have islanded stuff away, or you could do it with schemes); or ok let's give you that somehow, and it's a 3 card combo, which makes 10 vp per turn, for only 9 turns (coppers will run out), and 3 of the 5 cards cost 7, while the other two don't much help you get there? You broke the game, man. I mean, okay, it is a cute combo, but if people can pull that off, I am not worried.

(Edit: I can't do math. 9 coppers means 5 turns in a 2-player game with the standard number of coppers.)

GoldenTouch I assume is a joke, but maybe that means the first one was supposed to be also...
« Last Edit: September 04, 2013, 09:15:43 pm by WanderingWinder »
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4381
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #233 on: September 04, 2013, 08:14:04 pm »
0

Queen's Palace (since it escaped my scrutiny until now):
I think this card is very interesting. It compares pretty well to the established power line right now, often being at least a $4 producer for 7, which I feel is pretty good, and while again not totally gamebreaking, also not enough good decision-inspiring.
However, the idea is interesting, and I think it's not so far above-the-curve that it couldn't be spared. Let's see, something like the embassy penalty, but with gold rather than silver, or maybe your choice of cheaper treasure. Well, anyway, it is not going to crack my favorite few here, but it's interesting enough, I think.

Wrclass

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 132
  • Dominion is the best game ever
  • Respect: +110
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #234 on: September 04, 2013, 08:15:13 pm »
0

I don't like Villa. Black Market is crazy enough
Logged
I play Lookout, revealing a Fortress, a Tunnel and a Gold.

Schneau

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1174
  • Shuffle iT Username: Schneau
  • Respect: +1461
    • View Profile
    • Rainwave
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #235 on: September 04, 2013, 08:29:25 pm »
+1

What other cards do people like?  Let's talk about this one for a bit:

Quote
Gilded Statue
Types: Treasure
Cost: $7
Worth $2. When you play this, you may discard a Treasure. If you do, gain a Gold.

When you gain this, gain an Action card costing up to $4.

Here's one I haven't seen discussed much. I'm not sure if it's 100% balanced, but I like the ideas. In particular, I really like the idea of gaining an Action card when gaining this Treasure card -- sure, that might fit better in Hinterlands, but it also costs $7 and is a Treasure, so it also fits here. It's a bit like Border Village, but more constrained in an interesting way.

I also like the discarding of a Treasure to get a Gold. To do so, you've sacrificed a buy on this Silver+ and also sacrificed a Treasure to get a Gold, so you have to consider whether it would be worthwhile or better to just buy a Gold in the first place. This seems to make the card interesting in that it's not always a good idea, but can be when you want it.

The only thing I don't like is that Gold isn't the best in Colony/Platinum games. In this way, it's similar to Hoard. But, I think it would play much differently, since you'd want Gilded Statue early, where Hoard usually doesn't help much until mid-late game.
Logged

Schneau

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1174
  • Shuffle iT Username: Schneau
  • Respect: +1461
    • View Profile
    • Rainwave
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #236 on: September 04, 2013, 08:32:18 pm »
0

I think I'm coming around to the possible fixes of either removing the +1 Buy or making the reward +1 VP, but I still think I'd prefer trying it with +$1 rather than +$2 first. Nobody seems to have weighed in on that proposed change.

Discussing proposed changes (and in fact, this much discussion of one card) seems a bit premature considering voting just started today.

What other cards do people like?  Let's talk about this one for a bit:

Quote
Villa
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. Play up to 2 Treasures from your hand. Draw until you have 4 cards in hand.

Some people find it scary to play Treasures during the action phase.  I think it's pretty neat.  That is already Black Market's schtick, but this card does it uniquely by only having you play up to two.  That's enough to attempt some cute tricks with Quarry and maybe some other Treasures (Philosopher's Stone before you draw a bunch of cards, Diadem before you use up actions, Royal Seal to top-deck gained cards).  It also combines hand-size reduction and fixed draw in a way that doesn't seem too powerful.

