Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

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

1

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.

« on: September 06, 2023, 07:01:07 am »

I like Donald X's suggestion of "offer a tie," since I was thinking about the potential issues with something like Collection+Stampede where the game can be unending (are there any other two card combo cases?).

You can replace Stampede by another Horse gainer for another (usually weaker) unending two card combo. There are also older two-card combos that can lead to unending "infinite VP" situations, e.g. Fortress/Bishop and King's Court/Monument. (The latter needs a trasher in the kingdom, but so does Collection/Stampede).

All of your examples tend to benefit from more engine-building however, it is basically never optimal to stop gaining cards. This is different with Collection/Stampede, which is the main problem with that combo.

With a golden deck of 5 Fortresses and 4 Bishops, gaining other cards does not help you at all once the Bishops are all gone. Gaining any VP card or terminal card hurts you since it increases the risk of not being able to play all your Bishops each turn. (Adding e.g. a Lab and a 5th Bishop may increase your average VP/turn, but if both players do this, you just get another stalemate.) Of course there are boards where building an engine from the start can win before the golden deck is ready, but not every board supports a stronger engine.

Also you can Collection/Stampede without a trasher. 10 Horses is enough to draw all your starting cards plus 5 Collections.

Right, but only if you manage to buy 5 Collections without a single Silver or other support card in your deck, which would take a very long time without shuffle luck. I suppose you can buy two Silvers in the opening and only get three Collections instead of five, for a 30VP/turn golden deck.

In the end, Collection/Stampede is clearly the strongest unending two-card combo (due to Stampede's anti-engine clause and  the highest VP gain per turn), but it's not the only one.

2

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.

« on: September 04, 2023, 07:13:24 am »

I like Donald X's suggestion of "offer a tie," since I was thinking about the potential issues with something like Collection+Stampede where the game can be unending (are there any other two card combo cases?).

You can replace Stampede by another Horse gainer for another (usually weaker) unending two card combo. There are also older two-card combos that can lead to unending "infinite VP" situations, e.g. Fortress/Bishop and King's Court/Monument. (The latter needs a trasher in the kingdom, but so does Collection/Stampede).

3

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #196: If a card is in the kingdom...

« on: August 25, 2023, 06:31:29 pm »

That sounds interesting. But I would increase the cost to $3 (at least) as Nomad Village is similar in strength to Village: It's better when revealing an Action, weaker when revealing a Treasure, and roughly equivalent when revealing a VP card or a Curse. NV's below-the-line effect also makes the card stronger.

4

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #188: Make a Wish

« on: May 30, 2023, 11:43:59 am »

Can we pretend that airplanes in the Night sky are like Shooting Stars? I could really use a Wish right now, Wish right now, Wish right now.

A Night-Reaction that can gain and play exactly one Wish per turn but only if you didn't gain any cards beforehand (and playing Wishes during your Night phase usually isn't as helpful). However, if you catch sight of a Shooting Star before Nighttime (via revealing), you can get your Wish early.

No idea on cost, $5 felt like too much, but maybe that's right? You don't really want these in multiples.

I think $4 is a better cost than $5 for this, as it is strongest in the opening, and a $5 cost would give 5/2 openings a huge advantage. This is very strong in the early game but usually becomes a dead card later in the absence of "reveal" triggers.

5

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent

« on: May 23, 2023, 11:49:24 am »

This is true, but I think the card would be better reworded to reflect this. The current form is not ideal anyways, as it has a dividing line that shouldn't be there. I would suggest

Move your Sanction token to a supply pile. At the start of your next turn, take it back and +$3.
Until then, when any player plays a card from that pile, they first take 2D.

The Copper sanctioning is still a problem and can lock people out of the game if you have a $5/$2 opening.

Whelp I really was tired when I made this. Missed both the horizontal line (?!) and the fact that it can hit Coppers. I very much want it to hit custom Treasure cards but not Copper/Silver/Gold. So "Kingdom supply pile" should do it.  And it shouldn't have the attack type; it's an attack like Embargo that doesn't have the type bc the interaction with moat is awkward

Updated Version (it's fine if this doesn't make it into the contest anymore).

I think it could be an Attack just like the other duration attacks Blockade and Swamp Hag are. The only difference to those two cards is that TB can also hurt the player themself, but this is rarely relevant when sanctioning an Action, and Moat clearly states that it only reacts to another player playing an Attack, not to your own Attack. TB hurts the opponents badly e.g. when sanctioning the only village or a strong cantrip.

Unrelatedly, you don't need a token if TB sets aside a copy from the pile instead (like Blockade, but returning it to the pile next turn).

6

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent

« on: May 22, 2023, 11:36:51 am »

Last!



