Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 11  All

Author Topic: Revised versions of published cards  (Read 42721 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1749
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #75 on: January 17, 2014, 09:57:23 am »
0

Does "gain and play immediately" break anything?  What if you are possessed, for instance?  Do you play it from an opponent's discard?

Since Possession is "would gain", it triggers before the play immediately, moving the card. Thus, Galley losses track of Retired Pirate and cannot play it. That seems a reasonable behavior.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11388
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12190
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #76 on: January 17, 2014, 10:01:49 am »
0

Does "gain and play immediately" break anything?  What if you are possessed, for instance?  Do you play it from an opponent's discard?

Since Possession is "would gain", it triggers before the play immediately, moving the card. Thus, Galley losses track of Retired Pirate and cannot play it. That seems a reasonable behavior.
Actually, Galley never has track of Retired Pirate in the first place because it never gains one. It tries to gain one, but fails, because Possession tells you that something else happens instead.

It's like gaining and playing the blue dog. If you don't gain a blue dog, you can't play the blue dog.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2014, 10:03:42 am by Awaclus »
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The Twitch channel where I stream DominionThe YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's albums for free

Warfreak2

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1149
  • KC->KC->[Scavenger, Scavenger, Lookout]
  • Respect: +1324
    • View Profile
    • Music what I do
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #77 on: January 17, 2014, 12:25:08 pm »
+1

To me pirate ship seems plently strong, especially with villages. Near the end of the game, you can easily be getting $4 to $6 or possibly even more from a $4 cost card.
However, you have to play it as a do-nothing terminal for the first half of the game, which harms your own economy, and it even removes Coppers from your opponent's deck. Trashing your opponent's Coppers without even hurting his current hand, that's a big drawback. If your Pirate Ship is worth $6, then you probably trashed at least 5 of your opponent's Coppers. Normally, he would have to buy a trasher (cost: one turn) and waste another few turns to get rid of those Coppers. (Of course, if there is a trasher, he can buy it and get rid of the rest of his Coppers, and then your Pirate Ships may never have anything to hit.)
« Last Edit: January 17, 2014, 12:26:56 pm by Warfreak2 »
Logged
If the only engine on the board is Procession->Conspirator, I will play it.

NoMoreFun

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1622
  • Respect: +1277
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #78 on: January 23, 2014, 07:47:17 am »
0

Sea Hag
Action/Attack $4
Each player puts his deck in his discard pile.
Each other player gains a Curse, putting it on top of his deck.

It removes the "attack only" nature of the card, and no more swingy, arbitrary looking discard. It looks a little cleaner too.
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1622
  • Respect: +1277
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #79 on: January 23, 2014, 08:15:54 am »
0

This is a new idea, but I didn't think it was worth making a new thread.

Chancellor
Action - $3
You may put your deck in your discard pile. Look through your discard pile and put a Treasure from it into your hand.

It's a terminal gold, but you need to buy a Gold first. Do you buy a mediocre card first, or wait until after (when price doesn't matter as much).

Personally I don't think chancellor needs to exist, but other cards can do interesting things with the effect.
Logged

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1749
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #80 on: January 23, 2014, 09:04:27 am »
0

Sea Hag
Action/Attack $4
Each player puts his deck in his discard pile.
Each other player gains a Curse, putting it on top of his deck.

It removes the "attack only" nature of the card, and no more swingy, arbitrary looking discard. It looks a little cleaner too.

In 3+ player games, this would mean everyone reshuffling almost every turn. The Sea Hag slog is annoying enough.  And it would still be swingy, because non-optional deck->discard is good for some and bad for some others. Maybe you could make it optional for each player to do that. Or better, each player may choose to discard their top card (without looking).
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7186
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10000
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #81 on: May 20, 2014, 12:23:42 pm »
+1

What do people think of giving Secret Chamber +1 Action? It seems like the best buff to me.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 4448
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +2103
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #82 on: May 20, 2014, 12:58:48 pm »
+1

What do people think of giving Secret Chamber +1 Action? It seems like the best buff to me.

im not sure, i think there is reason why all (okay there are just three...) discard-for-$ are terminal. there are some pretty strong combos you can do with them, sc/scrying pool, sc/menagerie, sc/library, sc/watchtower. all of those are already out there, but with sc being non-terminal, they become much easier to pull off.

mabye just reveal more cards in the reaction part?
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7186
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10000
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #83 on: May 20, 2014, 02:06:37 pm »
0

What do people think of giving Secret Chamber +1 Action? It seems like the best buff to me.

im not sure, i think there is reason why all (okay there are just three...) discard-for-$ are terminal. there are some pretty strong combos you can do with them, sc/scrying pool, sc/menagerie, sc/library, sc/watchtower. all of those are already out there, but with sc being non-terminal, they become much easier to pull off.

I suppose those combos would be much bettter. Is that a problem, though? Would those combos be broken? Right now they're incredibly difficult to pull off, requiring a bunch of villages. And when you don't have villages, it's hard to justify Secret Chamber as your terminal Action.

