Dominion Strategy Forum
Archive => Archive => Dominion: Dark Ages Previews => Topic started by: Donald X. on August 10, 2012, 09:00:12 am
-
(http://dominionstrategy.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/darkagespreview5.png?w=640&h=326)
Here they are at last, the Shelters. In an all Dark Ages game, your starting deck is 7 Coppers, Necropolis, Overgrown Estate, Hovel. When mixing sets up, the rule for using Shelters is similar to the Platinum / Colony rule.
Shelters may not be worth the 1 VP of an Estate, but they are way better to have in your deck. Necropolis lets you go a little heavier on terminals from the get-go. Overgrown Estate gives you an extra little treat if you ever manage to trash it. And Hovel has a built-in way to get rid of it - you move out of that Hovel, and into a nice Duchy or something.
You can't buy Shelters, but they cost $1. That's just to shake up how various cards interact with them. A Remodel doesn't take you as far as it used to. And with only one being a Victory card, that Crossroads doesn't go to as many places. Baron doesn't know what to do with these. And an Ambassador can't even give them away, since they have no piles to return to. On the other hand, they are fine places to get animals for your Menagerie. And how much exactly can you build Fairgrounds up to now, in games without Black Market? Man. A lot.
Even though I previewed 15 cards, only 9 of them were kingdom cards. There are 26 kingdom cards left that you haven't seen. That's as many as a whole set! It's like there weren't any previews at all. And yet they're over. Someone will no doubt post the card list after the set comes out at GenCon next week, and I will post a Secret History shortly afterwards.
-
That's all the previews?
Nooooooooooo!
Gotta get my fix!
-
Um?
-
When mixing sets up, the rule for using Shelters is similar to the Platinum / Colony rule.
Will there always be either all three Shelters or none in the starting decks or do the rules for mixed sets include a way to start with one or two Shelters plus two or one Estates?
-
When mixing sets up, the rule for using Shelters is similar to the Platinum / Colony rule.
Will there always be either all three Shelters or none in the starting decks or do the rules for mixed sets include a way to start with one or two Shelters plus two or one Estates?
Sounds straight forward - either all or none.
-
In this edition of "Which of his own rules has Donald X. broken today?" We get the closest we're likely to ever see to a pure reaction card...
-
Hmm...
-
So shelters are nothing like what I expected (some form of defense). I don't mind, though. Starting a game with a +2 Action card sounds like it opens the door for so many strategies. Looking forward to getting my copy of Dark Ages. Thanks for all the previews.
-
How much suckier does Baron get with these? Can somebody calculate the chance that, if Baron is in game, that these will be too, if chance they will appear is number of Dark Ages cards * 0.1 ?
-
I'd like to be able to choose, depending on my strategy. That seems like a reasonable house rule.
-
Thanks for running these previews, Donald. This has been fantastic. You did say Dark Ages was your favorite set, but I don't think even us die-hards expected you to knock it as far out of the park as it appears to have done. This expansion changes the whole Dominion world for sure.
-
4 and a hovel with island on the board is going to be the new mint fool's gold - elite opening that you have to be a little lucky to get.
-
Seems like a well-deserved nerf for Scout for me, after all the love it got from the rest of the set...
-
Shelters may not be worth the 1 VP of an Estate, but they are way better to have in your deck.
On average yeah, but I bet there are quite a few exceptions where they are worse than Estates would be, mainly due to the cost of only one.
For instance in a game with Upgrade and/or Remake and/or Develop without $2 Kingdom cards. Then you have to take an Estate when you trash them. With Develop, you even have to take an additional Copper!
-
Seems a bit luck-based? I mean, if you open double terminal and pair them with Necro, and opponent doesn't.. And if those terminals are Swindler/Swindler.
I mean, opening with these are totally different story. Well, necropolis mostly.
But is sure going to make Puzzles fun ;D
-
Wait, so finally have our first non-Action Reaction card right? So you can't play it right? I was always waiting for that to happen. Let's see if there will be a regular non-Action Reaction kingdom card.
-
Wait, so finally have our first non-Action Reaction card right? So you can't play it right? I was always waiting for that to happen. Let's see if there will be a regular non-Action Reaction kingdom card.
Tunnel. And Fool's Gold.
-
Baron has gotten shafted so hard.
-
Seems a bit luck-based? I mean, if you open double terminal and pair them with Necro, and opponent doesn't.. And if those terminals are Swindler/Swindler.
Actually, Swindler seems to get considerably worse in a game with Shelters: If you hit a Shelter, it gets trashed without replacement absent a $1 kingdom card! (I. e. absent only Poor House so far.)
That and Swindler gets much worse anyway against benefit-on-trash cards.
-
Re: the Fairgrounds comment, well, it's clear that Fairgrounds just got a lot better and could be powerful in Dark Ages games where there are so many unique cards to gain. However, it will still be quite difficult to get to 20 different cards, never mind having a functional deck with 20 different cards. Getting 15 different cards and popping Fairgrounds as a $6 Province is now much easier to do, but all players will probably go for this so the Fairgrounds will be more or less a wash and it will still come down to who can get more points other places.
I guess what I'm saying is that I wish Fairgrounds were two points for every FOUR different cards (not five) or, similarly, one point for every two different cards.
I bet that whoever gets 25 different cards in a Dark Ages/Black Market/Fairgounds game and is getting 10 points per Fairgrounds is actually unlikely to win the game.
-
Wait, so finally have our first non-Action Reaction card right? So you can't play it right? I was always waiting for that to happen. Let's see if there will be a regular non-Action Reaction kingdom card.
Tunnel. And Fool's Gold.
Right. I formulated it wrong. It's the first Reaction card that you only can use for its reaction (You buy Fool's Gold mainly for the money and Tunnel often for the 2VP). If it weren't red, (because that signalizes a Shelter) it would be only blue. And normally blue cards are Action-Reaction cards. That was what I was trying to say.
-
Young witch/tunnel just got better.
-
So shelters are nothing like what I expected (some form of defense). I don't mind, though. Starting a game with a +2 Action card sounds like it opens the door for so many strategies. Looking forward to getting my copy of Dark Ages. Thanks for all the previews.
I'm not sure. Necropolis certainly is, but the other two? Trash when buying a Victory card and having in hand, how fast will this happen? In a standard game? With GH, Island, ok, but you still don't want to buy Duchies before Provinces, and once you start buying Provinces, it's already quite late, and you likely don't have the Hovel in hand (especially because the fact that you have it in hand reduces the chance that you can afford the Province). And later you don't mind the Estate giving you +1VP all that much.
And the Overgwrown Estate... When you trash it, you get +1card. But it is worth $1 less, so with TFB, it's not really that strong. If at all. Will depend. With Chapel you don't care for the +1card, Steward might want it, opponents Bishop might really like it. Lookout will like it. And when you don't trash, you just have -1VP compared to an Estate.
-
Thanks for running these previews, Donald. This has been fantastic. You did say Dark Ages was your favorite set, but I don't think even us die-hards expected you to knock it as far out of the park as it appears to have done. This expansion changes the whole Dominion world for sure.
I agree with this. For regular players/isotropic addicts, Dark Ages looks boss. For newbs, no way. Methinks it's going to take us quite a while to sort through the rules on a lot of cases with Dark Ages cards.
-
Baron has gotten shafted so hard.
Not to mention Scout!
-
4 and a hovel with island on the board is going to be the new mint fool's gold - elite opening that you have to be a little lucky to get.
Um, what are you going to do with that opening Island? Set aside a Copper? Setting aside an Overgrown Estate seems lackluster and setting aside a Necropolis is just counterproductive.
-
Thanks for running these previews, Donald. This has been fantastic. You did say Dark Ages was your favorite set, but I don't think even us die-hards expected you to knock it as far out of the park as it appears to have done. This expansion changes the whole Dominion world for sure.
This.
-
Seems a bit luck-based? I mean, if you open double terminal and pair them with Necro, and opponent doesn't.. And if those terminals are Swindler/Swindler.
I mean, opening with these are totally different story. Well, necropolis mostly.
But is sure going to make Puzzles fun ;D
Necro diminishes the probability of terminal collision (assuming neither terminal draws) in the first reshuffle hurting you by precisely 1/3. Which knocks it from ~30% to about 20%.
Edit: Hey, I can't do math. Should be precisely 3/10, which knocks you to about 21%.
-
Thanks for the previews!
Do we know / are we allowed to know if the word "Shelter" at the bottom of those cards actually means anything? My guess would be that there are other Dark Age cards that reference "Shelter" cards; if not, why have a special type at all?
-
Seems a bit luck-based? I mean, if you open double terminal and pair them with Necro, and opponent doesn't.. And if those terminals are Swindler/Swindler.
I mean, opening with these are totally different story. Well, necropolis mostly.
But is sure going to make Puzzles fun ;D
Necro diminishes the probability of terminal collision (assuming neither terminal draws) in the first reshuffle hurting you by precisely 1/3.
3/10.
-
4 and a hovel with island on the board is going to be the new mint fool's gold - elite opening that you have to be a little lucky to get.
Um, what are you going to do with that opening Island? Set aside a Copper? Setting aside an Overgrown Estate seems lackluster and setting aside a Necropolis is just counterproductive.
If I'm not willing to island a copper on turn 3 with the hand Island Copper Copper Copper Copper (or its evil twin Island Silver Copper Copper Copper) I'm probably not opening island on any board. But yeah, I imagine I'd set aside an overgrown estate or a copper unless I just really did not want +2 actions this game.
-
So shelters are nothing like what I expected (some form of defense). I don't mind, though. Starting a game with a +2 Action card sounds like it opens the door for so many strategies. Looking forward to getting my copy of Dark Ages. Thanks for all the previews.
I'm not sure. Necropolis certainly is, but the other two? Trash when buying a Victory card and having in hand, how fast will this happen? In a standard game? With GH, Island, ok, but you still don't want to buy Duchies before Provinces, and once you start buying Provinces, it's already quite late, and you likely don't have the Hovel in hand (especially because the fact that you have it in hand reduces the chance that you can afford the Province). And later you don't mind the Estate giving you +1VP all that much.
And the Overgwrown Estate... When you trash it, you get +1card. But it is worth $1 less, so with TFB, it's not really that strong. If at all. Will depend. With Chapel you don't care for the +1card, Steward might want it, opponents Bishop might really like it. Lookout will like it. And when you don't trash, you just have -1VP compared to an Estate.
With no $2 card in the kingdom, you'd probably buy an Estate on a 5/2 opening -- or any other early $2 turn -- with Hovel in hand. Turning your Hovel into an Estate gives you a point without damaging your deck.
-
Seems a bit luck-based? I mean, if you open double terminal and pair them with Necro, and opponent doesn't.. And if those terminals are Swindler/Swindler.
I mean, opening with these are totally different story. Well, necropolis mostly.
But is sure going to make Puzzles fun ;D
Necro diminishes the probability of terminal collision (assuming neither terminal draws) in the first reshuffle hurting you by precisely 1/3.
3/10.
3/10 is precisely 1/3.
-
3/10 is precisely 1/3.
For certain values of "precisely"...
-
Seems a bit luck-based? I mean, if you open double terminal and pair them with Necro, and opponent doesn't.. And if those terminals are Swindler/Swindler.
I mean, opening with these are totally different story. Well, necropolis mostly.
But is sure going to make Puzzles fun ;D
Necro diminishes the probability of terminal collision (assuming neither terminal draws) in the first reshuffle hurting you by precisely 1/3.
3/10.
3/10 is precisely 1/3.
Trolololol
-
(trashing an estate before the first time you shuffle your deck is huge!)
I also imagine a feodum (w/hovel in hand) chapel opening is going to be sick. The great hall/trade route opening went from being a trap to being useful as well.
-
With no $2 card in the kingdom, you'd probably buy an Estate on a 5/2 opening -- or any other early $2 turn -- with Hovel in hand. Turning your Hovel into an Estate gives you a point without damaging your deck.
Yepp, but this move does not really convice me that Hovel is stronger than Estate.
-
Seems a bit luck-based? I mean, if you open double terminal and pair them with Necro, and opponent doesn't.. And if those terminals are Swindler/Swindler.
I mean, opening with these are totally different story. Well, necropolis mostly.
But is sure going to make Puzzles fun ;D
Necro diminishes the probability of terminal collision (assuming neither terminal draws) in the first reshuffle hurting you by precisely 1/3.
3/10.
3/10 is precisely 1/3.
This is true for very large values of 3/10.
