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.

101

Dominion World Masters / Re: How best to run a 3-player tournament

« on: July 16, 2012, 01:12:33 pm »

i think the arguments that 'Jay wants' or 'this is how we did it in the past' are horrible reasons to maintain the status quo.

3 and 4 player tournaments are the result of jay's desires to help promote the game, and i personally haven't ever seen any other logistical or competitive reasons why he prefers 3/4p. any gains he might imagine from having 3p tournaments are likely lost when anyone views the circus of events that has surrounded the tournaments.

Except that Jay paid for this Nationals, including the very nice hotel rooms and food and travel (I think -- I paid my own way), so he has final say over what format the tournament takes. He does want the tournaments improved, as he stated at the end of Nationals on Saturday. Still, when the owner of the publishing company that put this game on the map sponsors the tournament, you can't just look this gift horse up the you-know-what.

Also, as Lekkit just said, it's a little hypocritical to complain about the status quo of 3-player tournaments when you espouse the status quo of 2-player gaming.

2 player had been the dominant competitive environment for most of isotropic's existence, with 3p only gaining popularity in preparation for this world's tournament. really, there are just too many technical issues in 3/4 player vs 2 player. the exaggerated effects of seating order, kingmaking, collusion, point systems for placing, tie breakers, and potential length of game issues. i'm sure i'm missing something, but the main issue for 2p tournaments IRL are related to actually having enough copies of the game, something which can be alleviated by the existence of the base card expansion, preset kingdoms, and/or the funsockets app.

donald x., creator of the game, has stated that he prefers 2p for competitive play. (though he adds that you could also run multiplayer tournaments for those that wish)

If tests prove that 3p just doesn't work compared to 2p, perhaps that'll convince Jay to run tourneys in 2p mode. Anyway, the point of this thread is not to complain about 3p over 2p -- it's to figure out how to improve 3p tournaments and then test those methods on Iso. If you have nothing to add to that discussion, please add no more.

102

Dominion World Masters / How best to run a 3-player tournament

« on: July 16, 2012, 11:30:20 am »

Hi, guys! I'm fresh back from the US Dominion Finals (don't ask how I did, though...), and the basic agreement is that, sorry Jay, but your format needs work.

This topic is meant to gather ideas for improving the kind of tournament that Jay wants for the Dominion Regionals/Nationals/Worlds/Universals? (any aliens playing this game?). Don't just say "Make it a 2-player tournament" because, as much as I know how most players prefer 2-player games, Jay has made it clear that he wants 3-player as much as possible.

Here's a reminder of how Nationals worked: For preliminaries, each player played three games, once in each seating position. You get 5 points for a 1st place, 3 for a 2nd, and 1 for a 3rd. Ties get a split between positions (e.g. a tie for 1st gets 4 points each). Once everyone plays their three games, the top nine (yes, we played three games each just to eliminate two players) start the process again with a clean slate.

Ideally, the player with the most points would win. That did not happen. There was a tie for first place, and Jay did not want a 2-player tiebreak. He wanted to put the third-placer in the tiebreak game, but there were two of them, too! After a heated discussion, we just did a 4-player final game that was overly Witch-centric. Not the best way to end a tournament, for sure.

After that final game, we talked about how tournaments should progress in the future. Jay firmly established that the format should stay 3-player, and I agree. ednever talked quite a bit about implementing a veto mode of sorts, from the standard veto format to one that favors the third player a bit more. I brought up a few ideas for a seeded elimination format, at least for the post-prelims, that uses the same point system to determine a single player to advance out of a group of three. I don't really remember the rest of the discussion, so if anyone who was there can help me out, I'd appreciate it.

Now's your chance to say whatever you want. Here are a few points of discussion that I want to focus on the most:

• For the point games, should there be more games? Obviously, the more games you get to play, the less likely a tie at the top will occur. To me, this seems like a no-brainer, but if people with brains have an objection, make it known.
• If there is ever a tie for qualification or the title, how should it be resolved? Three-way ties are optimal for the format, but how often would that happen? Larger ties could use the point system again, even though it'll take a long time, perhaps. Two-person ties are the big issue, due to the lack of desire to host 2-player games here.
• If we do use a seeded elimination system, how do we group up the seeds? I mentioned in a topic in the IsoDom board that I've been working on two such formats: double underdog (1-8-9, 2-6-7, 3-4-5), and what I now call "Magic Square" (1-5-9, 2-6-7, 3-4-8). One person at the tournament (I can't quite remember his name, so I'll just call him "Mr. Vegan") suggested sort of a split difference between the two that would look like this: 1-6-9, 2-5-8, 3-4-7.

