Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 14  All

Author Topic: Revised versions of published cards  (Read 106081 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #100 on: May 26, 2014, 03:25:43 am »
0

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

A good deck still beats Possession most of the time.  Possession mainly punishes almost-good decks, which do what good decks do but slower, thus giving Possession a chance to take advantage.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #101 on: May 27, 2014, 01:53:34 pm »
0

What do people think of a variant of Spy that's slightly weaker, but in turn less time-consuming to resolve?

Spy
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $4
+1 Card. +1 Action. Look at the top card of your deck. You may discard it. Name a card type (Victory, Action, etc.). Each other player reveals the top card of his deck and discards it if it doesn't have the named type.

Too complex? I wanted to keep the combo with Thief, etc.
Logged

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #102 on: May 27, 2014, 02:16:19 pm »
+1

What do people think of a variant of Spy that's slightly weaker, but in turn less time-consuming to resolve?

Spy
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $4
+1 Card. +1 Action. Look at the top card of your deck. You may discard it. Name a card type (Victory, Action, etc.). Each other player reveals the top card of his deck and discards it if it doesn't have the named type.

Too complex? I wanted to keep the combo with Thief, etc.
That seems longer to resolve. You still have to reveal and know what the top card is in order to resolve the effect properly, but in addition there might also be AP associated with stuff like "It'd be great if he discards a Bazaar, but what if he discards his ruins?" And then there's the situation where one opposing player has a Copper left on his or her deck and another and another has an Estate on top. Do you name Treasure or Victory card? At least with the original spy, you can be all like "just leave your top cards there everyone" after playing a chain of them.

Edit: Okay, you can name "Pokemon card" and leave all junk on top. There's still the issue of not knowing stuff like whether a Nobles, a Harem, or an Estate is on top of a player's deck, and then agonizing over it, while considering that you don't want the other players to discard their Coppers.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2014, 02:21:20 pm by markusin »
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3189
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #103 on: May 27, 2014, 02:26:16 pm »
+1

yea, I don't reallly see how that version takes considerably less time either

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #104 on: May 27, 2014, 02:49:42 pm »
+1

It takes a tiny bit longer in 2 player games but it's faster with more players.  With the original Spy, you have to make one decision for each other player based on the card they reveal.  With this version, you make one single decision and then everybody can resolve it simultaneously.

That said, I think it weakens it too much for a minor gain that is still unreliable (I think it makes the card faster in general, but there is more potential AP when you have to choose before seeing the flipped cards).
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #105 on: May 27, 2014, 02:52:54 pm »
0

That seems longer to resolve. You still have to reveal and know what the top card is in order to resolve the effect properly, but in addition there might also be AP associated with stuff like "It'd be great if he discards a Bazaar, but what if he discards his ruins?" And then there's the situation where one opposing player has a Copper left on his or her deck and another and another has an Estate on top. Do you name Treasure or Victory card? At least with the original spy, you can be all like "just leave your top cards there everyone" after playing a chain of them.

Edit: Okay, you can name "Pokemon card" and leave all junk on top. There's still the issue of not knowing stuff like whether a Nobles, a Harem, or an Estate is on top of a player's deck, and then agonizing over it, while considering that you don't want the other players to discard their Coppers.

yea, I don't reallly see how that version takes considerably less time either

It takes a tiny bit longer in 2 player games but it's faster with more players.  With the original Spy, you have to make one decision for each other player based on the card they reveal.  With this version, you make one single decision and then everybody can resolve it simultaneously.

That said, I think it weakens it too much for a minor gain that is still unreliable (I think it makes the card faster in general, but there is more potential AP when you have to choose before seeing the flipped cards).

Yeah, good points all around. This change isn't worth it.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3189
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #106 on: May 27, 2014, 03:04:57 pm »
0

the problem i have with spy isn't so much that it takes a lot of time to resolve, but rather that it's super weak. compare it to ironmonger, both have the self-spy effect, but ironmonger is also either a village, a peddler, or a lab, which is 3$, 4$, and 5$ worth respectively. spy on others is worth... dunno, but 2$ at most.

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #107 on: May 27, 2014, 03:08:58 pm »
0

the problem i have with spy isn't so much that it takes a lot of time to resolve, but rather that it's super weak. compare it to ironmonger, both have the self-spy effect, but ironmonger is also either a village, a peddler, or a lab, which is 3$, 4$, and 5$ worth respectively. spy on others is worth... dunno, but 2$ at most.

Spy definitely seems weak. The problem is that its effects are almost invisible. I think Spy would be passable $4 card if it didn't take forever to resolve. Not a powerful $4 card, but a passable one.