-
4 and a hovel with island on the board is going to be the new mint fool's gold - elite opening that you have to be a little lucky to get.
Um, what are you going to do with that opening Island? Set aside a Copper? Setting aside an Overgrown Estate seems lackluster and setting aside a Necropolis is just counterproductive.
I thought (perhaps incorrectly) that the idea was that when Island is a good opening anyway -- which on some boards it is -- now it's even better when you can get rid of your Hovel when you get it. Then you can Island your Overgrown Estate (or Copper, even), and by that point you've gotten double the deck-thinning an Island usually does for you.
-
With no $2 card in the kingdom, you'd probably buy an Estate on a 5/2 opening -- or any other early $2 turn -- with Hovel in hand. Turning your Hovel into an Estate gives you a point without damaging your deck.
Yepp, but this move does not really convice me that Hovel is stronger than Estate.
Oh. Was that the question? Agreed.
-
Seems a bit luck-based? I mean, if you open double terminal and pair them with Necro, and opponent doesn't.. And if those terminals are Swindler/Swindler.
I mean, opening with these are totally different story. Well, necropolis mostly.
But is sure going to make Puzzles fun ;D
Necro diminishes the probability of terminal collision (assuming neither terminal draws) in the first reshuffle hurting you by precisely 1/3.
3/10.
How do you get 3/10? Here's how I get 1/3, and tell me where I am going wrong: So, for it to mitigate, you already had to have your terminals colliding. So take those two cards as a given. Then you have 3 cards left in your hand, and if one is the necro, it's mitigated. The chance of NOT getting the necro is (8/9)*(7/8)*(6/7)=6/9=2/3, and 1-2/3 = 1/3.
-
Watchtower is awesomer now, with Necropolis. ;D
-
So shelters are nothing like what I expected (some form of defense). I don't mind, though. Starting a game with a +2 Action card sounds like it opens the door for so many strategies. Looking forward to getting my copy of Dark Ages. Thanks for all the previews.
I'm not sure. Necropolis certainly is, but the other two? Trash when buying a Victory card and having in hand, how fast will this happen? In a standard game? With GH, Island, ok, but you still don't want to buy Duchies before Provinces, and once you start buying Provinces, it's already quite late, and you likely don't have the Hovel in hand (especially because the fact that you have it in hand reduces the chance that you can afford the Province). And later you don't mind the Estate giving you +1VP all that much.
And the Overgwrown Estate... When you trash it, you get +1card. But it is worth $1 less, so with TFB, it's not really that strong. If at all. Will depend. With Chapel you don't care for the +1card, Steward might want it, opponents Bishop might really like it. Lookout will like it. And when you don't trash, you just have -1VP compared to an Estate.
With no $2 card in the kingdom, you'd probably buy an Estate on a 5/2 opening -- or any other early $2 turn -- with Hovel in hand. Turning your Hovel into an Estate gives you a point without damaging your deck.
Maybe, but I am not so sure. I mean, do you really want that 1 point? Because there is a decent chance that you can get rid of your hovel later on, when you buy a better green card. So, the question is, will that come late enough on average to make it worth it to do this? And that is going to depend on the deck. I don't know the 'general' answer.
-
Would opening Great Hall with Hovel in hand possibly be a good idea? You basically skip a buy for the ability to play with 1 less dead card. (Plus 1 point!)
-
Would opening Great Hall with Hovel in hand possibly be a good idea? You basically skip a buy for the ability to play with 1 less dead card. (Plus 1 point!)
Seems (almost) strictly better than an island open on a traditional board, which is often worthwhile and often not (almost because you get 1 VP less - otherwise strictly better).
-
So the reason cards that give you +2 actions are called "villages" is because of the idea that you have a village full of people running around and doing stuff for you. A Necropolis is a village of the dead... but somehow it still gives you +2 actions. That's a little creepy.
-
4 and a hovel with island on the board is going to be the new mint fool's gold - elite opening that you have to be a little lucky to get.
Um, what are you going to do with that opening Island? Set aside a Copper? Setting aside an Overgrown Estate seems lackluster and setting aside a Necropolis is just counterproductive.
I thought (perhaps incorrectly) that the idea was that when Island is a good opening anyway -- which on some boards it is -- now it's even better when you can get rid of your Hovel when you get it. Then you can Island your Overgrown Estate (or Copper, even), and by that point you've gotten double the deck-thinning an Island usually does for you.
Well, sure. But it seems like in a game where none of your starting deck is worth VP that Island would be a worse opening in general.
-
How do you get 3/10? Here's how I get 1/3, and tell me where I am going wrong: So, for it to mitigate, you already had to have your terminals colliding. So take those two cards as a given. Then you have 3 cards left in your hand, and if one is the necro, it's mitigated.
So far the same. Now you have 3 spots for the Necro, out from 10 remaining, the Necro is equally likely to be at each position, so the probability is 3/10. Or:
The chance of NOT getting the necro is (9/10)*(8/9)*(7/8)=7/10 and 1-7/10 = 3/10.
FTFY. There was one card lying under the table...
-
How do you get 3/10? Here's how I get 1/3, and tell me where I am going wrong: So, for it to mitigate, you already had to have your terminals colliding. So take those two cards as a given. Then you have 3 cards left in your hand, and if one is the necro, it's mitigated.
So far the same. Now you have 3 spots for the Necro, out from 10 remaining, the Necro is equally likely to be at each position, so the probability is 3/10. Or:
The chance of NOT getting the necro is (9/10)*(8/9)*(7/8)=7/10 and 1-7/10 = 3/10.
FTFY. There was one card lying under the table...
Oh hey look, I can't subtract 12-2= 10. I am wondering how I got 9 from this..........
-
I was imagining Shelters would at least reference Looters - otherwise, why even have these two card types? Every other card type is either referenced (Moat reacts to Attacks) or tells you something fundamental about the card. Durations stay out, Actions are... well... Actions, etc. What does Looter tell you? That you should include Ruins? Well, having Ruins mentioned on the card kinda already does that for you. And there's really no point in calling these three cards "Shelters" except for the purpose of the rules saying "In this instance, use Shelters." Dark Ages better have cards that reference Shelters and Looters. Even if it's just a card that says "When another player plays a Looter, run screaming into the hills," I will be mollified.
-
How do you get 3/10? Here's how I get 1/3, and tell me where I am going wrong: So, for it to mitigate, you already had to have your terminals colliding. So take those two cards as a given. Then you have 3 cards left in your hand, and if one is the necro, it's mitigated.
So far the same. Now you have 3 spots for the Necro, out from 10 remaining, the Necro is equally likely to be at each position, so the probability is 3/10. Or:
The chance of NOT getting the necro is (9/10)*(8/9)*(7/8)=7/10 and 1-7/10 = 3/10.
FTFY. There was one card lying under the table...
Oh hey look, I can't subtract 12-2= 10. I am wondering how I got 9 from this..........
Probably because you also substracted the Necro.
-
This is crazy. Dark Ages is looking more and more like the set I most want to play just by itself. It would do really well as a standalone game.
-
Seems a bit luck-based? I mean, if you open double terminal and pair them with Necro, and opponent doesn't..
I don't think opening double terminal with Necropolis gets more luck based. I mean, it already is really luck based now: There is a 30.3% risk that two terminals that you bought in turns 1 and 2 collide in turns 3 or 4.
A necropolis in your deck decreases that risk somewhat - which one might even consider as becoming less luck based. In any case, the 'sort' of risk is basically the same as when two opponents open double terminal and one of them has a collision while the other doesn't.
EDIT: Ninja'd, mostly.
-
How do you get 3/10? Here's how I get 1/3, and tell me where I am going wrong: So, for it to mitigate, you already had to have your terminals colliding. So take those two cards as a given. Then you have 3 cards left in your hand, and if one is the necro, it's mitigated.
So far the same. Now you have 3 spots for the Necro, out from 10 remaining, the Necro is equally likely to be at each position, so the probability is 3/10. Or:
The chance of NOT getting the necro is (9/10)*(8/9)*(7/8)=7/10 and 1-7/10 = 3/10.
FTFY. There was one card lying under the table...
Oh hey look, I can't subtract 12-2= 10. I am wondering how I got 9 from this..........
Probably because you also substracted the Necro.
I don't think so, but I am baffled, so hey maybe. I do remember making a similar mistake on a Cal exam in high school (yeah, I remember random things); essentially -X + -X = -3X.
But hey, it is 1/3 in the incredibly precise case that 1 of your two terminals is island, AND you get rid of your hovel with that.
-
I was imagining Shelters would at least reference Looters - otherwise, why even have these two card types? Every other card type is either referenced (Moat reacts to Attacks) or tells you something fundamental about the card. Durations stay out, Actions are... well... Actions, etc. What does Looter tell you? That you should include Ruins? Well, having Ruins mentioned on the card kinda already does that for you. And there's really no point in calling these three cards "Shelters" except for the purpose of the rules saying "In this instance, use Shelters." Dark Ages better have cards that reference Shelters and Looters. Even if it's just a card that says "When another player plays a Looter, run screaming into the hills," I will be mollified.
With Looters it does matter, because you can (and might want to!) buy a Ruins from the Ruins pile, but the Ruins pile is only available in games with a Looters. This is different than Curses, which are always available.
With Shelters, I already asked this; but I'm guessing we'll see a Dark Ages card that references Shelters. Actually I'd guess that at least one of the other two Looters will.
-
Thanks for the previews!
Do we know / are we allowed to know if the word "Shelter" at the bottom of those cards actually means anything? My guess would be that there are other Dark Age cards that reference "Shelter" cards; if not, why have a special type at all?
I'm there for you.
If no cards referred to Shelters (something as yet unknown), then the point to the type would be, to give the cards a color - in Dominion, having a color indicates having a type (but not vice versa). And they have a color to make them go together, for separating out of your deck and stuff.
-
Thanks for the previews!
Do we know / are we allowed to know if the word "Shelter" at the bottom of those cards actually means anything? My guess would be that there are other Dark Age cards that reference "Shelter" cards; if not, why have a special type at all?
I'm there for you.
If no cards referred to Shelters (something as yet unknown), then the point to the type would be, to give the cards a color - in Dominion, having a color indicates having a type (but not vice versa). And they have a color to make them go together, for separating out of your deck and stuff.
Speaking of colors, it's driving my OCD nuts that Necropolis has the red half on the bottom; while the other 2 have the red half on the top. :P
-
Oh, hey, guys, can we use this to stop all the speculation that ruined village will give +2 actions? K thanks.
-
Thanks for the previews!
Do we know / are we allowed to know if the word "Shelter" at the bottom of those cards actually means anything? My guess would be that there are other Dark Age cards that reference "Shelter" cards; if not, why have a special type at all?
I'm there for you.
If no cards referred to Shelters (something as yet unknown), then the point to the type would be, to give the cards a color - in Dominion, having a color indicates having a type (but not vice versa). And they have a color to make them go together, for separating out of your deck and stuff.
Speaking of colors, it's driving my OCD nuts that Necropolis has the red half on the bottom; while the other 2 have the red half on the top. :P
Just remember, red bottom = good, red top = terrible :D
-
Oh, hey, guys, can we use this to stop all the speculation that ruined village will give +2 actions? K thanks.
So you think +1 action?
-
If no cards referred to Shelters (something as yet unknown)
Says the man who knows very well if there are. :P
-
Oh, hey, guys, can we use this to stop all the speculation that ruined village will give +2 actions? K thanks.
So you think +1 action?
Yes, of course.
Edit: The 'of course' is just because of the way Donald said things - I don't think it would be so obvious what those 3 benefits would be if they didn't exactly parallel, for all the different vanilla bonuses in the game. And yeah, it's useless 90% of the time, but you know, he did say some were better than others.
-
Oh, hey, guys, can we use this to stop all the speculation that ruined village will give +2 actions? K thanks.
So you think +1 action?
Yes, of course.
I agree; though I also think that makes it so much worse a card to get than Ruined Market. (Or any of the "basic" ruins).
-
So the reason cards that give you +2 actions are called "villages" is because of the idea that you have a village full of people running around and doing stuff for you. A Necropolis is a village of the dead... but somehow it still gives you +2 actions. That's a little creepy.
Do you remember how the Battle of the Pelennor Fields was concluded? ;-)
-
Well... this is a serious nerf for early trash-for-benefit cards, like remake, develop, and so on. I can definitely see the need for Rats now...
-
I was thinking an all Dark Ages game would be fun. It's good to see Donald has played it that way too. Is there any other expansion you would play by itself besides base?