FAQ: if blocked by Moat, you don't get to move/place the token.

So one player's Moat protects all other players in multiplayer games? That's very unusual, no other Attack works like that AFAIK. Shouldn't Moat just protect the player revealing it from taking debt?

7

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent

« on: May 19, 2023, 08:31:08 am »

Lieutenant • $4 • Action - Command - Attack
Each other player takes their deck's top card and sets it aside face-up. You may play one face-up set aside card, if it is an...: Action, once; or Treasure, twice. Each player discards one card set aside.

You can use a player's cards to take advantage of their improved deck and remove it from their use for one turn. 

Discarding the top card doesn't hurt at all on average, so I wouldn't call this an Attack. (Tribute isn't an Attack either.)

Besides, I think it's very swingy, especially in 2 player games: You don't know if it’s terminal or not when playing it (same as Tribute, again), and it does nothing when only green cards are revealed. I think I'd give it at least +1 Action.
 

8

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent

« on: May 19, 2023, 05:29:30 am »

While this is similar to Exiling Attacks, it is different enough to be novel and interesting. But it is also pretty centralizing (if you don’t contest the pile and the opponent play it consistently, 10 cards stay in nirvana) and as the vanilla net effects are those of Caravan, just more delayed, this has to be nerfed somehow.
I would make I terminal. As non-terminal, easy-gainable $3, you want the entire pile even if the attack did not exist.

I feel like it's not quite so strong. In the early game, the attack is actually a benefit more often than not (or doesn't do anything, if you aren't shuffling). If an opponent goes hard for these, that can be counteracted quite easily by getting more Coppers as fodder to remain in play. It forces you to adapt how you build your deck, but I don't think it's too centralizing.

If it were terminal, the vanilla effect would be weaker than Sleigh, and that's a $2 that has other stuff going on as well. The comparison to Caravan is interesting, and maybe I'll up the price to $4, though I think the Horse gaining is significantly weaker than start-of-turn draw.

I also think so. Additionally, the draw is delayed by a full shuffle compared to Caravan, which is a significant disadvantage. E.g. Bandit Camp is a Village that effectively comes with a Gold delayed by one shuffle, for only $5 instead of $3+$6. (Gaining a Spoils each play is actually slightly better than gaining a Gold once, since you can keep the Spoils for the next shuffle if you dont need the $.)

9

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Revised versions of published cards

« on: May 09, 2023, 03:29:56 am »

This only makes a difference with Black Cat.

No, the change makes Moat nonterminal (i.e. a Lab) whenever an opponent plays an attack. It's a lot stronger than the original card, often better than Guard Dog... 

10

General Discussion / Re: Dominion terms

« on: May 05, 2023, 04:33:30 am »

I'm learning German. I find it interesting how "Koffer" means suitcase and how many English words are translated into German by changing the "c" to a "k". An example: (English) camera = Kamera (German)

Yes, German does not use the C as a single character, it only appears in the combinations CH, SCH and CK (with a few edge cases in words of foreign origin like Café or Cello). I suppose that in most words of Latin origin, the C was changed to K when the German language developed. Or maybe historical English changed K to C in German-origin words, like "können" -> "can"...
It's quite annoying in German Scrabble when you draw a C without an H or K. 

Good luck with your learning!  German is supposed to be a rather complicated foreign language to learn, as far as I've heard.

11

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #184: Spring is in the Air

« on: April 21, 2023, 10:44:25 am »

OK, I will try something Chinese.
Spring is a special season in Chinese classical poetry. (Of course, the other three seasons are special too.) I selected a very famous and storytelling Tang poem about spring:

题都城南庄 Written in a Village South of the Capital
（崔护 Written by Cui Hu, translated by Xu Yuanchong）
去年今日此门中，
In this house on this day last year a pink face vied;
人面桃花相映红。
In beauty with the pink peach blossom side by side.
人面不知何处去，
I do not know today where the pink face has gone;
桃花依旧笑春风。
In vernal breeze still smile pink peach blossoms full blown.

I design a Victory card with Heirloom, trying to tell a story about the poet's memories and peach blossoms:

Poem Notes
Treasure - Heirloom
+
You may discard a Victory card for +1 Villager.

Vernal blossoms
Victory
2
-
When you gain this, you may remove 2 Villagers from your mat to +2
Heirloom: Poem Notes

AFAICS Poem Notes is clearly worse than Coin of the Realm, which gives you a "double Villager" unconditionally. Even if you draw your deck each turn and can thus play PN twice as often as CotR and always collide it with a VP card, it's usually worse than CotR unless you want the Copper back in your deck immediately.

Maybe you could allow PN to discard up to 2 VP cards (or even any number of VP cards) for +1 Villager each?

