Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - popsofctown

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: 1 ... 269 270 [271] 272 273 ... 276
6751
Actually, even the main effect is at risk for causing VP loop games.  It's not that +card +trash is stronger than Monument's 2$, that's certainly not the case, but trashing a card encourages slim comboing decks, +$ encourages buying Provinces once the 2's start adding up.  Both players could end up looping the card even if you take the reaction off completely.


Tying it to the estate stack is a good idea, it goes with the set and puts a light at the end of the tunnel.

Give it a stabley effect with estates, gain estates on the reaction.  Let it gain VP, then become invisible by stabling



EDIT: Ok I thought about it, and though trashing does encourage looping (provided +buy is available) it's not powerful enough to compete with greening so the main effect isn't issue.  The reaction definitely, definitely is though.


By the way, gypsy might be balanced but it is very, very, very powerful.  Please test it with Big Money, because I see it shining in Big Money more so than in a village deck.  If you try to recreate a village wharf engine with the card, the VP chip is going to feel worse than a card because it doesn't help you assemble a dense engine quickly.  In Big Money the VP chip, I'd expect, feels better than a card because you've less need for momentum and love a slower game with a thickened greening phase engines suffer more from greening than money does, as a rule.  The card looks like Gypsy BM bot beats Smithy BM bot which is cause for concern.  It might be at Envoy strength which is fine - a heavy BM threat but one that loses to a good engine.  But definitely don't limit yourself to engine testing on gypsy, that's not going to be its strength.

6752
Auction is tha ultimate torturer counter.


Seems fine.  The second art requires a rename, while the art is good it does not look like an auction.  "Traveller's trade" meshes with the mechanics of the card, but might sound kind of awkward.  "Trusty Dealer" suggests that the man with the pots can always be counted on to give you the same price, one silver.

6753
I thought you were going to raise the cost to 4$ and add no other penalty.  I misunderstood.  Forced discard is exactly the kind of thing that can balance the card.


6754
You guys are great, I really hope I run into some of you at a gaming convention one day. I'd really like to buy all of you a beer.

Qvist - Yeah testing showed the card to not be quite as broken as it would appear, well said. The trick to beating it was being agile enough, that you could counter-attack nearly as often, but then also build a more agile/robust engine. Summon was a "simpler/easier" route, that often worked, but often there was a better, subtler way to win. Removing the +1 Action would, I fear, leave it dead on the board in a lot of games.

I don't think it works at all as a terminal card (or at least I think if its terminal it's a 2$ card). In the situation where you had no ations on the stack, you really wouldn't do anything but tutor your first treasure and so the average gain would be maybe 2$ in the later rounds and far, far worse in the early rounds. On the situation where you got both terminals (Summon+the card you want to tutor for), well the situation is worse. You'd "hit the lottery" on a Village+Summon draw, it means you could tutor the marquee terminal and play it, but that is a lot of work and not easy to ensure you get that. You could build an engine to get that, and if you've built an engine, you don't really need the Summon. Not to mention, the design would ensure you'd never want more than one. But then I guess a lot of terminals wind up being like that. Summon's "appeal" is a fast, quick, instant engine to launch attacks (or some other strong terminal). It soars early, sputters late and isn't particularly agile, but can be extremely effective.

You assessed the card perfectly (in fact it took you just a few minutes to deduce what it took me 100 games to arrive at, I really marvel at how well you guys assess and judge cards). The card is overpowered when a card like Witch or Torturer is in the Kingdom and really lousy when other obvious engines are there. Your 4$ advice, I think is literally right on the money, if you'll forgive the pun.

DStu - Another superb post from you. Cheers.  This line summarizes the issue beautifully:

Quote
I think, coming from rinksworks thread it really seems somehow wrong to let you play $5 cards for $4, but when you want to do this you are so limited in your strategy that is is not a big deal

I think given the analysis from DStu and Qvist, I'll bump the price to 4$. Play test it and see how it goes.

Much obliged, for this, thank again.

Have you ever played Magic?  There was a card that worked much like Summon : "Destroy target creature.  The destroyed creature's controller reveals cards from the top of his or her deck until he reveals a creature, then he puts that creature into play under his control."  A mechanic called creature tokens pretty much let you cheat around the limitation that would have you hitting runts accidentally when you want to get your "5$" creature, so it worked very similarly.  I didn't like it, you had to use very specific counterstrategies to deal with it.  Summon seems problematic because those counterstrategies don't even seem to exist.  This card might be testing well within your set but if your interested in mixing other sets at all you're going to have problems.  Summon on the board would make 5's like Minion automatic mirrors.  Embassy, mirror.  Expand? Mirror. 