I like Villa a lot. It seems elegant and different. I almost like the idea better without the draw-to-4 part, since then it would be fun to pair it with draw-to-x cards. But, I'm a fan!
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #237 on: September 04, 2013, 08:36:14 pm »
0

I think I'm coming around to the possible fixes of either removing the +1 Buy or making the reward +1 VP, but I still think I'd prefer trying it with +$1 rather than +$2 first. Nobody seems to have weighed in on that proposed change.

Discussing proposed changes (and in fact, this much discussion of one card) seems a bit premature considering voting just started today.

If it seems like I'm discussing it as if it has already won, that's not what I'm doing. I'm discussing it because it's the most interesting card to me (and I hope it wins).

One of the advantages of approval voting is that it's really hard, if not impossible, to game the system. That means, for example, that I can tell you that Indulgence is so far not a runaway winner. Right now there is no runaway winner. In fact, right now there isn't even a winner. My current tally has a couple of cards tied for first.
« Last Edit: September 04, 2013, 08:46:49 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #238 on: September 04, 2013, 08:38:04 pm »
0

I don't like Villa. Black Market is crazy enough

Care to elaborate?  The craziness of Black Market is in the BM deck of unique cards.  The treasure playing is not actually that crazy.  It mostly matters for Quarry, Tactician and fixed draw cards, which is not actually that much.
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4381
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #239 on: September 04, 2013, 08:42:27 pm »
0

I think I'm coming around to the possible fixes of either removing the +1 Buy or making the reward +1 VP, but I still think I'd prefer trying it with +$1 rather than +$2 first. Nobody seems to have weighed in on that proposed change.

Discussing proposed changes (and in fact, this much discussion of one card) seems a bit premature considering voting just started today.

What other cards do people like?  Let's talk about this one for a bit:

Quote
Villa
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. Play up to 2 Treasures from your hand. Draw until you have 4 cards in hand.

Some people find it scary to play Treasures during the action phase.  I think it's pretty neat.  That is already Black Market's schtick, but this card does it uniquely by only having you play up to two.  That's enough to attempt some cute tricks with Quarry and maybe some other Treasures (Philosopher's Stone before you draw a bunch of cards, Diadem before you use up actions, Royal Seal to top-deck gained cards).  It also combines hand-size reduction and fixed draw in a way that doesn't seem too powerful.
It lets you play treasures in the action phase, which has interactions with some trashers, tac, quarry, phil stone, sorta venture/loan, Horn Of Plenty. But mostly, it's a lab if you start with it, better if you can get the full benefit stacked, but you are less likely to be able to get big chains, and it is much less good after you have drawn stuff (which is a big use case) for being a little better against discard attacks. And some anti-synergy with other drawers, especially stables, and sorta synergy with villages and non-draw terminals, though that's pretty weak. I'm not sure it's different enough from Lab (or better often enough) for me to really like it, but it's at the very least worth lots of consideration.
What other cards do people like?  Let's talk about this one for a bit:

Quote
Gilded Statue
Types: Treasure
Cost: $7
Worth $2. When you play this, you may discard a Treasure. If you do, gain a Gold.

When you gain this, gain an Action card costing up to $4.

Here's one I haven't seen discussed much. I'm not sure if it's 100% balanced, but I like the ideas. In particular, I really like the idea of gaining an Action card when gaining this Treasure card -- sure, that might fit better in Hinterlands, but it also costs $7 and is a Treasure, so it also fits here. It's a bit like Border Village, but more constrained in an interesting way.

I also like the discarding of a Treasure to get a Gold. To do so, you've sacrificed a buy on this Silver+ and also sacrificed a Treasure to get a Gold, so you have to consider whether it would be worthwhile or better to just buy a Gold in the first place. This seems to make the card interesting in that it's not always a good idea, but can be when you want it.