Edit: I just noticed that Poem notes is designed as an Heirloom rather than a kingdom card. So ignore what I wrote above. 

12

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #182: I Choose Nothing

« on: March 28, 2023, 08:12:33 am »

Kings feast: A throne room where you can make it become a Kings court by giving each other player a copy of the played Action card.

Kings feast - $5 - Action

You may play an Action card from your hand twice. You may give each other player a copy of that card. If all other players got a copy, replay the Action card.

A concern of mine is that a infinite loop may be possible with this, is that the case?

edited it so the kingscourt effect only triggers if all other players got a copy of the throned card

At best it's a Kings Court for you, so I don't think an infinite loop is possible, except for the ones KC already enables itself.
What do you mean by "give"? Does the copy come from your hand or the supply? I assume the latter, otherwise the card would be extremely weak.

13

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #180: Pay the Iron Price

« on: March 03, 2023, 04:44:09 am »

Two cards doing similar things! I think they're mostly balanced but in games with lots of attacks Usurper might be too good.

I think Usurper may already be too strong on its own as you can trigger its second effect just by buying another copy of it yourself (until the pile is empty, but by then you'll have gained dozens of Loots).
Compared to Cutthroat, it gives an extra Throne Room after fulfilling their respective gain condition, which is a huge advantage.

Blood Crown is better than Platinum when you can play another Loot or a Gold with it, or a Grand Market+Throne Room when playing an Attack with it in your Action phase. But it might be fine since you wont always have such a collision.

14

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #176 - Game Changer

« on: February 02, 2023, 01:16:35 pm »

Local stable $4
Action
+1 action
Play up to 3 treasure.  +1 card per treasure played this way
-
In games using this, whenever an player gains an victory card, they gain an copper.



Might look strong, but it is an conditional libary, with some potential upside.

I'd say it is a conditional double Lab, since it's nonterminal (unlike Library). So it seems very strong to me...

15

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #175 - Super Expensive

« on: January 20, 2023, 07:25:04 am »

Gentrification
Project
$12

Set aside a non-Victory Action card from the supply next to this and place your project cube on it.
_______________________________________________________________________________
When scoring +2VP per card you have from that pile.


Notes
- Not happy with the wording regarding the scoring but I am trying to imply that if this is put on a split pile all cards in that pile score 2 points each.
- The non victory clause is to prevent a player claiming the Castles pile by setting aside one that is also an action.
- I am a bit unsure of the pricing for this. For the number of points it can potentially score without adding cards that clog your deck it needs to be expensive. I feel it has to be more then Colony but other than that I am not sure.

I don't think this is really worth the price. You need a LOT of cards from a given pile to justify spending $12 on it imo.

In the common case where a 10-card pile runs out, you'll get 10 VP if you split the pile 5-5 (so it's a marginally more expensive Colony that doesn't give you a dead card in your deck), or 12 VP if you win the split 6-4. (I suppose the set-aside card also gives 2 VP?) In either case, you have to buy Gentrification before the pile has emptied.

So I think this is competitively priced if you tie or win any Action pile split.

The best-case scenario is setting aside Rats -  you'll rapidly get 40 VP. 

16

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Plunder is online

« on: December 28, 2022, 04:31:18 pm »

That was my precisely my point. Actions are not the „standard“ while Treasures are some weird funky edge case that need any rationale. Especially not in an expansion with a lot of Treasures.

You make it sound like a complete coincidence that every other card that works the same as an action or a treasure has been an action so far. Clearly actions are some sort of default; or at least they always have been until now.

Ain’t just me dude. The designer himself said in the other thread that there was no deeper meaning, no fine-tuning or whatever behind converting an Action into a Treasure. Also pure coincidence that Shaman did not end up as a Treasure.

Has he said that? Previously Donald clearly stated that only specific cards should be Treasures:

Treasures should make money; I made an exception for a card that wanted to be played in the buy phase. They should feel like treasures - they make money, or, there's Horn of Plenty again, gain cards.

17

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Plunder is online

« on: December 21, 2022, 06:27:28 am »

It's interesting that in games with Looting, you just don't ever buy Gold.

Well, maybe sometimes there is no Loots left, or there are only Endless Chalices left.

Hammer can also be worse than Gold when you don't want any (more) $4- cards.

18

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Plunder is online

« on: December 21, 2022, 06:18:47 am »

It's interesting that in games with Looting, you just don't ever buy Gold. Technically in games with Delve you don't ever buy Silver either, but at least there you still get Silver.

It's similar to Wedding, which also makes buying a Gold practically obsolete (paying 1 debt extra for 1 VP is a real bargain) , but Wedding does still gain the Gold.