I don't really like the card, even at 4$.  I think terminal is the best answer.  I think you can reward healthy use of the card by removing the +action and adding a quirky "If you chose treasure, +1 action.  If you chose action, +1$".  That forces you to buy villages, diluting your deck to some degree, making things ok.  It's slightly underpowered that way, but I'm just trying to point in the direction that makes the card more of a Scheme and less of a Polymorph.  It could be balanced with the second option being 2$ (more likely than not, actually.)  Or you could add +buy to either option, maybe make it 2$, or add an estate option with a benefit.  There's several directions you could go.



Land grab looks fine.

6755
That's the other verbiage I considered, it just doesn't abuse rules loopholes :( haha.

I think the new version looks good, but I dislike that the main effect doesn't have a unique feel.  Maybe add Pearl Diver too?

6756
^^^^Goodposting

I thought about it a bit, and I think some people might misinterpret reactions as not being "you can choose to do this thing and get this benefit" but rather "You're allowed to do this.  You're allowed to do that.  By the way, this always causes benefit A.  That always causes benefit B".

So someone could have trouble with my earlier suggestion of Hero if they are attacked by Minion and want to get VP, but don't want to block the attack.

I think you can fix that with a very small change just by making the second reaction ability "If you are attacked, you may discard this card and reveal it.  If you do, gain a VP".
Revealing from discard happens on tunnel, so swapping the order works fine here.  And it then happens to work under the cause-effect interpretation (although I think it's actually an erroneous one).

6757
Dominion Isotropic / Re: Veto strategy
« on: November 22, 2011, 04:50:22 pm »
I was thinking about the big tournament.

Most of the people, including me, aren't skilled enough to expect to win.  However, if I'm not actually somehow a dormant Dominion genius held back by lack of pressure or something, I have no chance of placing first anyway.  Therefore, I should assume that I am such a genius when I make veto decisions.  Therefore, I should veto against variance in the tournament.  And so should the majority of people playing.  Creating a paradox!!!

Of course, if I were to get to semis or finals, then I would flip back to increasing variance, since I'm more likely to be a lucky dormant level 40 player than a dormant level 50 player at all etc.

6758
Rink's list is a lot of guidelines about what makes a good card, but there are tradeoffs and you have to weigh things against eachother.

(2) Simplicity is a good thing. You don't want your cards to be any more complicated than they have to be. If you have an idea for a card, try to boil it down as simply as possible without losing the essence of the idea.




6759
2011 / Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Kingdom Design Challenge Rules
« on: November 22, 2011, 04:38:48 pm »
I think both the manual and automated methods of accomplishing the task are equally outlandish, so theory just picked manual

6760
The internet ate my post I guess.

The issue you're talking about is a way smaller deal than issues Masquerade creates.  Optimal play is always to preserve your Gold from thief and get VP off the last attack.  There is a tiny space where you might let your guard down more for someone who is playing poorly but it might not even kick in.  People who play MP instead of 2P are generally ready for small interactions like this.

6761
Isotropic should do what the card says.  Kinda black and white.  I just didn't understand it because I wasn't paying attention

6762
huh.

I thought Theif attacks everyone.

6763
This easy to fix because the rules of Dominion are so elegant!  Just separate the abilities.


"When you are attacked, you may reveal this.  If you do, you are immune to that attack"

"When you are attacked, you may reveal this and discard it.  If you do, +1 VP."

You can reveal it for the first ability seven times when player two attacks you, then three times when player three attacks you, and then, when player four attacks you, reveal it ten times for redundant immunity to the attack, but you can only reveal it and discard it once for VP.

This means you have to guess whether to cash in on VP or to keep it in case you're attacked again.  That's absolutely fine for multiplayer.

As for card power, I think the main ability is a tad bit weak, maybe +action or +buy.  +action would be nice for when it fraternizes with other sets because it could be used during greening phase even without attacks on the board.

Removing the estate ability seems like a good idea when I think about it, because the card could get too purely VP oriented, which could stall games.  In fact, since the reaction gains VP it's probably best the main effect do something else entirely.