-
I guess what I'm saying is that I wish Fairgrounds were two points for every FOUR different cards (not five) or, similarly, one point for every two different cards.
I'm really happy that Fairgrounds is not like this. This would mean that they dominate Provinces in most games as 12 different cards are much more easy to obtain than 15.
I bet that whoever gets 25 different cards in a Dark Ages/Black Market/Fairgounds game and is getting 10 points per Fairgrounds is actually unlikely to win the game.
I accept that bet! 8)
Fairgrounds + Black Market already is an extremely strong combo pre-Dark Ages in Province games (at least unless there are neither villages nor cantrips) and it will certainly get even stronger with Shelters and Ruins.
-
I was thinking an all Dark Ages game would be fun. It's good to see Donald has played it that way too. Is there any other expansion you would play by itself besides base?
All of them? 'cept maybe Alchemy, because only having two non-Potion cards just would not be practical. Fun, but not practical.
-
Oh, hey, guys, can we use this to stop all the speculation that ruined village will give +2 actions? K thanks.
So you think +1 action?
Yes, of course.
Edit: The 'of course' is just because of the way Donald said things - I don't think it would be so obvious what those 3 benefits would be if they didn't exactly parallel, for all the different vanilla bonuses in the game. And yeah, it's useless 90% of the time, but you know, he did say some were better than others.
Proud to have given you your 1000th point of respect on this post. Didn't even realize, until the flash of movement -- the appearance of another digit -- caught my eye when I hit the up-arrow.
-
These cards are definitely going to change the landscape of openings and first shuffles. Double terminals will definitely be more common here. Plus, a 5/2 opening with no Actions on the board will often buy an Estate to trash the Hovel - no more wasted $2 turns on your first turn!
-
Oh, hey, guys, can we use this to stop all the speculation that ruined village will give +2 actions? K thanks.
So you think +1 action?
Yes, of course.
Edit: The 'of course' is just because of the way Donald said things - I don't think it would be so obvious what those 3 benefits would be if they didn't exactly parallel, for all the different vanilla bonuses in the game. And yeah, it's useless 90% of the time, but you know, he did say some were better than others.
Proud to have given you your 1000th point of respect on this post. Didn't even realize, until the flash of movement -- the appearance of another digit -- caught my eye when I hit the up-arrow.
You upvoted THAT? ???
-
These cards are definitely going to change the landscape of openings and first shuffles. Double terminals will definitely be more common here. Plus, a 5/2 opening with no Actions on the board will often buy an Estate to trash the Hovel - no more wasted $2 turns on your first turn!
Somehow that still seems like a waste. Unless you're opening Estate/Baron.
-
These cards are definitely going to change the landscape of openings and first shuffles. Double terminals will definitely be more common here. Plus, a 5/2 opening with no Actions on the board will often buy an Estate to trash the Hovel - no more wasted $2 turns on your first turn!
Somehow that still seems like a waste. Unless you're opening Estate/Baron.
Which seems quite a bad idea with ONE estate in your deck.
-
Oh, hey, guys, can we use this to stop all the speculation that ruined village will give +2 actions? K thanks.
So you think +1 action?
Yes, of course.
Edit: The 'of course' is just because of the way Donald said things - I don't think it would be so obvious what those 3 benefits would be if they didn't exactly parallel, for all the different vanilla bonuses in the game. And yeah, it's useless 90% of the time, but you know, he did say some were better than others.
Proud to have given you your 1000th point of respect on this post. Didn't even realize, until the flash of movement -- the appearance of another digit -- caught my eye when I hit the up-arrow.
You upvoted THAT? ???
I'm not sure if it's just the higher volume of posters, or just that I'm posting more frequently (or the quality of my posts has increased? I'm sure WW would disagree), but my respect has jumped about 150 points in just the past week, and I'm still trying to figure out which post is to blame...
-
Is anyone else freaking out that Necropolis should be red on the top and not the bottom, to match the other two? Maybe I need to get my OCD checked...
-
These cards are definitely going to change the landscape of openings and first shuffles. Double terminals will definitely be more common here. Plus, a 5/2 opening with no Actions on the board will often buy an Estate to trash the Hovel - no more wasted $2 turns on your first turn!
Somehow that still seems like a waste. Unless you're opening Estate/Baron.
Which seems quite a bad idea with ONE estate in your deck.
Estate/Island, then? Estate/Remake? I dunno, I'd rather just pass.
-
Proud to have given you your 1000th point of respect on this post. Didn't even realize, until the flash of movement -- the appearance of another digit -- caught my eye when I hit the up-arrow.
I'm going to go downvote one of WW's posts so he can get 1000 again.
-
I feel a little underwhelmed, though.
I too was expecting Shelters to have some interaction with cards, especially the Looters. There are a lot of cards not yet previewed, so I'm cautiously optimistic.
I shouldn't complain, though. I like the idea of replacing the three Estates with cards of variety, just like I'm pleased to see something similar to Curses of variety.
I think I might take my base cards to GenCon. Then when I buy this expansion (because I know I'm going to), I can pull it out during any down time to play some Dark Ages. Maybe I'll finally be able to get a Governor card.
Hell, I can leave my Estates, Colonies, Platinum, and Potions at home.
-
Is anyone else freaking out that Necropolis should be red on the top and not the bottom, to match the other two? Maybe I need to get my OCD checked...
What I'm freaking out about most is that the VP sign for Overgrown Estate is on the RED portion of the card, and not the GREEN.
-
These cards are definitely going to change the landscape of openings and first shuffles. Double terminals will definitely be more common here. Plus, a 5/2 opening with no Actions on the board will often buy an Estate to trash the Hovel - no more wasted $2 turns on your first turn!
Somehow that still seems like a waste. Unless you're opening Estate/Baron.
Well, it's a waste in a normal game. But here, you'd almost definitely prefer Estate to Hovel - more VP, costs more for TFB, etc. Unless you're planning on rushing VP early, I doubt it's worthwhile to hold onto Hovel if you can get rid of it early for an Estate with an otherwise worthless $2 hand.
-
I was thinking an all Dark Ages game would be fun. It's good to see Donald has played it that way too. Is there any other expansion you would play by itself besides base?
All of the large expansions are quite enjoyable to play all by themselves. All-Alchemy and all-Cornucopia games are going to be a bit samey.
-
Proud to have given you your 1000th point of respect on this post. Didn't even realize, until the flash of movement -- the appearance of another digit -- caught my eye when I hit the up-arrow.
I'm going to go downvote one of WW's posts so he can get 1000 again.
Meh, too hard to find a recent post that I upvoted.
It's just easier to upvote one of WW's posts and then downvote it back to 1000.
So congrats on your 1000th respect again.
-
I feel a little underwhelmed, though.
Hell, I can leave my Estates, Colonies, Platinum, and Potions at home.
Estates will still be in the game, just not in your starting hand. Don't leave them behind just yet.
And can someone remind me what the Platinum/Colony rule is? I've never played it IRL.
-
I feel a little underwhelmed, though.
Hell, I can leave my Estates, Colonies, Platinum, and Potions at home.
Estates will still be in the game, just not in your starting hand. Don't leave them behind just yet.
And can someone remind me what the Platinum/Colony rule is? I've never played it IRL.
Probability of Colony/Platinum = 10% * (Number of Prosperity Cards in Game)
One way to implement it with the physical randomizer cards (mentioned in the rulebook) is to predesignate a position from the first to the tenth card dealt, say the first. If the first card dealt is a Prosperity card, you use Colony/Platinum, otherwise you don't.
Assuming the rule is exactly analogous, we could designate the first card as a check for Colony/Platinum, and the tenth card as a check for Shelters (any two positions will do fine, just don't use the same unless you want the two to be mutually exclusive).
-
I feel a little underwhelmed, though.
Hell, I can leave my Estates, Colonies, Platinum, and Potions at home.
Estates will still be in the game, just not in your starting hand. Don't leave them behind just yet.
And can someone remind me what the Platinum/Colony rule is? I've never played it IRL.
Ah yes, good point. So just Base game.
The general rule for Colony/Platinum (and Shelters) is that there is a chance proportionate to the number of Prosperity (and Dark Ages) cards are in the Kingdom.
So, if 4 of your kingdom cards are from Prosperity, there's a 40% chance that it'll be a Colony game. As far as I know, the Bane card would not contribute to this.
With Prosperity, the rule of thumb is that if the first card you flip over from the randomizer deck is from Prosperity, then you play with Colony. Presumably, you would do the same with DA. But, that method does not allow for you to play with both. Edit: sherwinpr's solution would work
I have a 10-sided die I keep in my box in case my phone's battery dies. I use it to determine Colony status.
Of course, the main rule is: If you want to play with them, go for it.
-
Oh, hey, guys, can we use this to stop all the speculation that ruined village will give +2 actions? K thanks.
So you think +1 action?
Yes, of course.
Edit: The 'of course' is just because of the way Donald said things - I don't think it would be so obvious what those 3 benefits would be if they didn't exactly parallel, for all the different vanilla bonuses in the game. And yeah, it's useless 90% of the time, but you know, he did say some were better than others.
Proud to have given you your 1000th point of respect on this post. Didn't even realize, until the flash of movement -- the appearance of another digit -- caught my eye when I hit the up-arrow.
You upvoted THAT? ???
I'm not sure if it's just the higher volume of posters, or just that I'm posting more frequently (or the quality of my posts has increased? I'm sure WW would disagree), but my respect has jumped about 150 points in just the past week, and I'm still trying to figure out which post is to blame...
Indeed; I've also gotten a way above average amount of respect during these previews. It's the Scout jokes.
-
In general, yeah these Shelters are going to be better than Estates four you, yeah. Also, more $1 cards! Necropolis in particular looks like it's really nice for making double-terminal openings more viable, the other two will be good to get out of the way but I can imagine preferring Estate to them once in awhile. Shelters are going to really seriously hurt Remake, since getting Silver from your starting Estates is the reason it's so good; but on the other hand they will be yet another boost for Fairgrounds, even if 2/3 of them only actually benefit you as they leave your deck.
-
Is anyone else freaking out that Necropolis should be red on the top and not the bottom, to match the other two? Maybe I need to get my OCD checked...
Look a few posts up. :)
-
I feel a little underwhelmed, though.
Hell, I can leave my Estates, Colonies, Platinum, and Potions at home.
Estates will still be in the game, just not in your starting hand. Don't leave them behind just yet.
And can someone remind me what the Platinum/Colony rule is? I've never played it IRL.
Basically, if you've got lots of $6+ cards, put in Plats and Colonies.
-
Hovel becomes the second card which gives no bonus to an opponents tribute. And it's a dual type to boot.
-
Oh, hey, guys, can we use this to stop all the speculation that ruined village will give +2 actions? K thanks.
So you think +1 action?
Yes, of course.
If all the ruins cost $1, doesn't this break our sacred "no strictly superior cards" rule? Though you can't buy ruins and shelters as you do other cards. And it's not like every other card rule hasn't been broken so far, especially the ever-important "no card names with 15 or more letters" rule.
EDIT: Ruins cost $0. Still too early for me.
-
Ruins cost 0.
-
If all the ruins cost $1, doesn't this break our sacred "no strictly superior cards" rule? Though you can't buy ruins and shelters as you do other cards. And it's not like every other card rule hasn't been broken so far, especially the ever-important "no card names with 15 or more letters" rule.
This already only existed for cards you can buy see Trusty Steed > Lab.
-
Basically, if you've got lots of $6+ cards, put in Plats and Colonies.
–1 for misinformation.
-
Crossposting from the Preview Game thread.
Shelters
Menagerie gets an unneeded boost. Fairground is better too! HoP is sort of better as well, in that Necropolis is one more unique playable card that you start with. Ambassador kind of takes a hit, which is fine. (Edit: and Donald actually addressed all those in his starting writeup, ha.) Jester also gets a slight nerf, in that there are less starting VP to hit.
You might not want to trash Necropolis, huh. Also, Ruined Village is probably going to be either "+1 Action" or "+2 Actions, discard X Cards", or +2 Actions with some other drawback.
Interestingly, you might opt not to pass Overgrown Estate using Masquerade -- trashing it yourself might be better, and if your opponent is the one who played Masq then you might not want to pass it because it might help him out when he trashes it!
Hovel is only better than Overgrown Estate when there isn't any trashing on the board, heh. I expect that will be less likely with Dark Ages cards on the board. Oh well!
OH. HUNTING PARTY HATES THESE.
Nothing else interesting that I can think of. Looking forward to seeing the full set!