I would like to host some test 3-player tournaments on Iso to help determine what would work best. This will be after I get more input, of course. So please, start discussing! And thank you in advance!

103

Dominion World Masters / Re: Dominion US National Championships

« on: July 14, 2012, 07:47:00 pm »

I had a fun time getting my butt handed to me (I did win a few times, but the rest...), so thanks to ednever and everyone else for being great opponents.

I look forward to seeing more tournaments like this, though I'll probably take a break from competitive play for a while (IED and all).

104

Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Part 3!

« on: July 12, 2012, 05:26:52 pm »

Getting rid of a Curse is itself a bonus. Even Coppers and Estates have their uses from time to time. All Curse ever gives you is dead space and one less point. The only good Curse is the one in your opponent's deck.

105

Dominion World Masters / Re: Dominion US National Championships

« on: July 10, 2012, 11:24:42 pm »

I will be representing Gamicon of Iowa City at the championships.

IOWA!  Woot.

Are you from Iowa, Powerman?

106

Dominion World Masters / Re: Dominion US National Championships

« on: July 10, 2012, 07:14:43 pm »

I will be representing Gamicon of Iowa City at the championships.

107

General Discussion / Re: Dominion Cards that put songs in your mind

« on: June 10, 2012, 08:11:20 pm »

Crossroads - If I'm in a classic rock mood, "Crossroads" by Cream. If even more classic than that, the original Robert Johnson version. Or, if I'm feeling hip-hoppish, I'll think "Tha Crossroads" by Bone Thugs-n-Harmony.

Bridge - Usually "Under the Bridge" by Red Hot Chili Peppers. If in a more depressed mood (i.e. ten-game losing streak), "Bridge Over Troubled Water" by Simon & Garfunkel.

Wishing Well - "Wishing Well" by Terence Trent D'arby is my usual choice, but sometimes I'll start singing "Goodnight Girl" by Wet Wet Wet instead.

Watchtower - "All Along the Watchtower," of course. Only the Jimi Hendrix version, though.

Island - ..."La Isla Bonita" by Madonna. Yeah.

Navigator - Reminds me of Nami, so I start whistling whatever "One Piece" theme pops into my head.

108

Rules Questions / Re: Should Inn always shuffle your deck, even when you don't put any Actions in?

« on: May 27, 2012, 12:53:01 am »

If you choose zero action cards to shuffle in, you still shuffle.

Thanks, Donald. Good to know that it was a rule, not an Isotropic bug. Still a little peeved about that incident, though...

109

Rules Questions / Should Inn always shuffle your deck, even when you don't put any Actions in?

« on: May 27, 2012, 12:41:14 am »

I just played/rage quit a game using Navigator and Inn (by the way, if my opponents are reading this, I sincerely apologize for my behavior afterward). One turn, I played Navigator, saw that I had Witch among the top five cards of my deck, and decided to keep them. I then bought an Inn, and since I didn't want to shuffle, I opted not to shuffle that Inn into my deck. It was the only card in the discard pile at the time, too. However, I see that my next hand has no Witch in it. I didn't accidentally discard all of my cards, as after one anger-filled turn, my Witch shows up -- just before a reshuffle will force it back another few turns if I decide to play it. That was when I... um, did things I would rather not retell, if you don't mind...

After I calmed down, I took a look at the description of Inn from the Hinterlands rulebook. Here it is in full:

When you play this, you draw 2 cards, get +2 Actions, then discard 2 cards. The cards you discard can be one that were in your hand and/or ones you just drew. You discard cards if able, even if you were unable to draw 2 cards. When you gain this, you look through your discard pile (something normally not allowed), and shuffle any number of Action cards from it into your deck (leaving the rest of your discard pile in your discard pile). You do not have to shuffle any Action cards into your deck. You can shuffle the Inn you just gained into your deck; it is an Action card in your discard pile. Cards with two types, one of which is Action, are Action cards. You must reveal the Action cards that you choose to shuffle into your deck. It does not matter what order you leave your discard pile in afterwards. This ability functions if you gain Inn due to buying it, or gain Inn some other way.

