2551
Tournaments and Events / Re: International Dominion Team World Cup
« on: July 25, 2013, 04:27:36 am »
I suppose I should throw my hat into the ring for U.S. (southwest/west coast if we end up with multiple teams).
Show Posts
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.
2552
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Artisans Guild
« on: July 24, 2013, 10:36:26 pm »You're right, it's probably not bad, but it is something to consider. It's safer just to buy your own card. I guess what would probably end up happening is that if 2 or more players want a particular card, they rake in coin tokens while the other players feel obligated to put their tokens on that card to compete. Maybe it's not a problem at all.At first I read this and thought it was terrible, but then I realized that any player who buys the card triggers your coin token. I really like that. In multi-player though, it seems like it would be political. "Player 2 is not doing so well, so it's fine if I buy this card; but player 3 is a threat to me, so I won't buy his card." Or maybe you say "If I buy your card, will you buy my card?" You could make a sort of alliance. You and another player agree to move your tokens how each other wants, and then buy each other's cards, to gain an edge over the other player(s) who aren't using those cards/don't want to help you out.
If you're just playing normal Dominion and then saying "Hey there's another player's token on this card" and taking that into account, then maybe it's not so bad, but if you're playing to win, it seems like arranging alliances with other players would be optimal. I can't really think of a good way to fix that (other than by not playing multi-player).
Hmm, you are right, it could become political. I am not sure how political though -- my first thought is that it would be minimal. With the mandatory moving, it's hard to nail down exactly where your token would be when another player makes their purchase. Of course, you may want the token on whatever you are going to buy this turn, so that you guarantee at least some benefit. The scenario you describe, where a player will purchase card with player A's token but not the card with player B's token -- that is easy to work around, as player B can just move his token to the same card as player A.
I imagine that forming such alliances would actually be suboptimal because you would be pigeon-holing yourself into buying cards that are not best for you (assuming you honour your word). Why buy player A's card and trust that they'll buy your card when you can just buy your own card?
BTW, I'm guessing that often times the best way to play this card is to get it and play it once, then trash it as soon as you can. That way you're not stuck with a terminal Copper in your deck, and you don't have to move your token around (although sometimes you may want to later; it's probably not worth keeping a terminal Copper in your deck, unless you also need the +buy).
2553
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Artisans Guild
« on: July 24, 2013, 08:29:11 pm »
At first I read this and thought it was terrible, but then I realized that any player who buys the card triggers your coin token. I really like that. In multi-player though, it seems like it would be political. "Player 2 is not doing so well, so it's fine if I buy this card; but player 3 is a threat to me, so I won't buy his card." Or maybe you say "If I buy your card, will you buy my card?" You could make a sort of alliance. You and another player agree to move your tokens how each other wants, and then buy each other's cards, to gain an edge over the other player(s) who aren't using those cards/don't want to help you out.
If you're just playing normal Dominion and then saying "Hey there's another player's token on this card" and taking that into account, then maybe it's not so bad, but if you're playing to win, it seems like arranging alliances with other players would be optimal. I can't really think of a good way to fix that (other than by not playing multi-player).
If you're just playing normal Dominion and then saying "Hey there's another player's token on this card" and taking that into account, then maybe it's not so bad, but if you're playing to win, it seems like arranging alliances with other players would be optimal. I can't really think of a good way to fix that (other than by not playing multi-player).
2554
Dominion General Discussion / Re: WW's Power Rankings
« on: July 24, 2013, 03:22:42 pm »
Comparing coin tokens and victory tokens is like comparing +cards with +coin. Sure, in the most general sense, you can probably say that coin tokens are a little "better" than victory tokens, just like +cards are generally "better" than +coin. Eventually, you turn your coin tokens into victory points, kind of like how you eventually you turn the cards you draw into coin that you spend. But your ability to do that (in both comparisons) varies hugely depending on the situation, so it's difficult (if not impossible) to decide how much better one is than the other. Furthermore, there will be games in which you can't manage to get 1 victory point per coin token, just like how there are games where you can't manage to get 1 coin per card you draw, so just leaving it at "coin tokens are better" is not helpful. What you need to consider are the cases in which coin tokens are better, and then how does that synergize with the rest of the text on the card?
I believe someone else pointed out earlier in the discussion: Monument with a coin token instead of a victory token would be too strong for $4; but Baker with a victory token instead of a coin token would be too strong for $5.