-
I'm glad to see hunting party get a nerf.
-
Okay, so this is supposed to be like Col/Plat in that you only play with it with a probability of N/10, but I wouldn't mind always playing with them! :D
Unfortunately, it also introduces some extra early game variance.
We've accepted the 5/2 vs 4/3 start and we can even enforce same starts on Iso, but I could see how it would matter even more with Shelters.
Same start Shelters?
Also: OPEN MENAGERIE!!!
-
Harvest is pretty sweet now. Never would have guessed it could become a decent opener (shuffle dependent).
-
Okay, so this is supposed to be like Col/Plat in that you only play with it with a probability of N/10, but I wouldn't mind always playing with them! :D
Unfortunately, it also introduces some extra early game variance.
We've accepted the 5/2 vs 4/3 start and we can even enforce same starts on Iso, but I could see how it would matter even more with Shelters.
Same start Shelters?
Also: OPEN MENAGERIE!!!
But the opening shelters hardly matter, unless you plan on buying a victory card in the first two turns on a non-5/2 opening, in which case you'd want Hovel to line up with 4 coppers for buying Island/(anything), and Hovel to line up with 3 coppers for buying Great Hall/($4 card) or Tunnel/($4 card), and I guess similar rules for rarer situations where you want to open with another card.
What will really matter quite a bit, however, is the result of the reshuffle after turn 2.
Though I guess you might as well fix the position of the opening shelters for the few cases where it does matter if you want to have identical starting hands anyway.
-
Harvest is pretty sweet now. Never would have guessed it could become a decent opener (shuffle dependent).
That's true. Opening Harvest on 5/2 might be pretty cool.
And be prepared for a rage-quit when someone draws on his third turn: Harvest, $2 buy, Necropolis, Overgrown Estate, and Hovel.
Okay, maybe not that bad.
-
Harvest is pretty sweet now. Never would have guessed it could become a decent opener (shuffle dependent).
Harvest was always decent. 8)
-
Harvest is pretty sweet now. Never would have guessed it could become a decent opener (shuffle dependent).
Harvest was always decent. 8)
Harvest is still only mediocre. :)
-
Is anyone else freaking out that Necropolis should be red on the top and not the bottom, to match the other two? Maybe I need to get my OCD checked...
Yes. I'm telling myself it won't be as bad when I'm actually playing, rather than seeing them all right next to each other like that, but I don't think I'm convincing myself.
-
Harvest is pretty sweet now. Never would have guessed it could become a decent opener (shuffle dependent).
That's true. Opening Harvest on 5/2 might be pretty cool.
And be prepared for a rage-quit when someone draws on his third turn: Harvest, $2 buy, Necropolis, Overgrown Estate, and Hovel.
Okay, maybe not that bad.
It's a bit like drawing Coppersmith, ($2 or $3 buy), 4 coppers, except if the $3 buy is a useful terminal, that's slightly better. Also, considering the $2 or $3 may be have draw (like Courtyard), that Coppersmith opening is actually pretty solid.
Looking at only the first shuffle, I think the first Harvest turn with the Harvest/$2 (with shelters) opening will be about as good (probably a little weaker, especially given a $2 opening over a $3 opening) as the first Coppersmith turn with a Coppersmith opening (with Shelters). Though at least you can play the $2 card then still play Harvest for a single coin. This could buy you a silver if you opened Embargo, Duchess, Courtyard, etc (though you should probably Courtyard the Harvest) and can get you an estate replacement with many other openings that give you at least a +$1.
-
Is anyone else freaking out that Necropolis should be red on the top and not the bottom, to match the other two? Maybe I need to get my OCD checked...
Yes. I'm telling myself it won't be as bad when I'm actually playing, rather than seeing them all right next to each other like that, but I don't think I'm convincing myself.
Does anyone have a plausible explanation for this yet? Is there some inherent ordering of which color goes on top when two types interact? It might have just been better if Necropolis was all red (after all, Action-Reaction cards are solid blue, even though other card types can be Reactions, and Action-Duration cards are solid orange, although only actions can be Durations).
-
Hovel becomes the second card which gives no bonus to an opponents tribute. And it's a dual type to boot.
At least now Tribute can flip over Hovel/Curse and get nothing twice. With Curse/Curse, you have to settle for one nothing.
-
Is anyone else freaking out that Necropolis should be red on the top and not the bottom, to match the other two? Maybe I need to get my OCD checked...
Yes. I'm telling myself it won't be as bad when I'm actually playing, rather than seeing them all right next to each other like that, but I don't think I'm convincing myself.
I don't think I'm getting something about the colors in general.
Shelters appear to be orange, like durations.
Ruins appear to be brown.
But Shelters that are Action-Shelter are white/orange, whereas Ruins that are Action-Ruins are all-brown.
I know Donald has said that coloring is used to alert you when you're holding your hand that you might want to do something (ie reveal a reaction card). Can someone help me out on why Ruined Market shouldn't be brown/white, or Necropolis only orange?
-
Basically, if you've got lots of $6+ cards, put in Plats and Colonies.
–1 for misinformation.
How is this misinformation? That's the general rule I follow. If I don't have anything over $5 in a kingdom, even if it's all Prosperity, I probably won't put in Platinums and Colonies.
-
Is anyone else freaking out that Necropolis should be red on the top and not the bottom, to match the other two? Maybe I need to get my OCD checked...
Yes. I'm telling myself it won't be as bad when I'm actually playing, rather than seeing them all right next to each other like that, but I don't think I'm convincing myself.
I don't think I'm getting something about the colors in general.
Shelters appear to be orange, like durations.
Ruins appear to be brown.
But Shelters that are Action-Shelter are white/orange, whereas Ruins that are Action-Ruins are all-brown.
I know Donald has said that coloring is used to alert you when you're holding your hand that you might want to do something (ie reveal a reaction card). Can someone help me out on why Ruined Market shouldn't be brown/white, or Necropolis only orange?
Shelter is a basic type, like Action or Victory. Ruins is a secondary type, like Reaction or Duration.
-
Is anyone else freaking out that Necropolis should be red on the top and not the bottom, to match the other two? Maybe I need to get my OCD checked...
The colours on dual types are top colour is alphabetically first. There hows that for your OCD
-
Is anyone else freaking out that Necropolis should be red on the top and not the bottom, to match the other two? Maybe I need to get my OCD checked...
The colours on dual types are top colour is alphabetically first. There hows that for your OCD
R comes before S ....
-
Seems like a well-deserved nerf for Scout for me, after all the love it got from the rest of the set...
Nothing of the sort, my friend! Indeed, Scout continues to surpass other excellent cards like Goons and Ambassador. Do you want to launch a super powerful attack on your opponents, or do you want to re-order the next 4 cards in your deck? Easy choice!
If you foolishly think the purpose of Scout is to draw Green cards into your hand, then I see why you would think these cards hurt Scout. Ha, what idiocy. Oh, and by the way, Scout can still activate on Overgrown Estate. Baron can't do that. Scout > Baron
What about Necropolis? Necropolis is a great early engine component. Do you know what else is a great early Engine component? Scout. Play Scout, re-order your deck, and then you play Necropolis, and Necropolis doesn't mess up that order or anything. That's nice.
And Hovel... Hovel wants you to buy Victory cards! You might buy 3 or 4 Victory cards, just to really finish off that Hovel for good. Send a message, you know? And then Scout is your knight in shining army (on a Trusty Steed, maybe).
I can't wait to go out and King a Scout, so I can re-order the top of my deck not once, not twice, but thrice.
-
Is anyone else freaking out that Necropolis should be red on the top and not the bottom, to match the other two? Maybe I need to get my OCD checked...
Yes. I'm telling myself it won't be as bad when I'm actually playing, rather than seeing them all right next to each other like that, but I don't think I'm convincing myself.
I don't think I'm getting something about the colors in general.
Shelters appear to be orange, like durations.
Ruins appear to be brown.
But Shelters that are Action-Shelter are white/orange, whereas Ruins that are Action-Ruins are all-brown.
I know Donald has said that coloring is used to alert you when you're holding your hand that you might want to do something (ie reveal a reaction card). Can someone help me out on why Ruined Market shouldn't be brown/white, or Necropolis only orange?
I was wondering the same thing a few posts up. I think solid colors are appropriate to use with Actions if they are not permissible as a card's only type. Like it probably makes little sense for a card to be only a Duration or only a Ruin, and although a card could certainly be a Reaction only, I think we've heard that we'll never see a card like that (though Hovel comes awfully close). All this points to Necropolis being a solid color card, since I doubt we'd ever get a Shelter only card, especially as I think these three are the only shelters (and what would a Shelter only card be?).
As an aside, I think Shelters are supposed to be Red, but when I first saw them I thought they were orange too.
-
Does anyone have a plausible explanation for this yet.
Donald X. has written that he doesn't "know why the red isn't always on the same half".
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/9796195#9796195
(http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/9796195#9796195)
-
Is anyone else freaking out that Necropolis should be red on the top and not the bottom, to match the other two? Maybe I need to get my OCD checked...
The colours on dual types are top colour is alphabetically first. There hows that for your OCD
R comes before S ....
I hadn't looked Hovel when I said that. Uhm that would make my theory say hovel is the outcast!
-
Basically, if you've got lots of $6+ cards, put in Plats and Colonies.
–1 for misinformation.
How is this misinformation? That's the general rule I follow. If I don't have anything over $5 in a kingdom, even if it's all Prosperity, I probably won't put in Platinums and Colonies.
It's not THE rule.
-
Anyways to the cards
I see myself in some games not trashing necropolis that card seems like its always gonna have SOME value. In an engine deck Id want to wait until after the copper to say the least and in a BM deck well I dont need the +Actions unless Im super worried about my terminal witch colliding but I don't have trashing then.
Hovel and Overgrown estate seem legitamately bad except maybe in boards with Swindler, The first time I have an overgrown estate swindled into a poor house i'll be excited. I like that hovel gets rid of itself (hell you could even buy an estate and be back to square 1 now hows that scout look!?)
-
I know Donald has said that coloring is used to alert you when you're holding your hand that you might want to do something (ie reveal a reaction card). Can someone help me out on why Ruined Market shouldn't be brown/white, or Necropolis only orange?
The Ruins cards are all actions. As with Duration cards, being half white wouldn't be telling you anything extra. I mean the game could have gone that way from the beginning, but it didn't.
The Shelters meanwhile are not all Actions. With two of them indicating the other type it seemed best if Necropolis also did.
Again I do not know why Necropolis doesn't have red on the same side as the others. You can't be consistent for every type, but these could have been consistent. You could ask Catrein, he did the layout.
-
Anyone have a favorite dark ages card?
-
Anyone have a favorite dark ages card?
Donald has one.
-
Anyone have a favorite dark ages card?
Donald has one.
Yeah. RATS! :)
-
Hmmm... my first thought was that BM+X is even stronger with these three cards in your starting deck. 2 Smithies + money is marginally faster thanks to Necropolis, and Hovel can be moved out of the way when you ghit that first province, so that the first province doesn't damage your deck.
This is significant to me, as it means that if BM+X is stronger, then a lot of the funky combos we've been talking about on other previews are going to be edged out, by sheer fact of relative lack of tempo.
Then there's the whole develop/remake thing. Now we've got $1 cards instead of $2 cards, any opening based on trash for benefit / remaking are going to be weaker.
So actually, I'm not convinced that these three cards instead of estate encourage engines. Instead, they up the power of Dominion's most basic winning strategy: BM+X.
-
Are there any weird interactions that happen due to the fact that Hovel isn't a victory, treasure, action or curse? All I can think of is that Fortune Teller skips it.
-
Anyone have a favorite dark ages card?
Sage.
-
I know Donald has said that coloring is used to alert you when you're holding your hand that you might want to do something (ie reveal a reaction card). Can someone help me out on why Ruined Market shouldn't be brown/white, or Necropolis only orange?
The Ruins cards are all actions. As with Duration cards, being half white wouldn't be telling you anything extra. I mean the game could have gone that way from the beginning, but it didn't.
The Shelters meanwhile are not all Actions. With two of them indicating the other type it seemed best if Necropolis also did.
Again I do not know why Necropolis doesn't have red on the same side as the others. You can't be consistent for every type, but these could have been consistent. You could ask Catrein, he did the layout.
Thanks for the reply. That all makes sense (well, minus the whole order of the Necropolis red, but whatever) - close enough to perfection. 8)
-
Anyone have a favorite dark ages card?
Hermit.