There is nothing specifically saying that you must shuffle your deck when you gain Inn. The only reasoning I can see for the "shuffle anyway" deal is that "shuffle any number of Action cards into your deck" includes zero as a number (i.e. you are shuffling zero cards into your deck, but you are still shuffling). Still, I don't see why the deck must be shuffled if no discard-pile Action cards are going into it via Inn, especially if it's going to mess with the abilities of cards like Navigator or Courtyard or the like.

What say you, guys? Does the wording of the card require shuffling every time Inn is gained, even if its on-gain ability isn't really used?

110

GokoDom / Re: 3-person isodom?

« on: May 23, 2012, 10:17:49 am »

Tejayes, are you designing it as an elimination bracket? Wouldn't it work best to just use the Swiss system normally?

Honestly, I wasn't really thinking about alternates when I posted. I've just been tinkering with three-player elimination systems lately, then saw the "3-person isodom" thread and thought, "Woo-hoo, relevant to my little project!" For simplicity's sakes, the Swiss system probably would be best, but I still wanted to share my ideas.

111

GokoDom / Re: 3-person isodom?

« on: May 21, 2012, 01:28:22 pm »

As a 3-player fan myself, I've been working on a bracket for ranked/seeded 3p tournaments, since I can't find any good examples of such online. So far, I have two prototypes for anyone who wants to take a gander:

PROTOTYPE #1: DOUBLE UNDERDOG

In regular 2p tournaments, the highest-ranked player is paired up with the lowest ranked, and so on and so forth. The later rounds are constructed expecting the higher ranked player to advance each time. This first prototype pits the top-ranked player against the two bottom-ranked players, and so on. Here is a mock-up of what a ranked 81-entrant 3p tournament would look like under this model:

1-80-81|26-30-31|27-28-29
----------------------------
8-66-67|12-58-59|13-56-57
----------------------------
9-64-65|10-62-63|11-60-61
======================
2-78-79|24-34-35|25-32-33
----------------------------
6-70-71|16-50-51|17-48-49
----------------------------
7-68-69|14-54-55|15-52-53
======================
3-76-77|22-38-39|23-36-37
----------------------------
4-74-75|20-42-43|21-40-41
----------------------------
5-72-73|18-46-47|19-44-45

PROTOTYPE #2: TOP-MIDDLE-BOTTOM CYCLING

If you notice in 2p tournaments, when you sum up the first-round ranks (and expected ranks for each later round) for each match, all the sums will be the same (65 in the first round of a 64-player tournament, for example). This prototype uses a "simple" method to create 3-player match-ups that result in identical rank sums.

To do this, split up the total ranks (assuming it's in the form of 3^n) into thirds -- one top-third, one middle-third, and one bottom-third. Split each third into thirds again, and so on until you can't split them anymore. At each split, label each rank based on what third it was split into this time. For example, in the 81-rank mock-up below, rank 23 is in the first top-third, so it received a T. In the next split, it was in the bottom third, so it received a B. Next split, it's in the middle third (M). In the final split, it was the middle of three (M). Thus, #23's final designation is TBMM.

To match up the ranks, start with the expected final round of 1-2-3. Right now, that's just a simple T-M-B. For a 9-player tournament, 1, 2, and 3 are all in the top-third, so they would now be TT, TM, and TB, respectively. The rest (4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9) would be MT, MM, MB, BT, BM, and BB, respectively. To find your match-ups, take a rank, then do one cycle up and one cycle down. For example, since rank 1 is TT, a cycle up would be BB (rank 9) and a cycle down would be MM (rank 5). If you had started with ranks 5 or 9, you'd get the same results. Do this for every round up until you are complete. Going back to 23, its first-round opponents in the 81-rank mock-up would be MTBB (rank 36) and BMTT (rank 64).