Really, Spy should just be taken out of the Base Set and replaced with some other $4 cantrip that doesn't attack.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12847
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #108 on: May 27, 2014, 03:40:23 pm »
0

the problem i have with spy isn't so much that it takes a lot of time to resolve, but rather that it's super weak. compare it to ironmonger, both have the self-spy effect, but ironmonger is also either a village, a peddler, or a lab, which is 3$, 4$, and 5$ worth respectively. spy on others is worth... dunno, but 2$ at most.
Edge case: You hit a Curse. Both cards can discard it, which is often almost as good as Lab, but Spy also attacks.


Spy is either insignificant or played many times per turn. I like Spy because (I like cantrips in general and) it's usually easy to tell that it isn't worth the opportunity cost of gaining multiple Spies, but when it is worth it, it's difficult to tell that it is. IRL, this is a bit problematic, though, since either it's irrelevant or takes a long time to resolve. P-Stone is another card that's guilty of this, but it's not as subtle as Spy (and not a cantrip so I don't like it as much).
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

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3189
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #109 on: October 15, 2014, 04:36:23 am »
0

hey, the images don't work anymore. I just wanted to reference this thread, and now they're gone. tsts.

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4787
  • Respect: +3412
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #110 on: October 23, 2014, 08:40:41 am »
+1

Adventurer should be pretty easy to "fix".

Adventurer - $6
Action

Name a Treasure card.
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal 2 Treasure cards that are not the named card. Put those Treasure cards into your hand and discard the other revealed cards.


This just adds the "Rebuild" clause, making it possible to skip Coppers. From 2 Silvers onward, this is then guaranteed to provide at least $4 of spending power (if they're not already in your hand). But it's still a terminal with its terminal issues.
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

Holger

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 736
  • Respect: +458
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #111 on: October 23, 2014, 09:26:13 am »
0

Adventurer should be pretty easy to "fix".

Adventurer - $6
Action

Name a Treasure card.
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal 2 Treasure cards that are not the named card. Put those Treasure cards into your hand and discard the other revealed cards.


This just adds the "Rebuild" clause, making it possible to skip Coppers. From 2 Silvers onward, this is then guaranteed to provide at least $4 of spending power (if they're not already in your hand). But it's still a terminal with its terminal issues.

I think this is too strong. If you can skip (or trash) Silver and just gain 2-3 Golds, this reliably gives $6 without you having to trash any Copper. Even with 2 Silvers and 2 Golds in your deck, it gives $5 on average.

But what about:

"Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal 2 Treasure cards. You may trash one of them. Put the remaining revealed Treasure card(s) into your hand and discard the other revealed cards."

This would give Adventurer a chance to improve itself over time, by trashing the hated Coppers, removing the need for a Copper-trasher support card.
Logged

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1751
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #112 on: October 23, 2014, 09:31:47 am »
+1

Adventurer - $6
Action

Name a Treasure card.
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal 2 Treasure cards that are not the named card. Put those Treasure cards into your hand and discard the other revealed cards.

Wouldn't this make Adventurer-BM too strong? It would make Adventurer a terminal +$4 or better pretty reliably. The increased cycling could be bad because after one or two plays you will be greening already, but still, +$4 in a deck full of Treasures pretty realiably gets you a Province.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3189
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #113 on: October 23, 2014, 09:55:12 am »
0

well I've said this multiple times before, and I still think he can just dig for three treasure cards instead of two, and that's it. I doubt it would be too strong.

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4787
  • Respect: +3412
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #114 on: October 23, 2014, 10:08:00 am »
+3

Adventurer - $6
Action

Name a Treasure card.
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal 2 Treasure cards that are not the named card. Put those Treasure cards into your hand and discard the other revealed cards.

Wouldn't this make Adventurer-BM too strong? It would make Adventurer a terminal +$4 or better pretty reliably. The increased cycling could be bad because after one or two plays you will be greening already, but still, +$4 in a deck full of Treasures pretty realiably gets you a Province.
Maybe Adventurer-BM would be way stronger compared to regular BM, but against engines, I don't think it's particularly strong.
I really think this is just fine, but I also think dig for 3 is fine.

My main goal is to make the card usable in a fun way. Discarding Coppers is more fun than drawing 2 of them and wishing you'd bought a Gold instead.

How I wish there was an open Isotropic server where we can playtest these easily implemented revisions.
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #115 on: October 23, 2014, 10:27:04 am »
+2

Rather than "Name a Treasure card", it's almost certainly cleaner to just say "other than Copper". It's pretty rare that you'd want to name other cards.
Logged

Rubby

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 170
  • Respect: +324
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #116 on: October 23, 2014, 10:55:03 am »
0

Rather than "Name a Treasure card", it's almost certainly cleaner to just say "other than Copper". It's pretty rare that you'd want to name other cards.