Thought it's also fun to say PILLAGE A VILLAGE! *shwack*
-
Hovel/Overgrown Estate make Trade Route better as an opener - the OE is a perfect trash target, and the Hovel mechanic lets you buy the first Estate without damaging your deck.
Silk Roads are obviously made worse.
-
Basically, if you've got lots of $6+ cards, put in Plats and Colonies.
–1 for misinformation.
How is this misinformation? That's the general rule I follow. If I don't have anything over $5 in a kingdom, even if it's all Prosperity, I probably won't put in Platinums and Colonies.
Then that is your house rule, thus misinformation.
The real rule (from the rulebook of Prosperity) has been mentioned above (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=3939.msg82686#msg82686).
-
Baron has gotten shafted so hard.
Not to mention Scout!
At least it can still draw the Overgrown Estate. Baron can't discard any of these.
-
Hmmm... my first thought was that BM+X is even stronger with these three cards in your starting deck. 2 Smithies + money is marginally faster thanks to Necropolis, and Hovel can be moved out of the way when you ghit that first province, so that the first province doesn't damage your deck.
This is significant to me, as it means that if BM+X is stronger, then a lot of the funky combos we've been talking about on other previews are going to be edged out, by sheer fact of relative lack of tempo.
Then there's the whole develop/remake thing. Now we've got $1 cards instead of $2 cards, any opening based on trash for benefit / remaking are going to be weaker.
So actually, I'm not convinced that these three cards instead of estate encourage engines. Instead, they up the power of Dominion's most basic winning strategy: BM+X.
It would be nice to see simulations, but I think it's quite a small boost. You might take a while before you buy a victory point card on a turn where you have a Hovel, and if you only have two Smithies in your deck (as you probably should), it won't be that often that they'll line up with Necropolis. You might get a single strong early turn. But I'm still not sure if this means you should get your second smithy much earlier.
-
Seems a bit luck-based? I mean, if you open double terminal and pair them with Necro, and opponent doesn't.. And if those terminals are Swindler/Swindler.
I mean, opening with these are totally different story. Well, necropolis mostly.
But is sure going to make Puzzles fun ;D
Necro diminishes the probability of terminal collision (assuming neither terminal draws) in the first reshuffle hurting you by precisely 1/3.
3/10.
3/10 is precisely 1/3.
And both are equal to pi.
Thanks for the previews!
Do we know / are we allowed to know if the word "Shelter" at the bottom of those cards actually means anything? My guess would be that there are other Dark Age cards that reference "Shelter" cards; if not, why have a special type at all?
I'm there for you.
If no cards referred to Shelters (something as yet unknown), then the point to the type would be, to give the cards a color - in Dominion, having a color indicates having a type (but not vice versa). And they have a color to make them go together, for separating out of your deck and stuff.
Speaking of colors, it's driving my OCD nuts that Necropolis has the red half on the bottom; while the other 2 have the red half on the top. :P
I imagine they tried it, but it looked better this way. But yeah, that was like my first reaction to seeing the 3 cards next to each other as well...
Hmmm... my first thought was that BM+X is even stronger with these three cards in your starting deck. 2 Smithies + money is marginally faster thanks to Necropolis, and Hovel can be moved out of the way when you ghit that first province, so that the first province doesn't damage your deck.
This is significant to me, as it means that if BM+X is stronger, then a lot of the funky combos we've been talking about on other previews are going to be edged out, by sheer fact of relative lack of tempo.
Then there's the whole develop/remake thing. Now we've got $1 cards instead of $2 cards, any opening based on trash for benefit / remaking are going to be weaker.
So actually, I'm not convinced that these three cards instead of estate encourage engines. Instead, they up the power of Dominion's most basic winning strategy: BM+X.
I don't know about this. I mean, part of what makes BM+X faster than some engines is that they have 3 points to start with. The engine player trashes their Estates, so they have to not only split the Provinces, but actually add and extra Duchy just to tie. And Necro also helps engine more than BM since you're more likely to draw it in a hand where you can use it.
-
Seems a bit luck-based? I mean, if you open double terminal and pair them with Necro, and opponent doesn't.. And if those terminals are Swindler/Swindler.
I mean, opening with these are totally different story. Well, necropolis mostly.
But is sure going to make Puzzles fun ;D
Necro diminishes the probability of terminal collision (assuming neither terminal draws) in the first reshuffle hurting you by precisely 1/3.
3/10.
3/10 is precisely 1/3.
And both are equal to pi.
Nah. As we all know, pi is exactly 3 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-Y-ua3WBi4)
-
Seems a bit luck-based? I mean, if you open double terminal and pair them with Necro, and opponent doesn't.. And if those terminals are Swindler/Swindler.
I mean, opening with these are totally different story. Well, necropolis mostly.
But is sure going to make Puzzles fun ;D
Necro diminishes the probability of terminal collision (assuming neither terminal draws) in the first reshuffle hurting you by precisely 1/3.
3/10.
3/10 is precisely 1/3.
And both are equal to pi.
Nah. As we all know, pi is exactly 3 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-Y-ua3WBi4)
That's the reference I was going for but failed at the wording :(
-
I still think it's possible that shelters give blanket protection against looters. It would make some thematic sense. If your kingdom consists of a ghost town, an abandoned mansion, and a straw hut, there's really nothing to loot.
It would make Hovel in particular make some more sense, not just because Hovel is weak, but also because it gives you a reason to maybe hold onto it, even through the endgame.
I bet at the very least there's one attack that says "Each other player [does some bad thing] or reveals a shelter." or something to that effect.
-
I bet at the very least there's one attack that says "Each other player [does some bad thing] or reveals a shelter." or something to that affect.
The problem with that would be, what if you aren't using shelters? It's the same reason no prosperity cards specifically mention colony/plat. I think there's a decent chance no other card mentions them. Or if it does, it requires them to be used. I could be wrong, but the card would have to function well without shelters in the game too.
-
I still think it's possible that shelters give blanket protection against looters. It would make some thematic sense. If your kingdom consists of a ghost town, an abandoned mansion, and a straw hut, there's really nothing to loot.
It would make Hovel in particular make some more sense, not just because Hovel is weak, but also because it gives you a reason to maybe hold onto it, even through the endgame.
I bet at the very least there's one attack that says "Each other player [does some bad thing] or reveals a shelter." or something to that affect.
There is some precedent for this. While Prosperity cards make no mention of Platinums/Colonies, Apprentice does specifically state what to do with Potions in a cost, which has absolutely no use unless there are Potion cards on the board, which Apprentice is not one. So it's an expansion specific effect for a card that doesn't have an expansion specific type/cost.
-
I still think it's possible that shelters give blanket protection against looters. It would make some thematic sense. If your kingdom consists of a ghost town, an abandoned mansion, and a straw hut, there's really nothing to loot.
It would make Hovel in particular make some more sense, not just because Hovel is weak, but also because it gives you a reason to maybe hold onto it, even through the endgame.
I bet at the very least there's one attack that says "Each other player [does some bad thing] or reveals a shelter." or something to that affect.
There is some precedent for this. While Prosperity cards make no mention of Platinums/Colonies, Apprentice does specifically state what to do with Potions in a cost, which has absolutely no use unless there are Potion cards on the board, which Apprentice is not one. So it's an expansion specific effect for a card that doesn't have an expansion specific type/cost.
But how could you defend an attack with a card you might not even be using to play with?
-
Couldn't you make the case that "Overgrown Estate" is an "Estate" and therefore should work with Baron?
-
Couldn't you make the case that "Overgrown Estate" is an "Estate" and therefore should work with Baron?
That's actually a really good idea! I wonder if Donald make a ruling in the rulebook that allowed that.
But even if he did, the likelihood of drawing an Overgrown Estate and a Baron together is very thin.
-
I still think it's possible that shelters give blanket protection against looters. It would make some thematic sense. If your kingdom consists of a ghost town, an abandoned mansion, and a straw hut, there's really nothing to loot.
It would make Hovel in particular make some more sense, not just because Hovel is weak, but also because it gives you a reason to maybe hold onto it, even through the endgame.
I bet at the very least there's one attack that says "Each other player [does some bad thing] or reveals a shelter." or something to that affect.
There is some precedent for this. While Prosperity cards make no mention of Platinums/Colonies, Apprentice does specifically state what to do with Potions in a cost, which has absolutely no use unless there are Potion cards on the board, which Apprentice is not one. So it's an expansion specific effect for a card that doesn't have an expansion specific type/cost.
Apprentice's effect is fine without potions. If an Attack can be moated by Shelters, it needs to be strong enough to make it worthwhile despite inconsistency. Then it's too strong without Shelters!
Maybe an Apprentice-like effect where Shelters only have a marginal impact.
-
Couldn't you make the case that "Overgrown Estate" is an "Estate" and therefore should work with Baron?
lol, in Magic, that would actually work. Not Dominion.
-
Couldn't you make the case that "Overgrown Estate" is an "Estate" and therefore should work with Baron?
That's actually a really good idea! I wonder if Donald make a ruling in the rulebook that allowed that.
But even if he did, the likelihood of drawing an Overgrown Estate and a Baron together is very thin.
I think it's a terrible idea... can I also play Wishing Well, name "Market", and then reveal and draw Grand Market? Can I play Bag of Gold and gain a Fool's Gold on my deck?
-
I do like how with all these post-apocalyptic versions of older cards, they've gotten the original artists to come back. Ruined Market has the same artist as Grand Market, Pillage has the same artist as Village, and Overgrown Estate has the same artist as the full-card art from the Estate in the Base Cards set.
-
There is some precedent for this. While Prosperity cards make no mention of Platinums/Colonies, Apprentice does specifically state what to do with Potions in a cost, which has absolutely no use unless there are Potion cards on the board, which Apprentice is not one. So it's an expansion specific effect for a card that doesn't have an expansion specific type/cost.
But how could you defend an attack with a card you might not even be using to play with?
How do you defend against an attack if there are no defense cards in the kingdom? You bend over and take it, just like if you don't have Shelters in play.
-
Couldn't you make the case that "Overgrown Estate" is an "Estate" and therefore should work with Baron?
That's actually a really good idea! I wonder if Donald make a ruling in the rulebook that allowed that.
But even if he did, the likelihood of drawing an Overgrown Estate and a Baron together is very thin.
I think it's a terrible idea... can I also play Wishing Well, name "Market", and then reveal and draw Grand Market? Can I play Bag of Gold and gain a Fool's Gold on my deck?
But Wishing Well says "Name a card" and so if you name Market, the card you draw either is or is the card "Market" - whether it's a Market is irrelevant. Baron says (IIRC) an Estate, not an Estate card. An Overgrown Estate is clearly an Estate.
-
There is some precedent for this. While Prosperity cards make no mention of Platinums/Colonies, Apprentice does specifically state what to do with Potions in a cost, which has absolutely no use unless there are Potion cards on the board, which Apprentice is not one. So it's an expansion specific effect for a card that doesn't have an expansion specific type/cost.
But how could you defend an attack with a card you might not even be using to play with?
How do you defend against an attack if there are no defense cards in the kingdom? You bend over and take it, just like if you don't have Shelters in play.
I'm talking about an Attack that specifically says "Reveal a Shelter card from your hand, if you don't ______"
That card would be dominant on a Board that disallows Shelters.
Couldn't you make the case that "Overgrown Estate" is an "Estate" and therefore should work with Baron?
That's actually a really good idea! I wonder if Donald make a ruling in the rulebook that allowed that.
But even if he did, the likelihood of drawing an Overgrown Estate and a Baron together is very thin.
I think it's a terrible idea... can I also play Wishing Well, name "Market", and then reveal and draw Grand Market? Can I play Bag of Gold and gain a Fool's Gold on my deck?
But Wishing Well says "Name a card" and so if you name Market, the card you draw either is or is the card "Market" - whether it's a Market is irrelevant. Baron says (IIRC) an Estate, not an Estate card. An Overgrown Estate is clearly an Estate.
Donald is very careful with his wording ;)
-
Man, this is definitely NOT your daddy's Dominion!
Huge amount of new elements to add into the game. This expansion is much more advanced than the other ones, I'd wish to know about the other cards sooner.
-
There is some precedent for this. While Prosperity cards make no mention of Platinums/Colonies, Apprentice does specifically state what to do with Potions in a cost, which has absolutely no use unless there are Potion cards on the board, which Apprentice is not one. So it's an expansion specific effect for a card that doesn't have an expansion specific type/cost.
But how could you defend an attack with a card you might not even be using to play with?