Here is the final mock-up for this 81-rank prototype. As you can see, each first-round rank sum is 123, each expected second-round rank sum is 42, and each expected third-round rank sum is 15:

1-41-81|14-54-55|27-28-68
----------------------------
5-45-73|18-46-59|19-32-72
----------------------------
9-37-77|10-50-63|23-36-64
======================
2-42-79|15-52-56|25-29-69
----------------------------
6-43-74|16-47-60|20-33-70
----------------------------
7-38-78|11-51-61|24-34-65
======================
3-40-80|13-53-57|26-30-67
----------------------------
4-44-75|17-48-58|21-31-71
----------------------------
8-39-76|12-49-62|22-35-66

Of course, if this 3p tournament were to be unranked, all of this is moot. Still, hopefully it's something to consider.

112

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Really bad card ideas

« on: May 14, 2012, 01:30:40 am »

A while back we were doing two cards combined together.

Governor + Duchess =

Governess
Action $4
+1 Action
Choose one, opponent gets what's in parentheses:
Gain a Duchy (Gold); + 3 (1) cards; Look at the top 3 (2) cards of your deck, discard them or return them to the top in any order

Diadembassy
---
$5
When you play this, discard a card per unused Action you have.
-
When you gain this, each other player gains a Silver.
--
$6ish - Treasure

Monumint
---
+$2
You may reveal a Victory card from your hand. Gain a copy of it.
-
When you gain this, reveal your hand, then trash all revealed Victory cards.
--
$2pi - Action

Chancellar
---
+1 Action
+$2
You may put your deck into your discard pile; +1 Card per card discarded.
--
$A lot - Action

Mining Native Fishing Worker's Farming Border Village
---
+2 Actions
Choose one: +1 Card, then trash this card immediately for $2; or put the top card from your deck face down on your MNFWFBV mat; or put all cards from your mat into your hand; or +$1, then +1 Action, +$1 on your next turn; or +1 Card, +1 Buy; or reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Action or Treasure card, putting it into your hand and discarding the rest.
-
When you gain this, gain a card costing less than this.
--
$Something - Action/Duration

113

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Where's the official app?

« on: April 26, 2012, 04:17:48 pm »

When Jay Tummelson came to Gamicon in February, his laptop had a working version on it. I even got to play it for a few seconds, but I must say that I was underwhelmed. For what I got to experience of the interface, it didn't feel as intuitive as Isotropic. You had to drag the cards into the play area, which was hard to determine at first play. The presentation was nice (anything with the official artwork is going to be nicer than Isotropic, but that's not especially the point of Iso), but I was expecting something more awesome.

Jay also mentioned that they were trying to make the mechanics of each card as literal as possible, especially in regards to Thief. That means that Treasure cards will indeed be put in the Trash before they can be gained. When I asked about the point of this, Jay hinted that it had something to do with the mechanics of future cards. For those of you who like to speculate about what Dark Ages and The Guilds will have to offer, you're welcome.

I think I mentioned something about how this official app needs to be miles beyond what you can get on Isotropic, and that what I saw wasn't anywhere close. I could be mistaken, though, as I often am. Besides, like I said, I only got a taste of the current product at the time. If that taste is any indication, it'll be a while yet before the official app is anywhere near palatable for us Isotropic addicts.

114

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Bribing for Prizes

« on: April 26, 2012, 09:44:33 am »

"Congratulations, young ruler! You have completed (or cheated on) the task admirably. As your reward, you shall receive...

• ...a Trusty Steed!
• ...some loyal Followers!
• ...this lovely Diadem!
• ...the hand of the Princess!
• ...a neverending Bag of Gold!
• ...a massive Banquet!
• ...a trustworthy Guard!
• ...your very own Guild Crest!
• ...this gorgeous Jewel!
• ...some creepy guy who revives corpses to do his unholy bidding... yeah...

My point is, Necromancer is a good name for the card in question. A good name for a prize, though? Compared to the canon Prizes and BubbleBoy's other four, probably not. I know it's a minor quibble, but it still bothers me enough to post and complain about.