The only thing I don't like is that Gold isn't the best in Colony/Platinum games. In this way, it's similar to Hoard. But, I think it would play much differently, since you'd want Gilded Statue early, where Hoard usually doesn't help much until mid-late game.
This card is interesting, but the action-gain feels strange and tacked on. Let's ignore that for a second. The main effect is I think a bit weak, though interesting. Compare to soothsayer - you can't give curses, they don't draw off that, you have a little more money, this isn't terminal. All in all, I think it could cost 6, especially without the action, and a pretty interesting card.

LastFootnote

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #240 on: September 04, 2013, 08:45:38 pm »
+2

I don't like Villa. Black Market is crazy enough

Care to elaborate?  The craziness of Black Market is in the BM deck of unique cards.  The treasure playing is not actually that crazy.  It mostly matters for Quarry, Tactician and fixed draw cards, which is not actually that much.

I think I agree with this. The reason I don't like the fact that Black Market allows you to play Treasure cards is that it doesn't tell you that you're allowed to play Treasure cards. I mean, what the hell? It's not an assumption I would have made.

Villa says right on it that you're allowed to play Treasure cards. Unless I'm missing something, there are no Treasure cards for which playing them in the Buy phase creates any rules issues. For a lot of special Treasures, it's more advantageous to play them in the buy phase! That's why Horn of Plenty is a Treasure, for instance.
« Last Edit: September 04, 2013, 08:47:06 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

Just a Rube

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 197
  • Respect: +385
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #241 on: September 04, 2013, 08:53:27 pm »
+1

For a lot of special Treasures, it's more advantageous to play them in the buy phase! That's why Horn of Plenty is a Treasure, for instance.
Now I want to see a Villa/Counterfeit Combo.
Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3249
  • Respect: +5459
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #242 on: September 04, 2013, 08:57:34 pm »
0

Quote
Villa
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. Play up to 2 Treasures from your hand. Draw until you have 4 cards in hand.

I like Villa also.   I feel that it is unfair to say that playing Treasures during the action phase is Black Market's shtick.  Black Market's shtick is accessing a variety of cards beyond those in the current kingdom.  Being able to play Treasures out of phase is simply an artifact of its implementation.  I think that's why combos like Black Market double-Tac feel like more of an abuse or exploit than combos like Hermit Market Square.  There are game design reasons to keep the action and buy phases distinct -- for instance, when you play Contraband during the action phase you might forget which card is proscribed by the time you are in your buy phase -- but as long as the cat is out of the bag, I like the idea of a card which permits this exception in a more focused and intentional form.

Ok, with that little rant out of the way, I like Villa.  At first I was worried that it would surpass Lab too often.  But you know, one of the perks of Lab is getting a really big hand, and Villa doesn't do that.  I really like the simplicity of the card, and I feel like it promotes some nice strategies.  I'm certainly planning to give it a vote.
« Last Edit: September 04, 2013, 09:02:12 pm by SirPeebles »
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #243 on: September 04, 2013, 09:06:31 pm »
+2

A possible tweak to Villa that I think would be a buff is to have you play only one Treasure from hand and draw up to 5.  Then it combos more with disappearing cards, and Villa chains don't clog up as much from running out of Treasure.  The missing Treasure play doesn't really hurt it; if you were going to do a combo with Quarry (most likely suspect) then you only need to play the one.
Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3249
  • Respect: +5459
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #244 on: September 04, 2013, 09:16:35 pm »
0

A possible tweak to Villa that I think would be a buff is to have you play only one Treasure from hand and draw up to 5.  Then it combos more with disappearing cards, and Villa chains don't clog up as much from running out of Treasure.  The missing Treasure play doesn't really hurt it; if you were going to do a combo with Quarry (most likely suspect) then you only need to play the one.