How do you defend against an attack if there are no defense cards in the kingdom? You bend over and take it, just like if you don't have Shelters in play.
I'm talking about an Attack that specifically says "Reveal a Shelter card from your hand, if you don't ______"
That card would be dominant on a Board that disallows Shelters.
Couldn't you make the case that "Overgrown Estate" is an "Estate" and therefore should work with Baron?
That's actually a really good idea! I wonder if Donald make a ruling in the rulebook that allowed that.
But even if he did, the likelihood of drawing an Overgrown Estate and a Baron together is very thin.
I think it's a terrible idea... can I also play Wishing Well, name "Market", and then reveal and draw Grand Market? Can I play Bag of Gold and gain a Fool's Gold on my deck?
But Wishing Well says "Name a card" and so if you name Market, the card you draw either is or is the card "Market" - whether it's a Market is irrelevant. Baron says (IIRC) an Estate, not an Estate card. An Overgrown Estate is clearly an Estate.
Donald is very careful with his wording ;)
Baron says "Estate card."
-
An Overgrown Estate is clearly an Estate.
Clearly it's not:
Baron doesn't know what to do with these.
-
Couldn't you make the case that "Overgrown Estate" is an "Estate" and therefore should work with Baron?
That's actually a really good idea! I wonder if Donald make a ruling in the rulebook that allowed that.
But even if he did, the likelihood of drawing an Overgrown Estate and a Baron together is very thin.
I think it's a terrible idea... can I also play Wishing Well, name "Market", and then reveal and draw Grand Market? Can I play Bag of Gold and gain a Fool's Gold on my deck?
But Wishing Well says "Name a card" and so if you name Market, the card you draw either is or is the card "Market" - whether it's a Market is irrelevant. Baron says (IIRC) an Estate, not an Estate card. An Overgrown Estate is clearly an Estate.
I believe it has been long established that "a X" and "a X card" have the same meaning in Dominion. Some attacks say "gain a curse card" while others say "gain a curse." And again, Bag of Gold refers to "a Gold," not "a Gold card." Dominion has always used "X" to mean "a card named "X." Do you think if there's a new card called "Ruined Treasure Map" that Treasure Map would allow you to gain 4 Golds for trashing one?
-
There is some precedent for this. While Prosperity cards make no mention of Platinums/Colonies, Apprentice does specifically state what to do with Potions in a cost, which has absolutely no use unless there are Potion cards on the board, which Apprentice is not one. So it's an expansion specific effect for a card that doesn't have an expansion specific type/cost.
But how could you defend an attack with a card you might not even be using to play with?
How do you defend against an attack if there are no defense cards in the kingdom? You bend over and take it, just like if you don't have Shelters in play.
I'm talking about an Attack that specifically says "Reveal a Shelter card from your hand, if you don't ______"
That card would be dominant on a Board that disallows Shelters.
Couldn't you make the case that "Overgrown Estate" is an "Estate" and therefore should work with Baron?
That's actually a really good idea! I wonder if Donald make a ruling in the rulebook that allowed that.
But even if he did, the likelihood of drawing an Overgrown Estate and a Baron together is very thin.
I think it's a terrible idea... can I also play Wishing Well, name "Market", and then reveal and draw Grand Market? Can I play Bag of Gold and gain a Fool's Gold on my deck?
But Wishing Well says "Name a card" and so if you name Market, the card you draw either is or is the card "Market" - whether it's a Market is irrelevant. Baron says (IIRC) an Estate, not an Estate card. An Overgrown Estate is clearly an Estate.
Donald is very careful with his wording ;)
Baron says "Estate card."
Well. I feel stupid.
-
An Overgrown Estate is clearly an Estate.
Clearly it's not:
Baron doesn't know what to do with these.
(http://i.qkme.me/3qfi6f.jpg)
-
know?
-
I thought it was going to be
Shelter?
I hardly knew'er.
-
Just wanted to point out how much better Jack gets with Necropolis and Overgrown Estate. Necropolis means Jack draws and extra card, and you can play actions you draw, and Overgrown is almost guaranteed to hit pretty early.
It might require a bit of luck, but Masquerade/Smithy could be a fun opening with shelters.
-
I believe it has been long established that "a X" and "a X card" have the same meaning in Dominion. Some attacks say "gain a curse card" while others say "gain a curse." And again, Bag of Gold refers to "a Gold," not "a Gold card." Dominion has always used "X" to mean "a card named "X." Do you think if there's a new card called "Ruined Treasure Map" that Treasure Map would allow you to gain 4 Golds for trashing one?
No, but it would allow you to gain 4 Ruined Golds.
Ruined Gold
Treasure
+$3
When this is in play, all other treasures you play this turn are worth $0.
(PS When I Contraband Witch I don't think I can tell you you can't buy a Young Witch either because she's still a witch.)
(Maybe that's it: Overgrown Estate may be an estate, but it's not an Estate.)
-
So, is today the last day of previews until Gen Con? At least, that is what it sounds like.
-
Please see Post 1, paragraph 4. (Sigh.)
-
An Overgrown Estate is clearly an Estate.
Clearly it's not:
Baron doesn't know what to do with these.
(http://i.qkme.me/3qfi6f.jpg)
I've seen Baron a million times, but it just dawned on me...he looks just like The Most Interesting Man in the World.
(http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/002/598/The-Most-Interesting-Man-in-the-World.jpg)
EDIT: Werewothegreat, where'd you get that blown-up image?
-
I've seen Baron a million times, but it just dawned on me...he looks just like The Most Interesting Man in the World.
EDIT: Werewothegreat, where'd you get that blown-up image?
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=1204.msg63168#msg63168 (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=1204.msg63168#msg63168)
-
I've seen Baron a million times, but it just dawned on me...he looks just like The Most Interesting Man in the World.
EDIT: Werewothegreat, where'd you get that blown-up image?
I blew it up myself.
-
Shelters, Ruins, Poor Houses, Hovels, might a lowly Beggar be waiting in the expansion?
-
I've been certain Beggar was coming since Base Set. You should be able to choose to give him a copper (discard it) and get some benefit if you do. Rather like Stables in that case, though.
-
I've seen Baron a million times, but it just dawned on me...he looks just like The Most Interesting Man in the World.
EDIT: Werewothegreat, where'd you get that blown-up image?
I blew it up myself.
No I mean the Baron itself. Or did you just rip that straight off an image of the card?
-
I think that's just an enlarged version of one of many scans of the baron card that are all over the place.
Like this one (http://dominionstrategy.com/2011/12/19/intrigue-baron/), for instance.
-
On the one hand, I'm not keen on a larger range of luck involved with the benefit of getting the correct Shelter for a hand. On the other, luck is a large element in this game anyway, and this gives all new aspects to think about. I wish one of either Overgrown Estate or Hovel had a non-"trash me" related ability as Necropolis does, both for the sake of asymmetry and feeling universality to any kingdom.
In any case, I'm eager to try out Shelters.
-
I've seen Baron a million times, but it just dawned on me...he looks just like The Most Interesting Man in the World.
I don't always discard an Estate... but when I do, I get +$4.
-
I've seen Baron a million times, but it just dawned on me...he looks just like The Most Interesting Man in the World.
I don't always discard an Estate... but when I do, I get +$4.
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=1204.msg63168#msg63168
-
I've seen Baron a million times, but it just dawned on me...he looks just like The Most Interesting Man in the World.
I don't always discard an Estate... but when I do, I get +$4.
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=1204.msg63168#msg63168
I kinda suspected I was subconsciously pulling that out of my memory...
-
Is anyone else freaking out that Necropolis should be red on the top and not the bottom, to match the other two? Maybe I need to get my OCD checked...
The colours on dual types are top colour is alphabetically first. There hows that for your OCD
R comes before S ....
ROYGBIV
-
shelters legitimately make scout worse... something I wasn't sure was possible. (Dark ages, fighting scout's overpowed abilities since 2012)
-
If u miss your nomad camp/ peddler open, then at least u scored a lab hehe
-
Some Cornucopia-and-Dark-Ages-only kingdoms seem like they could be quite fun!
I suppose with Fairgrounds on the board you'll have an interesting decision to make from the very start. Do you trash your starting Hovel and Overgrown Estate or keep them for more Fairgrounds variety? Because without a Supply pile for them, once you trash a Shelter, there's no going back!!! Well, unless there's another gain-from-trash-er that can gain cards costing as low as (1).
Hmmm...7 basic Supply cards (VP, Treasure, Curse) plus 10 Kingdom cards plus 3 Shelters is exactly 20! You could get 8-point Fairgrounds without the aid of Colonies, Potions, Young Witch, or Black Market! And it might give another reason for buying a Curse, aside from piling out or Ambassador. (I'm assuming we still play with those purple cards in Dark Ages and that Ruins don't replace the Curse pile...?)
-
Some Cornucopia-and-Dark-Ages-only kingdoms seem like they could be quite fun!
I suppose with Fairgrounds on the board you'll have an interesting decision to make from the very start. Do you trash your starting Hovel and Overgrown Estate or keep them for more Fairgrounds variety? Because without a Supply pile for them, once you trash a Shelter, there's no going back!!! Well, unless there's another gain-from-trash-er that can gain cards costing as low as (1).
Hmmm...7 basic Supply cards (VP, Treasure, Curse) plus 10 Kingdom cards plus 3 Shelters is exactly 20! You could get 8-point Fairgrounds without the aid of Colonies, Potions, Young Witch, or Black Market! And it might give another reason for buying a Curse, aside from piling out or Ambassador. (I'm assuming we still play with those purple cards in Dark Ages and that Ruins don't replace the Curse pile...?)
I'm hoping we see a traditional Curser along with these new-fangled Looters.
-
Can someone tell me why Overgrown Estate is a Victory card if it does not give you any VP's By that logic, all cards could be X-Victory with it granting 0 VP's. Suddenly, Scout and Tribute are incredible! Crossroads is the new Madman!
Or... Overgrown Estate should just be Shelter.
-
Can someone tell me why Overgrown Estate is a Victory card if it does not give you any VP's By that logic, all cards could be X-Victory with it granting 0 VP's. Suddenly, Scout and Tribute are incredible! Crossroads is the new Madman!
Or... Overgrown Estate should just be Shelter.
Why is Horn of Plenty a Treasure when it gives $0?
-
Can someone tell me why Overgrown Estate is a Victory card if it does not give you any VP's
For flavor! And it does make a difference functionally.
-
Can someone tell me why Overgrown Estate is a Victory card if it does not give you any VP's By that logic, all cards could be X-Victory with it granting 0 VP's. Suddenly, Scout and Tribute are incredible! Crossroads is the new Madman!
Or... Overgrown Estate should just be Shelter.
Why is Horn of Plenty a Treasure when it gives $0?
All we need now is an action card that doesn't do anything.
(cue jokes about Scout, Adventurer, CHancellor, and whatever other cards people love to hate)
-
Ruined Great Hall - $0
Action - Victory
1 VP
-
Can someone tell me why Overgrown Estate is a Victory card if it does not give you any VP's By that logic, all cards could be X-Victory with it granting 0 VP's. Suddenly, Scout and Tribute are incredible! Crossroads is the new Madman!
Or... Overgrown Estate should just be Shelter.
You forgot about Silk Road and Transmute.
-
Can someone tell me why Overgrown Estate is a Victory card if it does not give you any VP's By that logic, all cards could be X-Victory with it granting 0 VP's. Suddenly, Scout and Tribute are incredible! Crossroads is the new Madman!
Or... Overgrown Estate should just be Shelter.
You forgot about Silk Road and Transmute.
Hold the phone... what happens when you Transmute a Great Hall? Do you get a Duchy and a Gold?
-
Can someone tell me why Overgrown Estate is a Victory card if it does not give you any VP's By that logic, all cards could be X-Victory with it granting 0 VP's. Suddenly, Scout and Tribute are incredible! Crossroads is the new Madman!
Or... Overgrown Estate should just be Shelter.
You forgot about Silk Road and Transmute.
Hold the phone... what happens when you Transmute a Great Hall? Do you get a Duchy and a Gold?
Yes.
-
Haven't seen much discussion of this yet, but wow what a huge nerf to Ambassador. It's already a bit weaker in Dark Ages, relative to other trashers, because it doesn't get on-trash benefits. But with shelters in play that you can't get rid of with Amb... wow. It becomes pretty weak. Maybe still playable (since Necropolis serves as an engine component, and you can buy an Estate to trash Hovel, then return it), but much less dominating than pre-Dark Ages.