If your deck (excluding what's in your hand) has no non-Copper treasures, or its only non-Copper treasure card is a Silver or something no better than a Silver, or if you have no Copper and multiple treasures that are better than your worst treasure, you would not want to name Copper.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2014, 10:57:42 am by Rubby »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #117 on: October 23, 2014, 11:14:29 am »
+4

Rather than "Name a Treasure card", it's almost certainly cleaner to just say "other than Copper". It's pretty rare that you'd want to name other cards.

If your deck (excluding what's in your hand) has no non-Copper treasures, or its only non-Copper treasure card is a Silver or something no better than a Silver, or if you have no Copper and multiple treasures that are better than your worst treasure, you would not want to name Copper.

If the first two are true, you shouldn't have bought Adventurer. If you have no Copper and Adventurer is already pulling at least two Silvers, it does not need an additional buff.
Logged

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1856
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #118 on: October 23, 2014, 06:36:31 pm »
0

Idea: dig for a third Treasure card if both revealed Treasures were Copper.
Logged

pacovf

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3499
  • Multiediting poster
  • Respect: +3838
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #119 on: October 23, 2014, 07:13:51 pm »
+1

Idea: dig for a third Treasure card if both revealed Treasures were Copper.

...Dig for two differently named treasures? Similar, but less text.

...or Dig for three treasures and keep two.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2014, 07:16:49 pm by pacovf »
Logged
pacovf has a neopets account.  It has 999 hours logged.  All his neopets are named "Jessica".  I guess that must be his ex.

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2849
  • Respect: +1559
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #120 on: October 24, 2014, 02:15:05 am »
0

the problem i have with spy isn't so much that it takes a lot of time to resolve, but rather that it's super weak. compare it to ironmonger, both have the self-spy effect, but ironmonger is also either a village, a peddler, or a lab, which is 3$, 4$, and 5$ worth respectively. spy on others is worth... dunno, but 2$ at most.

Spy definitely seems weak. The problem is that its effects are almost invisible. I think Spy would be passable $4 card if it didn't take forever to resolve. Not a powerful $4 card, but a passable one.

Really, Spy should just be taken out of the Base Set and replaced with some other $4 cantrip that doesn't attack.
The cycle-junk-to-top aspect of Spy already got some fixed versions: Rabble, Fortune Teller. The only cool thing that Spy does that they don't is to combo with deck-trashing cards. Here's an attempt at a fix: make Spy terminal and change the effect to "each player reveals the top 5 cards of his deck and puts them back in an order you choose". That makes Spy useless for cycling junk to the top, and in a game without deck attacks it will rarely be bought, but it has some pretty killer combos with Swindler/Knights/etc. Maybe give it +$2 also, so it's then:

Infiltrator - $4
Action - Attack
+$2
Each player (including you) reveals the top 5 cards of his deck and puts them back in an order you choose.
Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4787
  • Respect: +3412
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #121 on: October 24, 2014, 02:17:29 am »
+1

Rather than "Name a Treasure card", it's almost certainly cleaner to just say "other than Copper". It's pretty rare that you'd want to name other cards.
Well, possibly, but I wanted to keep it flexible.

With "Name a Treasure card" or better yet "name a card" you can name the Ace of Spades and still dig up 2 Coppers if you really wanted to (let's say you already have 2 Silvers in your hand you can't draw with it).

I also wanted to point out that even if you make Adventurer a lot stronger, it's still a terminal that has to compete with a lot of other powerful $5+ terminals.
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3189
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #122 on: October 24, 2014, 03:35:28 am »
0

...or Dig for three treasures and keep two.

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1751
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #123 on: October 24, 2014, 08:21:14 am »
+2

Infiltrator - $4
Action - Attack
+$2
Each player (including you) reveals the top 5 cards of his deck and puts them back in an order you choose.

This looks like an insane amount of AP.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #124 on: October 28, 2014, 04:29:55 pm »
0

hey, the images don't work anymore. I just wanted to reference this thread, and now they're gone. tsts.

Sorry about this. Imgur told me I was reaching my limit (which I didn't know existed), and I kind of overcompensated by deleting lots of stuff. All the pretty images I made for the next official expansion were on my imgur so that we could all look at them and print them out for use if the spirit moved us. Anyway, I was keeping a bunch of outtake images too for some reason, and it was a lot of images, even without the hi-res versions.

I should re-upload the ones for this post, at least the low-res versions.

Oh hey, I can get rid of my old Enterprise images now that I've updated that OP with the latest changes. That's another 50-some images I can shed.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 14  All
 

Page created in 0.285 seconds with 22 queries.