115

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Really bad card ideas

« on: April 06, 2012, 07:19:41 pm »

CRAWL SPACE
---
+1 Action
Discard any number of cards from your hand. +1 Card.
--
$2 - Action

HOBBY HOLE
---
Gain a card costing $4.
--
$3 - Action

KINDLY OLD LADY
---
+2 Cards
Each other player gains a card.
--
$5 - Action/Attack

YARD
---
+3 Cards
Put your hand on top of your deck.
--
$2 - Action

PARTY
---
+1 Card
+1 Action
Reveal your hand. Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a card that isn't a duplicate of one in your hand. Discard the rest.
--
$5 - Action

116

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)

« on: March 31, 2012, 11:55:38 pm »

So far, these look really good, LastFootnote. I especially like going through the changes made with each card from your earlier thread, from the relatively minor (bumping Mill Town's Copper requirement from 2 to 3) to the major (basically mutating Prospector into Surveyor). I only have a few questions about some of the cards:

Surveyor
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+2 Cards. You may reveal then discard a card from your hand that is not a Victory card. If you do, trash this and gain a copy of the revealed card.

I'm guessing that since this is basically the newest card in your set, it hasn't had as much playtesting as the others. Is this true? Either way, what has your testing shown about opening with Surveyor. I would guess that unless you want to gain lots of Caravans or some other spammable $4, you'd want to wait to use the one-shot Mint-that-works-on-most-Actions-but-not-Harems until you draw a spammable expensive card like Grand Market or King's Court. I'd still rather open with this than Prospector, though.

Aqueduct
Types: Victory
Cost: $4
Worth 2 VP.
When you gain this, reveal the top 5 cards of your deck. Discard the revealed Victory and Curse cards and put the rest back on top in any order.

In your previous thread, you mentioned your apprehension about this card's interaction with Ironworks. I actually like that interaction, since you can basically choose what to draw when you use IW to gain Aqueduct, assuming Aqueduct's effect resolves before Ironwork's bonus. What I don't like is how dual-type cards like Nobles and Harem are discarded as well. Have you tried a Farming Village-like wording, such as "Discard the revealed cards that are not Actions or Treasures, then put the rest back on top in any order" or "Put the revealed Action and Treasure cards back on top in any order, then discard the rest"?

Mercenary
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $4
+2 Cards. +1 Action. You may discard a Treasure card from your hand. If you don't, trash this card. Each other player reveals the top 2 cards from his deck, discarding one that you choose and putting the other back on top.

I have nothing to say about the card itself, which I like. My question is, is that Guts from Berserk depicted in the image?

Monopoly
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+$2. Trash this card. Name a Kingdom card. Each other player reveals then discards the top 4 cards from his deck. If the named card is revealed, gain a Gold, putting it on top of your deck.
When you buy this, trash a Kingdom card from the Supply.

I'm debating whether this should be labeled as an Attack, since it now affects all other players instead of just the player to the left (a key reason why Possession and Tribute are not Attacks). Then again, it's a one-shot effect, and it doesn't leave junk on top like Rabble or Fortune Teller.

Barracks
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Choose one: +2 Actions; or reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Attack card, discard the other cards, then play the Attack card.
When you gain this, gain a Conscripts card.

Conscripts
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $0*
+$2. Trash this card. Each other player gains a Curse, putting it in his hand. (This is not in the Supply.)

Yeah, without other Attacks available, I wouldn't like this as an IGG-like card. For one, IGG always helps toward buying IGGs or Duchies, especially when you have more than one in hand. The problem with Barracks in the same situation is three-fold: if you have more than one Barracks and only one Conscripts left, all but one of the Barracks are useless unless you have a good drawer; if you have just the one Barracks/Conscripts and you draw both in the same hand, Barracks is once again useless; and once all Conscripts are used, the Barracks are just super-weak Villages, which I see as worse than IGG's "weak Silver" effect, especially with Gardens in play. I still like this with other good attacks in play, though.

Tax Collector
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $6
+1 Buy. +2 Coins. Each other player with at least 5 cards in hand trashes a card from his hand costing 2 Coins or more (or reveals a hand with no such cards). He may gain a card costing less than it.