-
Haven't seen much discussion of this yet, but wow what a huge nerf to Ambassador. It's already a bit weaker in Dark Ages, relative to other trashers, because it doesn't get on-trash benefits. But with shelters in play that you can't get rid of with Amb... wow. It becomes pretty weak. Maybe still playable (since Necropolis serves as an engine component, and you can buy an Estate to trash Hovel, then return it), but much less dominating than pre-Dark Ages.
Ambassador is still a power card, but you are right, both Shelters and Ruins do weaken Ambassador. I guess this is a good thing. That card is a bit on the strong side. I still think it will be the #1 $3 cost card when all is said in done though.
-
Can someone tell me why Overgrown Estate is a Victory card if it does not give you any VP's
For flavor! And it does make a difference functionally.
Yes, I understand this. It just seems like 0 VP is not enough to make Victory a subtype on the card. This could be extrapolated to all others by that logic. I know it may look like nitpicking to you, but for me it looks like unnecessary inconsistency among cards, thematics be damned.
Can someone tell me why Overgrown Estate is a Victory card if it does not give you any VP's By that logic, all cards could be X-Victory with it granting 0 VP's. Suddenly, Scout and Tribute are incredible! Crossroads is the new Madman!
Or... Overgrown Estate should just be Shelter.
Why is Horn of Plenty a Treasure when it gives $0?
Because you play it during your buy phase... I mean at least in this case the subtype Treasure makes sense, unlike Overgrown Estate, which is only for thematic consistency. It's not that big of a deal, but in my opinion, maybe change the name to Barn or something like that and drop the 0 VP part of the card.
-
You can transmute an overgrown estate into a gold, whereas you could transmute a shed into nothing.
-
"And it does make a difference functionally." So damn the thematics but what about function? There are tons of combos that are different just because it has that Victory label on it. You say "0 VP" could be extrapolated to the other cards, but you can't extrapolate that "Victory" type, and since it has that type it needs something on the card to say how many VP it's worth. That's not an inconsistency -- it's a consistency. What would be an inconsistency would be if something called "Overgrown Estate" weren't a Victory card in the first place.
-
Yes, I understand this. It just seems like 0 VP is not enough to make Victory a subtype on the card. This could be extrapolated to all others by that logic. I know it may look like nitpicking to you, but for me it looks like unnecessary inconsistency among cards, thematics be damned.
By convention, victory cards are worth VP. That's just a convention though. What makes a card a victory card is the word "victory" on the bottom line. That's all there is to it.
Overgrown Estate breaks the convention but fits the rule. It does so for both theme and functionality. I am betting more people appreciate this than are bugged by it.
-
In one important way, ambassador is buffed; namely, the ambassador/ambassador open is stronger when decks start with a village. (as is ambassador/any other important terminal).
-
"And it does make a difference functionally." So damn the thematics but what about function? There are tons of combos that are different just because it has that Victory label on it. You say "0 VP" could be extrapolated to the other cards, but you can't extrapolate that "Victory" type, and since it has that type it needs something on the card to say how many VP it's worth. That's not an inconsistency -- it's a consistency. What would be an inconsistency would be if something called "Overgrown Estate" weren't a Victory card in the first place.
Why could I not put 0 VP on all non-Victory cards and have them be a X-Victory hybrid? Why can I not extrapolate the "Victory" type? It doesn't need the subtype Victory in the first place. It is an inconsistency. It would be inconsistent for an "Overgrown Estate" to not be a Victory card. Why do you think I suggested that the name could have been changed to something else in addition to dropping the "Victory" type.
And, to Donald, I agree that it is merely a convention. However, I am of the belief that the convention should be a straight rule, not one to be broken. If it is to be broken, not in this way by the Overgrown Estate. A Victory card should have something to do with VP's, yet this one does not. It defeats the purpose of the subtype Victory if it has nothing relevant to VP's on it.
-
You could always Upgrade it to an Estate if you're that bothered by it.
-
In one important way, ambassador is buffed; namely, the ambassador/ambassador open is stronger when decks start with a village. (as is ambassador/any other important terminal).
I often open amb/amb but I think it's a huge mistake with shelters. There are only so many coppers to return, and you do need some sort of income, usually a silver will suffice on turns 3/4. I mean, lets say on turn 3 you return 2 coppers and buy nothing. And you draw Amb, Cx3, estate. Well you return the estate and buy a silver. But if you replace that estate with a shelter ... you cant return another 2 coppers otherwise you screw your economy. You'll have a nice thin deck with no copper, no silver, 2 ambs and 3 shelters that just clog things up. No, I think amb/silver becomes the stronger open with shelters.
It might still be reasonable if there is a strong $2 card you want (fool's gold, squire maybe).
-
Why could I not put 0 VP on all non-Victory cards and have them be a X-Victory hybrid?
There is no good reason to, and there are good reasons not to. Whereas there was a good reason to make Overgrown Estate a victory card. Really, it turns out that "I wouldn't do this everywhere" doesn't mean "so I shouldn't do it ever."
Why do you think I suggested that the name could have been changed to something else in addition to dropping the "Victory" type.
I wanted a victory card though. So I made one. Making a different card that wasn't a victory card here would not have been as good.
It defeats the purpose of the subtype Victory if it has nothing relevant to VP's on it.
It doesn't!
-
overgrown estate seems worse than just a plain estate..
Apprentice = draw two cards = same
Bishop = one less VP for draw
Remake = gain an estate many games
etc. etc.
-
Well you don't expect an estate to fall into disrepair and get better, do you?
-
Shelters may not be worth the 1 VP of an Estate, but they are way better to have in your deck.
-
Yes, I understand this. It just seems like 0 VP is not enough to make Victory a subtype on the card. This could be extrapolated to all others by that logic. I know it may look like nitpicking to you, but for me it looks like unnecessary inconsistency among cards, thematics be damned.
By convention, victory cards are worth VP. That's just a convention though. What makes a card a victory card is the word "victory" on the bottom line. That's all there is to it.
Overgrown Estate breaks the convention but fits the rule. It does so for both theme and functionality. I am betting more people appreciate this than are bugged by it.
Count me as not bugged. Actually I'd be considerably more bugged if none of the shelters were victory cards. Victory cards are a nice type that have many interactions, crossroads/transmute/silk road etc.
overgrown estate seems worse than just a plain estate..
Apprentice = draw two cards = same
Bishop = one less VP for draw
Remake = gain an estate many games
etc. etc.
You forgot plain trashers (as opposed to the TfB you've mentioned). So its better when you trash it with chapel/steward and a whole host of DA cards too rats/hermit/other stuff.
Anyway its more interesting
-
I just wanted to say: I'm missing the previews. :-\ Hopefully this whole set gets spoiled soon.
-
I just wanted to say: I'm missing the previews. :-\ Hopefully this whole set gets spoiled soon.
That may create an overload in my head.
-
"And it does make a difference functionally." So damn the thematics but what about function? There are tons of combos that are different just because it has that Victory label on it. You say "0 VP" could be extrapolated to the other cards, but you can't extrapolate that "Victory" type, and since it has that type it needs something on the card to say how many VP it's worth. That's not an inconsistency -- it's a consistency. What would be an inconsistency would be if something called "Overgrown Estate" weren't a Victory card in the first place.
Why could I not put 0 VP on all non-Victory cards and have them be a X-Victory hybrid? Why can I not extrapolate the "Victory" type? It doesn't need the subtype Victory in the first place. It is an inconsistency. It would be inconsistent for an "Overgrown Estate" to not be a Victory card. Why do you think I suggested that the name could have been changed to something else in addition to dropping the "Victory" type.
And, to Donald, I agree that it is merely a convention. However, I am of the belief that the convention should be a straight rule, not one to be broken. If it is to be broken, not in this way by the Overgrown Estate. A Victory card should have something to do with VP's, yet this one does not. It defeats the purpose of the subtype Victory if it has nothing relevant to VP's on it.
I don't understand why you're ignoring the functional ramifications, which is the question I put to you in my initial reply.
Why can't you make everything an X-Victory hybrid worth 0 VP? Because then Scout is a triple-Laboratory (an unnecessary buff for what is already a power card! Zing!).
Card types aren't flavor.
-
"And it does make a difference functionally." So damn the thematics but what about function? There are tons of combos that are different just because it has that Victory label on it. You say "0 VP" could be extrapolated to the other cards, but you can't extrapolate that "Victory" type, and since it has that type it needs something on the card to say how many VP it's worth. That's not an inconsistency -- it's a consistency. What would be an inconsistency would be if something called "Overgrown Estate" weren't a Victory card in the first place.
Why could I not put 0 VP on all non-Victory cards and have them be a X-Victory hybrid? Why can I not extrapolate the "Victory" type? It doesn't need the subtype Victory in the first place. It is an inconsistency. It would be inconsistent for an "Overgrown Estate" to not be a Victory card. Why do you think I suggested that the name could have been changed to something else in addition to dropping the "Victory" type.
And, to Donald, I agree that it is merely a convention. However, I am of the belief that the convention should be a straight rule, not one to be broken. If it is to be broken, not in this way by the Overgrown Estate. A Victory card should have something to do with VP's, yet this one does not. It defeats the purpose of the subtype Victory if it has nothing relevant to VP's on it.
I don't understand why you're ignoring the functional ramifications, which is the question I put to you in my initial reply.
Why can't you make everything an X-Victory hybrid worth 0 VP? Because then Scout is a triple-Laboratory (an unnecessary buff for what is already a power card! Zing!).
Card types aren't flavor.
Young Nick - the basic types (Action, Treasure, Victory) all mean basic things about the cards they're on. An Action uses up an Action, a Treasure is played during your buy phase, and a Victory is of importance at the end of the game. Different cards reference these types - Adventurer seeks Treasures, Scout draws Victory cards. If you want a card to perform something during your turn, it has to be Action or Treasure - if you want to limit how much it can be played, make it Action, if you want to be able to just throw an infinite amount down, make it Treasure. So Nobles and Harem, while playable, also give VP, so they're combo-types.
As for Overgrown Estate - the thought process was to have a card that cannot be played - a card that just sits in your deck. It also does not yield any VP. But we don't have a card type for that. So make it a Victory - now it can interact with Scout and Silk Road, but that's ok.
-
Cards that care about whether other cards are Victory cards or not:
* Bureaucrat
* Scout
* Tribute
* Transmute
* Fortune Teller
* Jester
* Crossroads
* Silk Road
* unknown number of Dark Ages cards
(Also Ironworks, Talisman, Treasury, Trade Route, Hoard, Horn of Plenty, and Haggler, but those can't combo with Overgrown Estate, so never mind.)
The big one here is "unknown number of Dark Ages cards." Overgrown Estate was specifically designed to work with Dark Ages, so I would be astonished if there weren't several Dark Ages cards that care about the fact that the Shelters are exactly what they are, including Overgrown Estate having the Victory card type.
-
Cards that care about whether other cards are Victory cards or not:
* Bureaucrat
* Scout
* Tribute
* Transmute
* Fortune Teller
* Jester
* Crossroads
* Silk Road
* unknown number of Dark Ages cards
(Also Ironworks, Talisman, Treasury, Trade Route, Hoard, Horn of Plenty, and Haggler, but those can't combo with Overgrown Estate, so never mind.)
The big one here is "unknown number of Dark Ages cards." Overgrown Estate was specifically designed to work with Dark Ages, so I would be astonished if there weren't several Dark Ages cards that care about the fact that the Shelters are exactly what they are, including Overgrown Estate having the Victory card type.
I'm not sure about that...keep in mind that shelters won't be used in every game with a DA card in it. No prosperity cards directly reference plats or colonies, because any prosperity card might be in a game that doesn't include the plats/colonies.
I would be surprised if there was no reference to shelters on some DA cards (why have the type if it's never used), but Donald seems pretty careful about ensuring that any card could be useful in any kingdom, so I doubt the presence of shelters will have a significant effect on a card's worth.
-
As for Overgrown Estate - the thought process was to have a card that cannot be played - a card that just sits in your deck. It also does not yield any VP. But we don't have a card type for that. So make it a Victory - now it can interact with Scout and Silk Road, but that's ok.
All this discussion makes me think... Curse really could just be type "Victory." I get that it's worse for flavor, which I'm sure is why it was done that way. But functionally; curses are identical to the basic victory cards. Just another card that you can't play on your turn, that counts towards your score at the end of the game, and that is available to buy in every game.
But, as we all know, it would completely break the game if it Curse were a Victory card, because Scout is too powerful as it is!