I believe someone else pointed out earlier in the discussion: Monument with a coin token instead of a victory token would be too strong for $4; but Baker with a victory token instead of a coin token would be too strong for $5.
2555
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Scavenger - fan card
« on: July 23, 2013, 10:28:03 pm »
All right, my comments on the actual card...
First off, it's a pretty unique idea. Having a card which can grab more copies of popular cards is interesting, but in a lot of games (maybe even the majority of games) this will just end up being a pure cantrip. Often times there won't be a card that gets down to two, and even when there is, you have to "time it" right; you have to draw your Scavenger before the last two copies run out. I think you generally want to get Scavenger fairly early; if you wait and buy it when you see that a good card is about to run out, then you risk not drawing it in time. But even though it's a cantrip and doesn't hurt your economy, it doesn't help your economy either when you get it early, and usually there's something you'd rather be buying. Also, if the good card that's running out is $4 or less, then you probably never even buy Scavenger, you just go straight for the good card instead (especially since it's a one-shot). If you leave everything else as it is now, I don't think it needs to be a one-shot, although I doubt it makes much difference either way. I think it's pretty weak as it is, making it not one-shot might slightly improve it.
The main weakness of it is that it's just a cantrip on boards in which there's not a hotly contested card. That made me consider, what if it picked up cards from kingdom piles with 9+ cards in them? Obviously, that's a lot stronger, since it can pick up anything right away. So you might make it more expensive, but then you face the problem of buying a $5 card to turn it into another $5, and that's silly. So instead of making it more expensive, you could leave the price at $2-ish, and make it harder to get in some other way. Here is what I came up with:
Scavenger ($2)
Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
If any kingdom piles have 9 or more cards in them, you may gain a card from one of these piles. If you gain a card in this way, trash this card.
---
You cannot buy this while you have Copper in play.
It still only costs $2, but you can't open with it, and sometimes you'll have S/C/C/C and you'll just buy a $5 anyway. But with a hand of S/C/C you might buy this, and with S/C it's almost certainly worthwhile. Gaining from piles with 9+ cards in them encourages diversity (which I like), and gives you lots of options. It means that you can buy any unpopular card with one Silver, but it's delayed by a shuffle. If it's too strong, bumping the price to $3 would make it quite a bit harder to get, or you could require that the kingdom piles have 10 cards in them (10+ if you want to allow gaining Rats).
Unfortunately IRL it would be annoying to count which piles have 9+ cards in them (I don't think that counting to 2 would be a problem, but 9 might be). Also, the version that I just described plays quite differently from your original card (it pretty much has the opposite effect, getting unpopular cards instead of popular ones), so I'm not sure if that's what you were going for, but it's still a card that gains based on cards remaining in the supply.
Also, it should be noted that all of my comments were assuming 2-player. Your original version may be better with 3+ players, but then maybe it's swingier.
First off, it's a pretty unique idea. Having a card which can grab more copies of popular cards is interesting, but in a lot of games (maybe even the majority of games) this will just end up being a pure cantrip. Often times there won't be a card that gets down to two, and even when there is, you have to "time it" right; you have to draw your Scavenger before the last two copies run out. I think you generally want to get Scavenger fairly early; if you wait and buy it when you see that a good card is about to run out, then you risk not drawing it in time. But even though it's a cantrip and doesn't hurt your economy, it doesn't help your economy either when you get it early, and usually there's something you'd rather be buying. Also, if the good card that's running out is $4 or less, then you probably never even buy Scavenger, you just go straight for the good card instead (especially since it's a one-shot). If you leave everything else as it is now, I don't think it needs to be a one-shot, although I doubt it makes much difference either way. I think it's pretty weak as it is, making it not one-shot might slightly improve it.
The main weakness of it is that it's just a cantrip on boards in which there's not a hotly contested card. That made me consider, what if it picked up cards from kingdom piles with 9+ cards in them? Obviously, that's a lot stronger, since it can pick up anything right away. So you might make it more expensive, but then you face the problem of buying a $5 card to turn it into another $5, and that's silly. So instead of making it more expensive, you could leave the price at $2-ish, and make it harder to get in some other way. Here is what I came up with:
Scavenger ($2)
Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
If any kingdom piles have 9 or more cards in them, you may gain a card from one of these piles. If you gain a card in this way, trash this card.
---
You cannot buy this while you have Copper in play.