Have you tested this against Goons? Both are $6 Woodcutters with Attacks, and I agree that Tax Collector's attack is stronger than Goons' for the most part. However, the real meat of Goons is the +VP with each Buy. I would guess that in games without good +Actions or any way to play more than one Goons at a time, Tax Collector might often be stronger. With the ability to multi-Goons, though, I doubt the efficacy of Tax Collector other than as a way to thwart some mega-Goons hands. Let us know what Goons vs. Tax Collector is like, please.

117

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Fan Expansion - Dominion: Piston Town

« on: March 23, 2012, 06:21:49 pm »

More thoughts:

I agree with NoMoreFun that Drilling Machine sounds ridiculous at first, and it might still be if you can put together a strong deck consisting of nothing more than cards costing no more than $4 (apart from Drilling Machine itself). Could be quite useful in Gardens/Silk Road games or games with strong $4 terminals like Monument or Bishop.

Another agreement that Mastermind is just far too labor-intensive to be fun. A 4P game would take hours with this card available. I know you must have your heart set on this attack, but perhaps it would be best to keep it to the player's deck alone. Still a very powerful ability.

Opening 5/2 with Blood Money in play would be awesome. A Gold that trashes early junk? As if Ill-Gotten Gains and Mountebank didn't make the 5/2 advantage ridiculous enough. With the Attack card bonus, maybe this should be a $6.

A warning for Buried Ore -- do not require something (like revealing all Buried Ore cards in the discard pile) without allowing all players to see that no shenanigans are being played. Even if everyone sees what goes into the discard, it's still possible to bluff and not reveal all Buried Ore cards. Thus, you should reveal all cards in the discard pile when you are about to reshuffle. Or, better yet, how about this:

"$3
--
If this card is in play during your Cleanup phase, set it aside. After your next reshuffle, set aside the top two cards of your deck for each Buried Ore set aside, then return all set aside cards to the bottom of your deck in any order."

Honestly, Tenant Housing doesn't sound like it's going to be useful in non-Cursing games, except maybe for Silk Road games. Maybe if you have a lot of extra buys to soak at the end of the game, but otherwise, I don't know about this one.

eHalcyon covered my question about Blue Blood, so moving on...

Frontier would be quite good with Silk Road in play. Otherwise, meh.

I was thinking about adding something like L.L. Bean Land's End to that ill-conceived Urban Planner idea I submitted to that one contest not too long ago. This card would be at least a Duchy in any game, and with cards like Caravan or Peddler or Fishing Village in play, it would be easy to turn Land's End into an almost-Province or more. I think the static 1 VP could be removed and this would still be a good card to consider.

In general, it looks like one of the mechanical themes of this set is returning cards to the supply, as well as a crapton of reactions. So far, it seems pretty cohesive. I hope you have the opportunity to playtest these, as I want to see this set improve. Good work so far.

118

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Fan Expansion - Dominion: Piston Town

« on: March 23, 2012, 02:42:12 pm »

Ah, the second person to steal implement my Repairs card, sans the "or less than," in their own fan expansion. Even if I did overprice it initially, it's cool to see one of my own ideas get this popular.

Anyway, on to your other cards...

Does the Tax token for Luxury Tax just increase the cost of the card for buying purposes, or does it also affect cards in your deck and hand? If the latter, that would give it some interesting interactions with Remodel, Upgrade, and the like.

In a game without Attack cards, Gate Watcher is a non-terminal, one-card not-quite-trasher for $3. I'm not sure I would buy Gate Watcher just for that. Even weak Reaction cards like Moat and Secret Chamber have uses in non-Attack games that (almost) justify their costs (sometimes). The Reaction itself is pretty neat, as it can help against both junkers (after the fact) and hand-reducers (immediately). The "+1 Card for every revealed Attack card," however, needs to go. It makes the entire card far too weak in an Attack-free game and far too powerful in a 4P game with good Attacks. I'd scrap this ability and keep the rest as a $2, because I like the rest.

Even as an anti-Gate Watcher/Secret Chamber, Runaway Train's deck-discard ability seems like it may help the opponent almost as much as it would hurt. Basically, you're taking the terminal Silver away from Militia and adding this extra attack to justify the $3. Like NoMoreFun said, this could use a little more non-Attack bonus. +$1 might do the trick.