Outside these combos, non-terminal Secret Chamber doesn't really stack. It mostly just makes you able to buy Secret Chamber for its reaction and then still play a different terminal Action without Secret Chamber being dead.

mabye just reveal more cards in the reaction part?

It's not the reaction that needs a buff, though. Revealing even one more card adds a lot of AP and probably doesn't help fight attacks much more.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 4448
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +2103
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #84 on: May 20, 2014, 02:27:16 pm »
+3

i dunno, how do you judge whether a combo is broken? the strongest 2-card combo in the game is probably apprentice/market square. neither of the sc chamber combos come close to that, so if "broken" is "better than any other combo", it isn't broken. it's still pretty good though, especially sc/mengarie, which now requires no villages at all. i guess it depends what exactly your goal is; if it's to make the card less awful without changing the way it's used (i.e. make it good in the situations where it previously was kinda sorta okay) you won't meet the goal, because you can now do menagerie/sc without any support. if your goal is to make the game more fun, it depends on how fun the combos are... which would require playtesting.

I also see sc being really good in engines with draw but without ways to get rid of the starting estates. previously, it was a terminal gold, which is eh, now it's just a gold, which is nice
« Last Edit: May 20, 2014, 02:29:17 pm by silverspawn »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7186
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10000
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #85 on: May 20, 2014, 02:47:38 pm »
0

You make several good points, especially with your Menagerie example. Maybe it is too powerful after all.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7186
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10000
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #86 on: May 20, 2014, 04:05:51 pm »
+1

im not sure, i think there is reason why all (okay there are just three...) discard-for-$ are terminal.

I was perusing the Dominion Outtakes just now and I found this, which was apparently fine but just didn't make the cut:

Keep
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Card. +1 Action. Discard any number of cards. +$1 per card discarded.

So probably there's no special reason that the surviving Vault-style cards are all terminal. Keep is a decent reference point for a non-terminal Secret Chamber, though. +1 Card is a big bonus for any discard-for-benefit and each +1 Card also makes a huge power difference for any non-terminal Action. Non-terminal Secret Chamber may be OK at $2. I'd have to do some testing both with and without the mega-combos you mentioned.
Logged

qmech

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1918
  • Shuffle iT Username: qmech
  • What year is it?
  • Respect: +2317
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #87 on: May 20, 2014, 04:31:12 pm »
+1

Oasis is non-terminal discard-for-$, and not amazingly powerful.  Being limited to a single discard weakens the combo potential significantly though.
Logged

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3043
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +3957
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #88 on: May 20, 2014, 10:45:52 pm »
+9

Keep
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Card. +1 Action. Discard any number of cards. +$1 per card discarded.

It's just as well that this card didn't get published; it would have been very confusing.

"I'll keep 2 cards."
"Wait, do you mean you're discarding 2 cards with Keep, or not discarding 2 cards?"
Logged

pacovf

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3441
  • Multiediting poster
  • Respect: +3778
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #89 on: May 21, 2014, 06:00:35 am »
+3

Keep
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Card. +1 Action. Discard any number of cards. +$1 per card discarded.

It's just as well that this card didn't get published; it would have been very confusing.

"I'll keep 2 cards."
"Wait, do you mean you're discarding 2 cards with Keep, or not discarding 2 cards?"

Edge case: you have four cards in hand.
Logged
pacovf has a neopets account.  It has 999 hours logged.  All his neopets are named "Jessica".  I guess that must be his ex.

Holger

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 478
  • Respect: +231
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #90 on: May 24, 2014, 05:02:09 pm »
+3

Keep
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Card. +1 Action. Discard any number of cards. +$1 per card discarded.

It's just as well that this card didn't get published; it would have been very confusing.

"I'll keep 2 cards."
"Wait, do you mean you're discarding 2 cards with Keep, or not discarding 2 cards?"

Just rename it "Discard" and it's perfectly fine.  :P
Logged

Holger

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 478
  • Respect: +231
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #91 on: May 24, 2014, 05:39:57 pm »
0

For all who hate Possession's "pseudo-attack", just replace the card by:

Self-Possession
Action-Duration, $6P
Take an extra turn after this one. This can’t cause you to take more than two consecutive turns.

Or, to still allow multiple plays per turn:

Strong Self-Possession
Action-Duration, $6P
If this is not an extra turn: Take an extra turn after this one.

I'm not quite sure if these are stronger or weaker than the published version; at least the second version sounds equally "insane"...
Logged

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1749
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #92 on: May 24, 2014, 09:23:03 pm »
0

I'm not quite sure if these are stronger or weaker than the published version; at least the second version sounds equally "insane"...

They seem stronger. You can counter Possession by greening earlier and then make the expensive Possessions of your opponent (pun intended) worse. If you Possess yourself, you can just megaturn in several turns, and there is nothing that will stop you. The opponent greening early would actually help.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 4448
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +2103
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #93 on: May 24, 2014, 10:38:58 pm »
+1

I'm not quite sure if these are stronger or weaker than the published version; at least the second version sounds equally "insane"...

