In playtesting, do you keep track of the same stats as Councilroom has? Do you play both as both players? And how do you physically mock up the cards? Play with real ones but keep track of which card represents which fan card?
You're going to get a much more verbose answer than you probably wanted, but since I am knee-deep in this process right now, I have much to share...
WHAT I TRACKI don't track what is drawn or discarded in a turn, but I do track purchases and gains in a turn. So I don't have all the data Council Room has, nor can I value cards the same way, I use a really raw rating scheme based on win-loss and purchasing. So its very, very crude, but still not a bad baseline to test an expansion with. I track all purchases, winning scenarios, turn order and openings in a small database. I do NOT track what was on the board at the time of the game, only what was bought. This is a HUGE mistake I will not make again, if I ever do this again.
THE CARDSYes, I mock up each card, print them out and sleeve them. It looks pretty good, sleeving is a pain, it took my wife and I over 30 minutes to sleeve over 250 cards (plus sleeves for all the money and victory cards you'll play with). It's not fun, but once its done, you have a great set to play with. I print out the mock-up (exactly as you see on this thread), then place another playing card behind it. It works quite well. I might post a photo of how it looks, as I am generally quite pleased with the overall look of the fan cards.
PLAYING GAMESI play most games with an opponent, although sometimes we discuss tactics before-hand, sometimes agreeing to try different combos specifically. I found we had to do this, or some cards just don't get tested. Cards that don't look that cool, actually turn out to be somewhat effective once you are forced to test them. Excursion sort of found its "niche" with us, by forcing us to give it some attention. So sometimes the games are less about competition and more about trying to bust things, or break things. So my wife and I will shuffle the board (I built a
small online shuffler to do that), and then discuss what to test and how.
When I do solo, I'll pit basic strategies against a BM+card draw combo. I'll take the best card draw on the board, buy one and then just buy money and victories. I follow Geronimoo's simulator rules for that. Later this week, I intend to put Smithy on the board specifically to test strategies against it. Beating BM isn't as easy as you think, but in general Curse attacks thwart it, even weak ones like Shyster (and a Summon+Lycanthrope combo wins handily, at least it has so far). I am often pleased when a combo or tactic FAILS to beat Big Money, because it means the cards aren't entirely broken.
TESTINGI try weird tactics sometimes. I tried to build a deck entirely out of Shyster and Church Bell and one Silver. I essentially wiped out my entire hand except for Shyster cards and Church Bell (which I could not trash out). I then essentially tried to win by gaining 3VP a turn, getting estates here and there (with the one silver), to 3-pile estates and curses. Weird stuff, that probably could never win, but wanted to see if a broken, guaranteed 3VP a turn, was unbeatable. It turns out, it can sometimes win, but most of the time can be beaten, so right now it is isn't broken.
I worry some things ARE broken in the expansion. Summon will mill through your entire deck, if your deck is entirely one thing for example, creating a LOT of discards along the way. So if you somehow chapel to an all-action deck, you can play Summon, say "treasure" and mill your deck, all back into your discard pile. Is that broken? Well it might be, so I need to test it, to see.
Church Bell+Argent+Emporium is another combo I am worried about. Buy one Church Bell, buy Silver, buy Argent...then use Emporium to put all the victory cards you acquire to the side. This is one I might test tonight. It could certainly be devastating but might take too long to get to the final destination.
I'd say the card I worry about most right now are Auction, Summon and Argent. Argent is probably the most broken. In general, testing a non-terminal card is a LOT harder.
WHY I DO THISYou have to love doing this kinda stuff I think (and thankfully I do). But it's a crude way to do it. For one thing, I have not tested multi-player. For another I've been at this for weeks now and still only have 46 games logged. That's a miserably small sample-size to really assess balance, value and broken combinations, but part of the fun is playing with a jagged set. In other words, part of the fun is playing a game with a set of cards that are poorly designed and by playing, seeing how and why they are poorly designed.
It gives you a TREMENDOUS appreciation for just how hard it is to do for real. Nothing beats play-testing for revealing whether your "good idea on paper" is really a good idea after all.
CONCLUSIONMy general feeling is Silver Lining, is pretty gimmicky and obvious, almost like a beginner set. The combos are not subtle and many of the cards are designed to obviously complement one another. I feel many of the cards are quite strong within the set's synergy and theme, but fall very short when mixed with the actual pantheon of real DOMINION cards. In other words, the more I play the expansion, the more I realize it really is just a "fan variant", and falls, far, far, short of the real thing.
To be fair to myself, it is a very FUN set and my wife and I have played VERY close games, pursuing different tactics. At that level, I am pleased I made something fun, but it also becomes obvious just how inferior the set's general design is, when held up to the real thing.