Maybe, although I wonder if this makes it lose some of its uniqueness.  Would a nonterminal draw-to-5 already be pretty powerful on a lot of boards even without the Treasure option?  I suppose it depends on the board.  To me, the original Villa seems to be about playing early Treasures, whereas your variant feels more like an engine-y nonterminal draw-to-5 whose Treasure option is there to help prevent Treasures from clogging your hand.  But maybe that's how I should be viewing the original.  In fact, it rather reminds me of Minion in that way.  Minion is essentially a nonterminal draw-to-4, and its "solution" to clogs is to make you toss everything and draw from scratch with each play.
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #245 on: September 04, 2013, 09:40:17 pm »
0

What other cards do people like?  Let's talk about this one for a bit:

Quote
Gilded Statue
Types: Treasure
Cost: $7
Worth $2. When you play this, you may discard a Treasure. If you do, gain a Gold.

When you gain this, gain an Action card costing up to $4.

Here's one I haven't seen discussed much. I'm not sure if it's 100% balanced, but I like the ideas. In particular, I really like the idea of gaining an Action card when gaining this Treasure card -- sure, that might fit better in Hinterlands, but it also costs $7 and is a Treasure, so it also fits here. It's a bit like Border Village, but more constrained in an interesting way.

I also like the discarding of a Treasure to get a Gold. To do so, you've sacrificed a buy on this Silver+ and also sacrificed a Treasure to get a Gold, so you have to consider whether it would be worthwhile or better to just buy a Gold in the first place. This seems to make the card interesting in that it's not always a good idea, but can be when you want it.

The only thing I don't like is that Gold isn't the best in Colony/Platinum games. In this way, it's similar to Hoard. But, I think it would play much differently, since you'd want Gilded Statue early, where Hoard usually doesn't help much until mid-late game.

The natural comparison to start is Hoard.  The notable bonus it has over Hoard is that you can gain a Gold without buy VP.  Discarding a Treasure usually means that this is worth only $1, or maybe even less -- a disadvantage compared to Hoard.  I don't know if it feels different enough overall.  It probably does, but I feel there are more interesting cards in the contest.

The on-gain is kind of weird and I'm not sure of the purpose.  This is a Treasure that gains more Treasure, so why does it also give you an action?
Logged

nopawnsintended

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220
  • Respect: +186
    • View Profile
    • My Website
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #246 on: September 04, 2013, 11:54:30 pm »
+2

Here are the cards I like the best.

Quote
Usurer
Types: Action
Cost: $6
+1 Card. +1 Action. Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a Treasure. Discard the rest. Trash the Treasure; gain a Treasure costing up to $3 more than it, putting it on top of your deck. Each other player may gain a Copper, putting it into his hand.

This is interesting.  A nonterminal mine that draws the mined treasure if you've got two of them.  Not sure how to gauge the power of this though.

Quote
Strong Room
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+4 Cards. +1 Action. You may return up to 4 VP tokens. Discard 4 cards, minus 1 card per VP token returned.

In games using this, at the beginning of each turn of the player who went first, each player gets +1 VP.

I like the "give up VP for a card in hand" mechanic, but one VP per card is a bit steep.  This mechanic could be tweaked.

Quote
Metropolis
Types: Action
Cost: $7
+1 Card. +2 Actions. Treasure cards other than Copper produce an extra $1 this turn.

This could be bonkers with Silver gainers, but you'd need a source of +Buy for that kinda bonkering.  I like the idea, not sure how much it'll change the game.

Quote
Stock Exchange
Types: Treasure
Cost: $7
Worth $2.

While this is in play, when you buy a Victory card, you may buy any number of VP tokens for $1 per token.

I actually really like this one.  This could really mess with endgame conditions though.  Perhaps tweak it by capping the number of VP tokens?

Quote
King's Greed
Types: Action
Cost: $10
Put your deck into your discard pile. Look through your discard pile and set aside up to 3 Action cards from it. Play them in any order.

I like this, and I'm not sure why.

Quote
Deed
Types: Treasure – Reaction
Cost: $5
Worth $2

When you gain a Victory card, you may discard this from your hand. If you do, +2 VP.