Ok, seriously... Crossroads, Tribute, Scout, Bureaucrat, Transmute, Silk Road, and Hoard would all get a little better. Talisman, and Haggler would technically get worse, though not in a noticeable way.
-
Cards that care about whether other cards are Victory cards or not:
* Bureaucrat
* Scout
* Tribute
* Transmute
* Fortune Teller
* Jester
* Crossroads
* Silk Road
* unknown number of Dark Ages cards
(Also Ironworks, Talisman, Treasury, Trade Route, Hoard, Horn of Plenty, and Haggler, but those can't combo with Overgrown Estate, so never mind.)
The big one here is "unknown number of Dark Ages cards." Overgrown Estate was specifically designed to work with Dark Ages, so I would be astonished if there weren't several Dark Ages cards that care about the fact that the Shelters are exactly what they are, including Overgrown Estate having the Victory card type.
I'm not sure about that...keep in mind that shelters won't be used in every game with a DA card in it. No prosperity cards directly reference plats or colonies, because any prosperity card might be in a game that doesn't include the plats/colonies.
I would be surprised if there was no reference to shelters on some DA cards (why have the type if it's never used), but Donald seems pretty careful about ensuring that any card could be useful in any kingdom, so I doubt the presence of shelters will have a significant effect on a card's worth.
Apprentice references Potions, which might not be in use just because Apprentice is in use. But your point still stands. Any card that references Shelter type (and I hope there will be some!) must work without Shelters around. Perhaps a card that counts the number of different types among some revealed cards?
-
Overgrown Estate was specifically designed to work with Dark Ages, so I would be astonished if there weren't several Dark Ages cards that care about the fact that the Shelters are exactly what they are, including Overgrown Estate having the Victory card type.
I'm not sure about that...keep in mind that shelters won't be used in every game with a DA card in it. No prosperity cards directly reference plats or colonies, because any prosperity card might be in a game that doesn't include the plats/colonies.
I would be surprised if there was no reference to shelters on some DA cards (why have the type if it's never used), but Donald seems pretty careful about ensuring that any card could be useful in any kingdom, so I doubt the presence of shelters will have a significant effect on a card's worth.
I'm not saying there will be cards that reference Shelters -- I'm saying I suspect there will be cards that reference Victory cards, or which will in some other way behave differently due to the fact that Overgrown Estate has the Victory type. (I agree with you that probably none of the other cards will directly reference Shelters.)
The comparison to Prosperity is apt: no, no cards specifically reference Platinum or Colony, but the cards in that set were designed with Platinum and Colony and the higher-income decks those cards require in mind. Which is not to say they don't work in non-Colony games, because they absolutely do. Similarly, obviously Dark Ages cards will work without Shelters, but it's silly to think they weren't designed with Shelters in mind.
-
As for Overgrown Estate - the thought process was to have a card that cannot be played - a card that just sits in your deck. It also does not yield any VP. But we don't have a card type for that. So make it a Victory - now it can interact with Scout and Silk Road, but that's ok.
All this discussion makes me think... Curse really could just be type "Victory." I get that it's worse for flavor, which I'm sure is why it was done that way. But functionally; curses are identical to the basic victory cards. Just another card that you can't play on your turn, that counts towards your score at the end of the game, and that is available to buy in every game.
But, as we all know, it would completely break the game if it Curse were a Victory card, because Scout is too powerful as it is!
Ok, seriously... Crossroads, Tribute, Scout, Bureaucrat, Transmute, Silk Road, and Hoard would all get a little better. Talisman, and Haggler would technically get worse, though not in a noticeable way.
Wuh... buh... why would you buy a Curse with Talisman in play?
-
As for Overgrown Estate - the thought process was to have a card that cannot be played - a card that just sits in your deck. It also does not yield any VP. But we don't have a card type for that. So make it a Victory - now it can interact with Scout and Silk Road, but that's ok.
All this discussion makes me think... Curse really could just be type "Victory." I get that it's worse for flavor, which I'm sure is why it was done that way. But functionally; curses are identical to the basic victory cards. Just another card that you can't play on your turn, that counts towards your score at the end of the game, and that is available to buy in every game.
But, as we all know, it would completely break the game if it Curse were a Victory card, because Scout is too powerful as it is!
Ok, seriously... Crossroads, Tribute, Scout, Bureaucrat, Transmute, Silk Road, and Hoard would all get a little better. Talisman, and Haggler would technically get worse, though not in a noticeable way.
Wuh... buh... why would you buy a Curse with Talisman in play?
To pile out the curses, leading to a three pile ending where you win.
-
As for Overgrown Estate - the thought process was to have a card that cannot be played - a card that just sits in your deck. It also does not yield any VP. But we don't have a card type for that. So make it a Victory - now it can interact with Scout and Silk Road, but that's ok.
All this discussion makes me think... Curse really could just be type "Victory." I get that it's worse for flavor, which I'm sure is why it was done that way. But functionally; curses are identical to the basic victory cards. Just another card that you can't play on your turn, that counts towards your score at the end of the game, and that is available to buy in every game.
But, as we all know, it would completely break the game if it Curse were a Victory card, because Scout is too powerful as it is!
Ok, seriously... Crossroads, Tribute, Scout, Bureaucrat, Transmute, Silk Road, and Hoard would all get a little better. Talisman, and Haggler would technically get worse, though not in a noticeable way.
Wuh... buh... why would you buy a Curse with Talisman in play?
Run out the third pile when you're ahead. Or you're boosting your Gardens to the next level, which gives you more points than the Curse takes away. Or you have a consistent draw-your deck engine that gets all its cash from pumped-up Trade Routes, and those Trade Routes need new fodder- and the Coppers are gone. Or Goons/Watchtower (where Talisman is irrelevant).
ed: ninja'd by WW, at least for the most common option
-
Maybe you have a Watchtower in hand, and you want to buy up lots of curses to trash them immediately so your opponent can't give them to you with Witch/Mountebank/Hag, etc?
That's why it was "technically worse, but not in a noticeable way". It's technically worse because you have fewer options by one, and you could come up with contrived examples where you'd want that option, though it would be more likely to come up in a puzzle than in a real game.
-
I actually ended up resigning on an iso game relevant to this today - he opened Hunting Party/Chapel, and I opened Amb/Amb. He was just too fast for me. I was able to pick up more Grand Markets than he was, but he managed to get an early King's Court, and then he bought a Curse and two Ambs. It was while he was giving me six Curses that I resigned.
-
I don't understand why you're ignoring the functional ramifications, which is the question I put to you in my initial reply.
Why can't you make everything an X-Victory hybrid worth 0 VP? Because then Scout is a triple-Laboratory (an unnecessary buff for what is already a power card! Zing!).
Card types aren't flavor.
I thought it went without say that I was only considering the functional ramifications. What I was saying was that you can't give non-VP-yielding cards "Victory" status because then they are the recipients of unearned interaction with all of the cards you listed in your next post. You say card types aren't flavor. This is exactly my point. It appears to me that "Overgrown Estate" is a Victory card because it makes sense thematically. But it is ignoring the functional ramifications.
Young Nick - the basic types (Action, Treasure, Victory) all mean basic things about the cards they're on. An Action uses up an Action, a Treasure is played during your buy phase, and a Victory is of importance at the end of the game. Different cards reference these types - Adventurer seeks Treasures, Scout draws Victory cards. If you want a card to perform something during your turn, it has to be Action or Treasure - if you want to limit how much it can be played, make it Action, if you want to be able to just throw an infinite amount down, make it Treasure. So Nobles and Harem, while playable, also give VP, so they're combo-types.
As for Overgrown Estate - the thought process was to have a card that cannot be played - a card that just sits in your deck. It also does not yield any VP. But we don't have a card type for that. So make it a Victory - now it can interact with Scout and Silk Road, but that's ok.
Yet, we do have a card that cannot be played and does not yield VP. Hovel does that. It is a reaction, yes, but it cannot be played. So there is precedent. When I saw the cards, I figured Shelters were cards that could not be played on their own. Maybe this was a wrong assumption, and judging by DXV's comments, it probably was. However, I think it is a valid path to go down, and I think it would make more sense functionally to have Shelters be unplayable in themselves, and as a result leave of the "Victory" on Overgrown Estate.
Is it a big deal? Absolutely not. However, the previews featured some cards that I do not think were worded as clearly as the currently available cards are. I have been known to praise DXV, especially to family and friends, for how perfect the wording on the cards are and how rarely is a FAQ actually necessary. With Overgrown Estate, and some other DA cards, I don't care for the wording as much. It's not meant to be an insult, just a contradictory opinion.
-
Well, it does reinforce that a Victory card is a Victory card because it says it is, and for no other reason. It's why Curse cards aren't Victory cards which give negative VP.
Also, stuff like Gardens or Silk Road or Duke or Feodum can also be worth 0 VP at times :) and they're still victory cards when they're worth 0 VP.
...but, what type DO you think that Overgrown Estate should have been? It's not an action or treasure because you can't play it. It's not a reaction because it doesn't react to anything, unlike Hovel which reacts to you buying a victory card. Victory makes sense - it's a card that sits in your deck and doesn't do anything.
-
...but, what type DO you think that Overgrown Estate should have been? It's not an action or treasure because you can't play it. It's not a reaction because it doesn't react to anything, unlike Hovel which reacts to you buying a victory card. Victory makes sense - it's a card that sits in your deck and doesn't do anything.
It easily could have just been a pure Shelter-type card. That being said, I like the fact that it's a Victory card.
-
I dunno if this helps but all of the single-type victory cards are land of some kind. Scouts search the surrounding land and help you traverse it more quickly. Crossroads offer a similar help with traversal. Silk roads are valuable because of the places the connect to. An overgrown estate is nearly worthless land because of it's disrepair, but it's still land.
-
It appears to me that "Overgrown Estate" is a Victory card because it makes sense thematically. But it is ignoring the functional ramifications.
In fact it being a victory card is the opposite of ignoring the functional ramifications. It is specifically taking into account the functional ramifications. It is valuable, functionally, that it is a victory card.
-
It appears to me that "Overgrown Estate" is a Victory card because it makes sense thematically. But it is ignoring the functional ramifications.
In fact it being a victory card is the opposite of ignoring the functional ramifications. It is specifically taking into account the functional ramifications. It is valuable, functionally, that it is a victory card.
Nuts. I was all ready to come in an point out that if there's nothing that we've learned from however many years of Dominion, it's that Donald always considers the functional ramifications. Even a cursory glance at the Secret Histories shows that. Overgrown Estate is a Victory card because you have determined that, all things considered, it works best in the game as such.
-
Apprentice references Potions, which might not be in use just because Apprentice is in use. But your point still stands. Any card that references Shelter type (and I hope there will be some!) must work without Shelters around. Perhaps a card that counts the number of different types among some revealed cards?
And Vagrant has given us the answer we've all been waiting for!
-
Overgrown Estate was specifically designed to work with Dark Ages, so I would be astonished if there weren't several Dark Ages cards that care about the fact that the Shelters are exactly what they are, including Overgrown Estate having the Victory card type.
I'm not sure about that...keep in mind that shelters won't be used in every game with a DA card in it.
I'm not saying there will be cards that reference Shelters -- I'm saying I suspect there will be cards that reference Victory cards, or which will in some other way behave differently due to the fact that Overgrown Estate has the Victory type. (I agree with you that probably none of the other cards will directly reference Shelters.)
Vagrant proves me wrong on the parenthetical, but Vagrant works when Shelters aren't around.
But a quick survey of the issue of Overgrown Estate being a Victory card. Dark Ages has added two more cards that care about the Victory type. OE having that Victory type is a boon if you're using...
* Ironmonger: Revealing OE gives you +1 Card instead of nothing.
* Rebuild: Can't convert OE into a Duchy, which would be nice, but you can at least convert it to a regular Estate and get OE's on-trash benefit. With Gardens/SR/Feodum/Island/GH/Tunnel, you're better off still.
Although Vagrant also cares about Victory cards, it cares about Shelters equally, and so in this case OE's Victory type is not an advantage.
-
Hovel becomes the second card which gives no bonus to an opponents tribute. And it's a dual type to boot.
Fun fact; my Ironmonger (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Ironmonger) hit Hovel (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Hovel) last week in a game. :(
-
Hovel becomes the second card which gives no bonus to an opponents tribute. And it's a dual type to boot.
Fun fact; my Ironmonger (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Ironmonger) hit Hovel (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Hovel) last week in a game. :(
Dude you must be soooooo bored
-
GendoIkari didn't even post +2 Actions. A disappointment.