They seem stronger. You can counter Possession by greening earlier and then make the expensive Possessions of your opponent (pun intended) worse. If you Possess yourself, you can just megaturn in several turns, and there is nothing that will stop you. The opponent greening early would actually help.

i agree, but either way it stops being insanely stupid, and that's what matters
Logged

KingZog3

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3163
  • Respect: +1376
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #94 on: May 25, 2014, 01:44:52 am »
+2

I'm not quite sure if these are stronger or weaker than the published version; at least the second version sounds equally "insane"...

They seem stronger. You can counter Possession by greening earlier and then make the expensive Possessions of your opponent (pun intended) worse. If you Possess yourself, you can just megaturn in several turns, and there is nothing that will stop you. The opponent greening early would actually help.

i agree, but either way it stops being insanely stupid, and that's what matters

I think if anything Self Possession is more stupid. It allows the person to get it first be in a huge advantage. More than normal possession, or KC or any other power card. This is just super outpost.

And at least as a thought experiment, regular Possession is actually quite interesting, with all kinds of interactions with other cards. It can feel stupid when you get burned by one of these interactions, but there is almost always something you can do to stop it.
Logged

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1749
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #95 on: May 25, 2014, 08:37:08 am »
0

And at least as a thought experiment, regular Possession is actually quite interesting, with all kinds of interactions with other cards. It can feel stupid when you get burned by one of these interactions, but there is almost always something you can do to stop it.

Agree with most of your post, but I disagree strongly with the last bit "there is almost always something you can do to stop it". Sometimes, you need to race for it. Similar to Tournament, I must say.
Logged

Holger

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 478
  • Respect: +231
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #96 on: May 25, 2014, 04:58:04 pm »
0

I'm not quite sure if these are stronger or weaker than the published version; at least the second version sounds equally "insane"...

They seem stronger. You can counter Possession by greening earlier and then make the expensive Possessions of your opponent (pun intended) worse. If you Possess yourself, you can just megaturn in several turns, and there is nothing that will stop you.

Usually, a megaturn (by definition) is a single turn; you don't want to get the cards you pile-drive into your deck. (Edge case: Merchant Ship.)
The non-countering is indeed an argument for my versions being stronger (though your opponent can still try to rush the game before you reliably draw the S-P). But on the other hand you can no longer abuse the opponents' coin tokens, TfB, Durations, Masq. etc., and you can no longer mess up their deck. Also my first version is no longer thronable; you can never get more than one extra turn per turn any more.


I think if anything Self Possession is more stupid. It allows the person to get it first be in a huge advantage. More than normal possession, or KC or any other power card. This is just super outpost.

So what? Outpost is a mediocre $5 card, and all the other "power cards" also cost far less than Self-Possession. And I'm not even sure if (non-"Strong") Self-Possession is stronger than KC - you can't spam it at all, and usually one great turn is better than two mediocre ones.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 4448
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +2103
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #97 on: May 25, 2014, 05:10:03 pm »
+1

Quote
And at least as a thought experiment, regular Possession is actually quite interesting, with all kinds of interactions with other cards. It can feel stupid when you get burned by one of these interactions, but there is almost always something you can do to stop it.

it's stupid because it punishes good decks. yes, it's one of the most skill dependend cards in the game, but i dont care! degrading your own deck so that your opponent cant use it just isn't fun, and from what i've heard i'm not the only one who doesn't like it. I make a comment about possessino being an awful card in almost every game i play with it, and most of the times my opponent agrees.

self-possession doesn't have this problem, good decks get rewarded again. I actually don't think it's that great of a concept, because outpost already does it, but it does solve the problem possession has. for me it's nothing > self possession >>>> possession
Logged

Holger

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 478
  • Respect: +231
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #98 on: May 25, 2014, 05:29:18 pm »
0

PS:
And at least as a thought experiment, regular Possession is actually quite interesting, with all kinds of interactions with other cards. [...]

I agree; but unfortunately Possession is real and my versions are only thought experiments.  :P
To clarify, I don't actually hate Possession, though I'd prefer a non-"attacking" version if it works. Self-Possession is meant to be an alternative, not a fix, for Possession.
As silverspawn wrote, Possession punishes good decks. It also increases the danger of infinite games, and has a potentially strong kingmaking effect in multiplayer: If player A goes for multiple Possessions per turn, player B has to either mess up their deck (giving C the win) or ignore the Possession (giving A the win).


self-possession doesn't have this problem, good decks get rewarded again. I actually don't think it's that great of a concept, because outpost already does it, but it does solve the problem possession has. for me it's nothing > self possession >>>> possession

I take this as a compliment.  :P :D 
The card may indeed be too similar to Outpost; but maybe the much higher price (and effect) and the fact that it also works reasonably in BM still justify it. I wonder if Donald ever tried it...
« Last Edit: May 25, 2014, 05:32:47 pm by Holger »
Logged

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1853
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #99 on: May 25, 2014, 06:51:19 pm »
+1

You make several good points, especially with your Menagerie example. Maybe it is too powerful after all.

Crossroads has some ridiculously powerful combos for a card that costs $2, though, so maybe non-terminal SC isn't so powerful.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 11  All
 

Page created in 0.085 seconds with 21 queries.