I like the idea.  Interesting tradeoff: use the money or get the VP.

Quote
Philanthropist
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+3 VP. Each other player gains a card costing up to $5.

Interesting.  To pile up the VP, you pump your opponents full of either (a) power $5s or (b) 3 VP of their own.  Not sure if this will ever be worth it, but I'd like to try making it worth it.

Quote
Crown (B)
Types: Treasure
Cost: $7
Worth $4.

When you gain this, each other player gets +2 VP.

Interesting on-gain effect that interacts w/ prosperity.  Plus, it is expensive and a $4 card.

Quote
Standard Bearer
Types: Action
Cost: $7
Trash this card. Put your deck (not including your discard pile) into your hand.

Feels like an easier Madman without the actions, maybe that makes it not as easy, and thus, more balanced than at first blush.  I love Madman.

Quote
Savant
Types: Action
Cost: $6
+3 Cards. +1 Action. Each other player draws a card, then reveals and discards one or more cards. He gets +1 VP per Action or Treasure card he discards.

This is interesting.  I like the VP interaction, but it may need to be tamed.

Quote
Queen's Palace
Types: Treasure
Cost: $7
You may choose a Treasure card in your hand. Play it three times.

Interesting.  Decent.  Fun enough.  Thematic.

Quote
Hedge Fund
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action.
You may return a VP token. If you do, +3 Cards, +1 Buy, and each other player gets +1 VP.

Setup: Each player gets +2 VP.

I like this mechanic.  As some others have mentioned, this could do with a +1 VP cost.  In any event, I'm a big fan of the VP for stuff idea.  Maybe that's broken, but it is cool.

Quote
Palladium
Types: Treasure
Cost: $7
Worth $4. +1 Buy. When you play this, trash all Treasures you have in play. +1 VP for each card trashed.

As it reads, this trashes itself.  Seems like a special type of deck that would work with this.  Maybe a deck that wants no treasure and has lots of synthetic money.  In this case, Palladium will be an uber deck thinner that has a one-shot economy boost and non clogging VP.  Intriguing.  Not sure about the balance of powers.


Quote
Smelter
Types: Action
Cost: $6
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Action card, a Treasure card, and a Victory card. Trash an Action card, a Treasure card, and a Victory card from the revealed cards. If you do, gain 3 Golds.

Living dangerously.  I think it would be fun to see how this plays out.  Great way to combat Ruins.  Interesting that you'll (with some probability) have choices about what to trash for some types, but never all types.
Logged

MarkowKette

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 213
  • Respect: +217
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #247 on: September 05, 2013, 01:14:45 pm »
0

So, the palladium example... you have a 4 card combo (you have to have islanded stuff away, or you could do it with schemes); or ok let's give you that somehow, and it's a 3 card combo, which makes 10 vp per turn, for only 9 turns (coppers will run out), and 3 of the 5 cards cost 7, while the other two don't much help you get there? You broke the game, man. I mean, okay, it is a cute combo, but if people can pull that off, I am not worried.

(Edit: I can't do math. 9 coppers means 5 turns in a 2-player game with the standard number of coppers.)

GoldenTouch I assume is a joke, but maybe that means the first one was supposed to be also...

yes the second deck is a joke as you correctly stated

and  the first one: most likely something like KC-Beggar-Palladium-Trasher of choice is better and quite fast to set up
while $13 with 2 Buys is also a good start to end the game after coppers ran out.
Logged

XerxesPraelor

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1069
  • Respect: +364
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #248 on: September 05, 2013, 01:26:45 pm »
0

Wow, this fizzled out. Anyone playtested any of the cards?
Logged

Polk5440

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1708
  • Respect: +1788
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #249 on: September 05, 2013, 01:39:25 pm »
+1

Wow, this fizzled out. Anyone playtested any of the cards?

Why playtest when you could be creating a new, untested card for week 2?  ;D
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 15  All
 

Page created in 0.063 seconds with 21 queries.