19

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #172: Trait Me Right

« on: December 20, 2022, 02:49:06 pm »

Warm
Trait
At the end of your Buy phase, if you have at least $4 unspent, gain a Warm card.

This is likely overpowered with a $6+ card - you could effectively "buy" a Warm King's court or Grand Market for only $4, without even using up a buy.
It's also clearly better than Cheap with any $6+ card, but underwhelming with a card costing $3 or less...

20

Dominion General Discussion / Re: * Plunder Previews #4: Next Time *

« on: December 15, 2022, 01:56:52 pm »

Does Inherited work from the top of the pile first, or are we all starting with a Fortune this game?

No, you all get a Gladiator. Except in a 6 player game, then the last Player is the lucky one :-)

Is that the actual rule for Inherited split piles? Seems very unfair at least with Glad./Fortune, almost game over before turn 1...

21

Dominion General Discussion / Re: * Plunder Previews #3: Loot *

« on: December 14, 2022, 03:28:04 pm »

For my money Dominion has all the randomness it needs in the shuffle. Cards like Castles and Tournament are my least favourite, introducing unnecessary randomness by giving players different opportunities by (mostly) pure chance. Loot looks to have the same problem, tho hopefully in a less swingy way as the loots are more similar to each other than, say, Princess and Followers.

I think it would have been better to take the most interesting 2 or 3 loots and make each of them a regular treasure.

I suppose it can be game-deciding to get e.g. an early Prize Goat on a board with no other trashing. In rare cases, it's possible to gain a Loot turn 1: e.g. buy Wealthy Village with 3 Coppers and 2 Heirlooms...

I'm surprised that Cheap exists: If most kingdom cards are designed to be as cheap as possible without breaking things, making a card still cheaper unconditionally should be problematic. Especially when it turns a strong $5 card like Witch into a $4...

22

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #171: Gains Upon Gains

« on: December 14, 2022, 01:15:55 pm »

Extra gaining as penalty as opposed to reward.

Another possible way to neatly balance what you can gain with this would be "costing up to $7" (or up to $6). You notably miss out on cards like Platinum and Prince (and King's Court if you go for up to $6). I think that is an acceptable compromise.

Nah, that is broken with cost reduction.

I don't think so. If Province's cost is reduced to $4 or less with stacked cost reduction, Summoner is no better than Workshop in gaining Provinces. If Province's cost is reduced to exactly $5, Summoner is still clearly worse than a $5 gainer like Altar. And a cost reduction to $6 or $7 would make gaining a Duchy preferable to gaining a Province plus two or three curses in most cases.

There's 10 Curses in a 2 player game. The first and second Province come with 4, the third with the last two, and the fourth through eighth are free. I don't know if it's too much of a rush to try and gain all eight this way, but I'd still rather avoid winning off eight plays of this.

The possibility of the curse pile running out is  independent from cost reduction.

You'd have to gain the entire Province pile in one turn together with the entire curse pile - otherwise the opponent will happily gain the remaining "curse-free" Provinces with their own Summoners.
KC-KC-3 Summoners would manage it, but it's as hard to pull of as the equivalent KC-KC-3 Bridges.

23

Dominion General Discussion / Re: * Plunder Previews #2: Durations & Traits *

« on: December 14, 2022, 02:51:05 am »

Are you able to use two Traits in the same Kingdom? I'm guessing you are, since you didn't specify in your post

I suppose so, since I had an online game with two Traits yesterday.

24

Dominion General Discussion / Re: * Plunder Previews #1: Treasures & Events *

« on: December 12, 2022, 02:38:11 pm »

Maestrom enables a semi-pin in which you can limit your opponent to owning just 4 cards.  Have them draw up their deck using Council Room and then buy Maestrom a bunch of times.

In principle this could work, but even with 10 CRs played they usually won't have drawn their entire deck. Also, with $40 and 10 buys to spare, you can usually just win the game instead of pinning your opponent.

25

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #171: Gains Upon Gains

« on: December 11, 2022, 07:05:26 pm »

Extra gaining as penalty as opposed to reward.

Another possible way to neatly balance what you can gain with this would be "costing up to $7" (or up to $6). You notably miss out on cards like Platinum and Prince (and King's Court if you go for up to $6). I think that is an acceptable compromise.

Nah, that is broken with cost reduction.

I don't think so. If Province's cost is reduced to $4 or less with stacked cost reduction, Summoner is no better than Workshop in gaining Provinces. If Province's cost is reduced to exactly $5, Summoner is still clearly worse than a $5 gainer like Altar. And a cost reduction to $6 or $7 would make gaining a Duchy preferable to gaining a Province plus two or three curses in most cases.