6764
2011 / Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Kingdom Design Challenge Rules
« on: November 22, 2011, 01:46:33 pm »
I'm not putting notes because theory is double my rank.  Biasing his decision probably wouldn't improve grand finals.

And no, I'm not powerspamming submissions.  I put lots of thought into each one.

6765
Dominion Articles / Re: Updating the Top 5 lists
« on: November 22, 2011, 12:49:44 am »
Can we make that a Bank race instead of a Grand Market race?

Grand Market reads Cache as "3$, when you gain this gain two curses"

6766
2011 / Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Kingdom Design Challenge Rules
« on: November 21, 2011, 11:21:35 pm »
Could you include more formatting guidelines for your own benefit?

If there's 100 other submissions like mine, then you've got work ahead of you..

6767
Excursion doesn't seem banal at all to me, it's really solid even without the synergy in the set.  It's a cantrip, other 3$ cantrips give you effects like Wishing Well's far less frequent extra card draw or "discard a card, +1$".

I say the card is boring because it's boring the way Moneylender tends to be boring.  In a setup with no other trashing and no cursing, you pretty much buy exactly one Moneylender and play it whenever you draw it.  There's not much choice to it.  Two Moneylenders is too clearly out of the question, but the card has a powerful enough interaction with its fuel that you have to pick one up.  Excursion looks like it will behave in a similar way (it's magic number might be 2, I don't know), and that doesn't foster much choice when it's obvious how much of a card to buy and obvious to play it whenever you buy it.

It is more interesting than Moneylender though, because it's not a legitimate option to buy copper to power a moneylender, but buying an Estate is plausible with this.  And with hybrid victory cards it begins to encourage clever discard pile management.  There is more there.  It's just going to be a moneylender a lot of times.

edit:
Villa needs Tournament flavor!  The card looks nice.  It actually would probably be totally inoffensive at 2$ cost.  The difference between a 3$ and a 2$ is +buy concerns, and this doesn't seem to need to be too concerned.  Amassing lots of villas will either fail to work because you don't see the other side of your engine because your hand is full of villas, or you can't reveal a green card because your hand is full of villas.  And if you reveal a green card it's probably what you want to use the cellar effect on, but then if you surprise yourself and draw into another villa, your green card is gone.

Sorry if that messes up your set's $ curve, but 2$ cards are very hard to make so it's exciting when you have a cantidate.

6768
Not overpowered, not underpowered, but a little bit boring.

Not boring enough to scrap through.  Buying estates in order to feed it is amusing.

6769
Other Games / Re: What other games are as good as Dominion?
« on: November 21, 2011, 04:53:00 pm »
Actually the dominating strategy is Combine in the base set.  Really Annoying is removed from the recommended set in the updated rules, but you have to download those, so >_>

6770
Other Games / Re: What other games are as good as Dominion?
« on: November 21, 2011, 04:32:01 pm »
I played Ascension a couple weeks ago and was dazzled by how it somehow managed to combine every aspect I hate about Dominion into a standalone game.

If that's a comparison, it goes too far..

6771
2011 / Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« on: November 21, 2011, 04:29:34 pm »
Im so confused.  Why can't you just both log out and back in?  I watch your name disappear from isotropic.  You come back.  You watch my name disappear from isotropic. I come back.  Isn't that easiest?

6772
I didn't say Pauper's feast was stronger, I just said it was a better combo enabler.  The perfect Goons deck wants a pauper, though a rush might stop it before it sets that up.  Chapel is stronger because it's faster.

6773
I wouldn't call it a gimped Chapel.  The card is an even better combo enabler than Chapel because it trashes itself.  Chapel's better against curses but I think I'd rather have multiples of Pauper's feast than a single Chapel.  But of course I haven't played with the card.

6774
Other Games / Re: What other games are as good as Dominion?
« on: November 21, 2011, 10:51:37 am »
I'm surprised no one's mentioned Sirlin's copycat game, Puzzle Strike.  It's a "fixed" version of Dominion. (" ")

Guess it goes to show what a failure it is

6775
2011 / Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Registration
« on: November 20, 2011, 11:48:37 pm »
pops

American central time, GMT-06 is what it says on my windows clock

Pages: 1 ... 269 270 [271] 272 273 ... 276

Page created in 0.093 seconds with 18 queries.