It still only costs $2, but you can't open with it, and sometimes you'll have S/C/C/C and you'll just buy a $5 anyway. But with a hand of S/C/C you might buy this, and with S/C it's almost certainly worthwhile. Gaining from piles with 9+ cards in them encourages diversity (which I like), and gives you lots of options. It means that you can buy any unpopular card with one Silver, but it's delayed by a shuffle. If it's too strong, bumping the price to $3 would make it quite a bit harder to get, or you could require that the kingdom piles have 10 cards in them (10+ if you want to allow gaining Rats).
Unfortunately IRL it would be annoying to count which piles have 9+ cards in them (I don't think that counting to 2 would be a problem, but 9 might be). Also, the version that I just described plays quite differently from your original card (it pretty much has the opposite effect, getting unpopular cards instead of popular ones), so I'm not sure if that's what you were going for, but it's still a card that gains based on cards remaining in the supply.
Also, it should be noted that all of my comments were assuming 2-player. Your original version may be better with 3+ players, but then maybe it's swingier.
2556
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Scavenger - fan card
« on: July 23, 2013, 04:48:20 am »
I'm pretty sure kingdom piles are only the 10 (11 with YW) cards that are randomly chosen every game. Copper/Estate/Silver/etc. (including Potions, Ruins, and Colonies) are not kingdom piles.
I might comment in more detail on the card later but for now I'll just say that it's an interesting idea, but probably not very exciting to play with.
I might comment in more detail on the card later but for now I'll just say that it's an interesting idea, but probably not very exciting to play with.
2557
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Discard/Trash for benefit
« on: July 22, 2013, 05:43:34 pm »
My initial reaction when reading it was that it's really weak, but others have pointed out that it could end up being like Rebuild. Even if you manage to connect Redistrict with Estate/Duchy every hand, and the Redistricts never collide, you wouldn't have four Provinces until turn 11 (open Redistrict/Redistrict, eight turns or redistricting Estate into Duchy or Duchy into Province, and one turn to buy a fourth Estate), and that was both assuming perfect shuffle luck and assuming that you get a Redistrict in every hand, which I don't think is possible without buying a third Redistrict. After that point, every new Province is going to take at least 3 turns (one to buy an Estate, then two turns to turn it into Province), which seems pretty slow.
If you have it cost $4, you can't open doubles (except with Baker, but that's just one combo), which I thought would slow it down a lot but now that I'm thinking about it maybe not. It might be the case that opening Redistrict/Estate and grabbing a second Redistrict later is almost as good as opening Redistrict/Redistrict and grabbing a fourth Estate later.
I think the big problem with this card is that most boards with Redistrict will be such that either you go for Redistrict and nothing else, or you ignore Redistrict. There are some interesting things you could do with it with a big hand size though.
Another problem is that if the monolithic strategy turns out to be strong, it will be very, very luck-dependent, since having two Redistricts collide can set you back a whole shuffle. Having it top-deck instead of discard would fix that problem, and then it would fix it even more by making the monolithic strategy be very slow anyway. Or maybe it actually wouldn't slow it down? You could just buy Redistricts whenever you can, because they won't collide (if you do you just top-deck them). Drawing a hand of four Redistricts and an Estate wouldn't make a difference at all; you just expand the Estate, and put back three Redistricts, next turn expand something else and put back two Redistricts, etc.
I keep thinking I have opinions on this card and then convincing myself that I'm wrong, so now I don't know what to think.
If you have it cost $4, you can't open doubles (except with Baker, but that's just one combo), which I thought would slow it down a lot but now that I'm thinking about it maybe not. It might be the case that opening Redistrict/Estate and grabbing a second Redistrict later is almost as good as opening Redistrict/Redistrict and grabbing a fourth Estate later.
I think the big problem with this card is that most boards with Redistrict will be such that either you go for Redistrict and nothing else, or you ignore Redistrict. There are some interesting things you could do with it with a big hand size though.
Another problem is that if the monolithic strategy turns out to be strong, it will be very, very luck-dependent, since having two Redistricts collide can set you back a whole shuffle. Having it top-deck instead of discard would fix that problem, and then it would fix it even more by making the monolithic strategy be very slow anyway. Or maybe it actually wouldn't slow it down? You could just buy Redistricts whenever you can, because they won't collide (if you do you just top-deck them). Drawing a hand of four Redistricts and an Estate wouldn't make a difference at all; you just expand the Estate, and put back three Redistricts, next turn expand something else and put back two Redistricts, etc.
I keep thinking I have opinions on this card and then convincing myself that I'm wrong, so now I don't know what to think.