I don't like Reassemble. You'd need three and have them all ready for this to be a Remodel, four for an Expand. Considering the cost and difficulty of three/four Reassembles compared to one Remodel/Expand, I don't think it's worth it. Even if you include the Reassemble you just played into the cost-increase equation, it still seems a little weak at $3.

Going back to my Locomotion expansion (geez, have I been putting off working on that or what?), your Assistant would just LOVE my Manifest (I have since renamed it and changed it around a little, and I'll post that change when I feel like it, so never).

Prospector is almost strictly better than Thief, barring Gardens games and any other time you just want to take Treasures. This could also be FAR too powerful in 4P games, just like Thief actually becomes semi-useful in 4P. Unless you just play one among all the Treasures revealed instead of one from each player, in which case, carry on.

There is definite potential for Outlaw shenanigans with Embargo or any +Buy card, but without any of that, Outlaw becomes a little useless. Drop the price.

Doesn't the "set aside, put into your discard during Cleanup" effect of Squatter count as a gain? Perhaps you should add "other than during your Cleanup phase" to the on-gain effect, just to avoid confusion.

Wayward Wanderer seems a little too powerful for a $5. Compare it to Council Room. The only way this card is weaker is that it doesn't give +1 Buy, which is not always that big of a deal, anyway. I like the bonus effect, though. Tinker with this one.

Steam Locomotive seems like it would be crazy powerful in a lot of circumstances. Though its self-synergy isn't fantastic, it can still be a cantrip with draw control. Up the cost or lessen the power.

I've seen Mad Mechanic discussed elsewhere, as well. Too lazy to look it up, though. Sorry!

And I need to go, so I'll look at the cards beyond Mad Mechanic some other time.

119

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Create a card inspired by another game

« on: March 09, 2012, 04:46:44 pm »

Since I want to revive this thread, and baseball season is coming up...

MANAGER
---
+$2
You may discard a card from your hand. If you do, reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a card with the same cost. Put it into your hand, then discard the rest.
-
During your Cleanup phase, look at the top three cards of your deck. You may reveal and discard any card that costs the same as a card in play. If you do, put a card in play with the same cost as the discarded card on top of your deck.
--
$4 - Action

This is loosely based around pinch hitters, relief pitchers, etc. And yes, I'm kind of obsessed with the "replace with same cost" mechanic, aren't I?

120

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Card Ideas: most playtested

« on: March 09, 2012, 09:36:14 am »

Lucky Break - 2$
+1 Card
+1 Action
Return a card from your hand to the supply. If you did, gain a card costing the same amount as the returned card and put it into your hand.

Interesting. I suggest playtesting with Ill-Gotten-Gains, Border Village or Peddler.

Not that different from the interaction of Salvager with these, right?

Well, except for the bit where this is non-terminal.

Also, with just a little bit of money, you can Salvage IGGs and BVs (and Inns, thanks WW) into Provinces and Peddlers into Colonies. Not so much with Lucky Break.

121

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Card Ideas: most playtested

« on: March 08, 2012, 05:32:21 pm »

Lucky break seems like a lot of fun. An anti-swindler, if you will. Seems like it would be reasonable as a curse trasher - switching curses for coppers isn't so bad, especially since they go right into your hand so it doesn't slow you down much. It's okay as an estate trasher, since you can trash estates for more lucky breaks, and lucky breaks are cantrips so they don't get in the way. I suspect there would be times to buy it for more than 2 in a game with Swindler, or in a game with cursing and low or bad terminal draw and no other trashing.

 Have you tried a game with Lucky break and peddler? Seems like it would be horribly degenerate in a lovely way. (I suspect that a good strategy is to buy lots of lucky breaks, then buy peddlers, then return peddlers to supply for provinces and re-buy them. I wonder if that's fast enough compared to like Smithy or Envoy-BM? If there's a +buy around, then this would be even crazier.)

That's pretty much what I intended with what I suspect is the inspiration for this card -- Repairs from my now-mostly-forgotten-because-I've-just-been-too-busy Locomotion fan expansion. The only differences between Repairs and Lucky Break is that Lucky Break has the +1 Card, and Repairs lets you swap out for a cheaper card if you want (like repairing Forge into Gold or Grand Market, which is nice because I find myself Forging cards into Forges quite a bit).

