Sorry for seeing this just today. So, here are some answers:
Sheriff: Seems too strong, I think it needs to cost at least $3. You can get one of these for $4 on the opening and then one for $5 on the second shuffle and that gives you 5 tokens so it's kinda like you've bought a terminal Silver curser for $4 which seems a little too good for me.
I agree that Sheriff might be too strong. However, at five tokens it would run out of Curses much faster than a regular Curser - if uncontested. If contested in 2P, it basically becomes what you say. It's just one of those weird cases where increasing the cost to 3$ breaks the card. For 4$ it's a one-shot Curser and for 5$ clearly too weak for its cost. I'd rather make it a terminal Copper instead.
Farmer: This seems like it is to Journeyman what Oracle is to Catacombs, so I thinm it can get away with being $3.
Might be. I always compared this to Smithy: One card less, great choice. Dropping the price never really occured to me. I feel its choice effect is quite a bit stronger than Journeyman's, but I never played all that much with that one to be honest.
Town/Road: This seems like a pretty clear $5 to me. Playing a Town and then Road is better than Lab! Sure, you have to draw them together for that to happen, but this can even just be a regular Village or a Smithy if you double play the Road. I think all this extra functionality makes up for the early unreliability. The Road gain isn't even mandatory!
The thing with Road is that you have a tradeoff between the card being reliable and having fewer dead Roads in your deck. Considering the fact that every Road you draw after the first is a dead card, I feel that a cost of 5$ is too much. I am however willing to playtest it at that price range. If it turns out to be weak at 5$, I'll say that I prefer a fun powerful card over one that gets barely played. But yeah, not opposed to trying this.
Cliffside Village: This is incredibly powerful, but you probably realise that. Better than Junk Dealer easily, villages are great.
Isn't it worse than Junk Dealer in the early game? Even so, it certainly could stomach being a bit weaker. Considering how simple/bland it is right now, it could maybe do with a bonus for the other players. I assume a coin token on gain is still too much? Alternatively, this could be a high-debt-cost card (haven't gotten one of those, yet), but I generally prefer player interaction.
Necromancer/Zombie: I don't think a kingdom pile based around the Rogue/Graverobber+Knights interaction is a good idea. These game would never end!
I tend to agree. There certainly seems to be something lacking to keep that from happening. I assume this is part of why the official Necromancer never returns cards from the trash. It's not like we need two of these, either way.
Tribunal: I'd be careful about this, the attack seems like it could be very frustrating! I imagine Tribunal big money to be particularly agonising!
Yes, this is another poor one. It was designed with Intrigue in mind, and like several Intrigue attacks, it's really no fun to get hit by.
Minister: It's probably broken, but all the cost reduction cards are so I guess it just join the party!
I'm actually kinda happy with this one, to be honest.
Improve: I think this should just be remodel, not expand. Trashing an Estate to gain a $4 is similar to Summon and Seaway as a thing where you're spending $5 on a $4 but getting some other benefit. Trashing one to get a $5 has basically no decision involved because it's almost always going to be better than buying the $5.
Hum... This is barely tested, so you might be right. One thing is that you can never open with this, so you only can expand Estates later on, an only thrice. In the end you might use it again to turn 5$ s into Provinces, I guess. Either way, I'm not sure it being almost strictly better than buying a 5$ directly is an issue. People don't complain that buying Delve is better than buying Silvers.