2558
Dominion: Guilds Previews / Re: Favourite Guilds cards
« on: July 22, 2013, 12:13:23 am »So far the funniest small expansion imo.I don't know; I mean the Butcher/Baker/Candlestick Maker reference is pretty funny, but there's nothing funnier than the look on your opponent's face when you play Possession during his double Province hand.
2559
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: 5$ Silver Variant
« on: July 21, 2013, 12:06:04 am »Yeah, I suspect that Royal Seal only exists because DXV overestimated it.I really think that it's just a matter of what's fun. If there was a supply pile of 40 Villages available in every game, I doubt that cards like Worker's Village, Farming Village, etc. would exist. Perhaps it would be more interesting if the Silver supply pile was swapped out for a stack of 40 of these $4 Silver variants in some games (I don't know how you would determine which games). Having it as a kingdom card is usually just going to feel like you're using up a kingdom slot to add a very minor rule variation to the game.
Now that's a great point. According to that reasoning, Royal Seal shouldn't really exist either, which I'd be perfectly okay with.
2560
Rules Questions / Re: Alchemy with the other sets
« on: July 20, 2013, 09:08:03 pm »
1) Yes
2) No (except Herbalist, since it doesn't have potion in its cost)
2) No (except Herbalist, since it doesn't have potion in its cost)
A bunch of people will post after this saying the same thing, but with a lengthy confusing explanation.
2561
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: 5$ Silver Variant
« on: July 20, 2013, 09:05:51 pm »
I really think that it's just a matter of what's fun. If there was a supply pile of 40 Villages available in every game, I doubt that cards like Worker's Village, Farming Village, etc. would exist. Perhaps it would be more interesting if the Silver supply pile was swapped out for a stack of 40 of these $4 Silver variants in some games (I don't know how you would determine which games). Having it as a kingdom card is usually just going to feel like you're using up a kingdom slot to add a very minor rule variation to the game.
2562
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Divide by Cardtypes
« on: July 20, 2013, 04:50:45 pm »
Dividing things into groups is fun! I think prioritizing certain categories is a good way to determine whether Harem is a treasure or victory card (assuming you want the categories to be mutually exclusive), so I like that. If you already have the list done, I would say go ahead and post it. Then everyone can get into arguments about where things belong, and people like arguing. Is the idea to rank them within each group?
BTW, for BoM and Governor, I think that for the sake of consistency (assuming I'm understanding your priority system correctly), BoM would be a junker (since it can be a Sea Hag, Marauder, etc.), and Governor would be...well I guess a drawer. But shouldn't Drawer and Lab-Drawer be flipped? Otherwise, Laboratory, Caravan, Wishing Well, etc. all get caught in the Drawer category before they make it to Lab Drawer. Lab-Drawer is a subset of Drawer, so everything that would be a Lab-Drawer is a Drawer. If you flip them then Governor would be Lab-Drawer. (Also, I would rename them Terminal Draw and Non-Terminal Draw, but maybe that's just me.)
Also, I'm not really sure I understand what Money Carers is, but I guess that's where Peddler-type cards would fall, as well as Woodcutter, Nomad Camp, etc.? I might consider separating terminal money from non-terminal money (there's a big difference between the function of Peddler and Woodcutter), but maybe the categories wouldn't be big enough then? I guess it's up to you.
BTW, for BoM and Governor, I think that for the sake of consistency (assuming I'm understanding your priority system correctly), BoM would be a junker (since it can be a Sea Hag, Marauder, etc.), and Governor would be...well I guess a drawer. But shouldn't Drawer and Lab-Drawer be flipped? Otherwise, Laboratory, Caravan, Wishing Well, etc. all get caught in the Drawer category before they make it to Lab Drawer. Lab-Drawer is a subset of Drawer, so everything that would be a Lab-Drawer is a Drawer. If you flip them then Governor would be Lab-Drawer. (Also, I would rename them Terminal Draw and Non-Terminal Draw, but maybe that's just me.)
Also, I'm not really sure I understand what Money Carers is, but I guess that's where Peddler-type cards would fall, as well as Woodcutter, Nomad Camp, etc.? I might consider separating terminal money from non-terminal money (there's a big difference between the function of Peddler and Woodcutter), but maybe the categories wouldn't be big enough then? I guess it's up to you.