The main idea with Repairs, though, was to hopefully negate that icky feeling when you buy one $X card instead of another $X card, and once you draw it, you wish you had bought the other one. Lucky Break would definitely be better with this, though, thanks to the +1 Card.

Also, Repairs was priced at $4, which I now agree is too much, even with the fun reactions with what I realize is too few cards. Perhaps the no +Card version would be okay at $2, but I still feel the cantrip Lucky Break would be a little overpowered at $2 due to the Estate swap trick. Then again, $3 would completely negate the Estate trick, making it underpowered... GAH, I wish I had the resources to playtest more!

In any case, thank you SO much for working with one of my favorite Locomotion cards, Chriamon!

122

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: I know fan cards that interact with the trash pile are a bad idea, but...

« on: February 21, 2012, 11:55:52 am »

Remember, once a card is trashed, there is no (current official) way to un-trash it.

Technically both thief and noble brigand let you gain a card from the trash.

True, but not after Thief/NB are both resolved (i.e. once you end Thief/NB, any cards trashed remain trashed). I meant un-trashing cards that were trashed by other cards, anyway.

123

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: I know fan cards that interact with the trash pile are a bad idea, but...

« on: February 21, 2012, 11:22:04 am »

The number of players should be included somehow, otherwise it can't be balanced properly.

The effects of Thief, Noble Brigand, Jester, and Pirate Ship aren't affected by number of players.  I don't think this card really needs to explicitly state number of players (or, in fact, should)

The thing is, we're discussing a hypothetical Victory card here, not another Attack. The only variable Victory cards in this game so far deal exclusively with the owner's deck. Perhaps Donald X. has tested Victory cards that vary based on communal attributes, such as trashed cards or depleted piles, and maybe they'll show up in Dark Ages or The Guilds, but nothing like that has made it to an official set yet.

Remember, once a card is trashed, there is no (current official) way to un-trash it. If you have a static number of trashed cards per VP, the VPs will rack up MUCH faster in 4p than 2p, making it a must-buy in the former when it's just an alternate strategy in the latter (assuming there are trashing methods). It's true that the Attack cards you listed get much stronger in multi-opponent games, but they don't really become must-buys. Only Pirate Ship has any real comparison to the hypothetical Victory card, thanks to the irreducible number of tokens gained throughout the game. Even then, the tokens are all owned by a single person. Perhaps if the hypothetical allowed you to keep tabs on cards only you trash, then it wouldn't need to address number of players.

124

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: I know fan cards that interact with the trash pile are a bad idea, but...

« on: February 17, 2012, 04:27:51 pm »

For my Locomotion fan-expansion (man, I've been neglecting that baby), I've been trying to rework Terminus as basically petrie's Scrapyard (which is, coincidentally, what I renamed Locomotion's Junkyard). This is where I'm currently at:

TERMINUS
---
Trash up to four cards from your hand. Discard the rest of your hand.
-
This card is worth 1 VP for every 5*P cards in the Trash at the end of the game (round down) (P = number of players).
--
Action/Victory - $5

So yes, this is basically a Victory-version of Chapel (if I ever get to posting my Dominion: Improvement fan-expansion, you'll see why...) with the added penalty of forcing a full discard. In other words, you'll need cards with plenty of +$ and +Buy to provide enough buying power and trashing fodder.

As for the 5*P caveat, this is to prevent the card from getting too ridiculous in games with more players. In a 2p game, getting at least 3 VP per Terminus might be feasible even if your opponent opts out of trashing all together (If you were to trash 4 cards each time you play Terminus, you'd need to do so 8 times in order to turn Terminus into a Duchy). In a 4p game, if you're the only one even going for a trash-heavy strategy, forget winning on Termini -- you need to trash 20 cards before it even becomes an Estate.

It still needs MUCH more testing, of course. This may be the 423rd incarnation of Terminus I've gone through now...

125

Puzzles and Challenges / Re: A ____ but not a ____ Riddle

« on: February 15, 2012, 10:26:59 am »

This one might be a bit of a stretch (ETA: never mind, it's no stretch), but...

Ill-Gotten Gains-Rush but not Gardens-Rush.

Less of a stretch...

Puzzles and Challenges but not Variants and Fan Cards.