2563
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: 5$ Silver Variant
« on: July 20, 2013, 03:46:59 pm »I'm not sure why Silver-with-a-bonus cards unequivocally can't cost less than $5, especially since this one doesn't even have an on-play bonus.Balance-wise this card is probably fine at $4, but I think the idea is that it's no fun to play with an extra pile of Silvers. So instead, it's better to make it cost $5 and have a more substantial bonus.
2564
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Least Ignorable Card
« on: July 20, 2013, 03:01:20 pm »I missed Rebuild in the original post too. I automatically read "KC, Goons, and Rebuild" as "KC Goons Masquerade". This is particularly odd given that the list was explicitly excluding Masquerade. Apparently I subconsciously think of that combo as entirely distinct from each of its components.That is really weird; I re-read the post three times before seeing Rebuild in it too. (I kept re-reading because I was confused by the following posts, and even while looking for it I didn't catch it.)
2565
Dominion General Discussion / Re: WW's Power Rankings
« on: July 19, 2013, 10:30:47 pm »There are only a few cards where I worry about losing the split 4/6:When you lose the Duchy split 4/6, you know your opponent is cheating.
- Peddler
- Minion
- Fools Gold
- Grand Markets
- sometimes Wharf
- sometimes Lab or Alchemist
- VP cards (Duchies in Duke games, Gardens, sometimes Silk Roads)
Yes, I know there is multi-player.
Moat is way overrated here. I understand that it can be a decent terminal drawer in thin engines sometimes. But you need some pretty serious trashing in order for Moat to be good in that kind of case, and lots of spammable villages. It doesn't seem like you can use it effectively as the main source of draw very often. And blocking attacks is not great. If Moat didn't have the top half of the card (if it were just a dead card that blocks attacks), you would almost never buy it. If you manage to draw it at the right time against a discarding attack, it saves you a card. If you manage to draw it at the right time against a junker, then it's a junk card that saved you from taking in a junk card, so you need to have it block at least twice for it to be a worthwhile buy (and even then, it's not necessarily worth it for $2/a buy). But it's pretty hard to get your Moat to line up with your opponent's attack, so that's not really a huge advantage.
Sure, Moat is probably underrated, but better than Gardens, Smithy, Peddler, a bunch of other cards that I'm too lazy to look up? I really can't see that being the case.
2566
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« on: July 19, 2013, 10:15:18 pm »
If anyone is worried that a $2 somtimes-Peddler is too strong, remember that Peddler is sometimes a $2 Peddler. I don't think Clerk is a problem at all; in the thin decks where you like to have lots of Peddlers, they miss pretty often. They're also a lot worse at the beginning, when you're more likely to have $2/$3/$4 hands. The $2 mostly just helps with picking them up on extra buys, and clearly that can't be a huge problem, since it's also easy to pick up lots of Peddlers on extra buys.
2567
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Really bad card ideas
« on: July 19, 2013, 08:47:41 pm »those are all strictly better than the original except merchant ship, because you don't have to play the spoils.They are worse in draw-to-X engines. Also, if the Spoils run out. Also, Horse Trading Post is missing the reaction and Mandarin is missing the on-gain. Also, this is the really bad card ideas thread.
2568
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Excavation -- quick description: Native Island meets Ruins
« on: July 19, 2013, 05:25:50 pm »
This is very interesting. I think it's kind of a Tactician-ish card, where it capitalizes on the principle that one big turn and one small turn in Dominion are better than two average turns; but this is much more long-term than Tactician. Instead of throwing away one hand to get a double hand next turn, it slightly hurts one turn every shuffle, until you decide to explode into a megaturn.
If there are no other Looters on the board (which will be the case most of the time), then each time Excavation comes up (until the megaturn), it will feel like a dead card in your hand. The reward that you get in exchange for having that "dead" card is that later on, you will get one more vanilla bonus added to your megaturn jackpot. Is that worth it? I doubt it. If it gained the ruin, played it, and returned it all in one shot, it would be terrible (buying it would almost be like buying a Ruin); but your version is clearly at least somewhat stronger than that, since it can save them up and capitalize on the Tactician principle.
Consider some of the things you could have saved up on your Excavation mat. If you played Excavation four times (which is like seeing a dead card four times), you could maybe get +4 cards; or +3 cards, +1 action; or +2 cards, +2 actions; or +$4; or +$3, +1 buy; or +3 cards, +1 buy. Those are probably the "best" effects. (Maybe Survivors would be good with +cards? Not sure.) Most of those are roughly $5-$6 effects. If I buy a Margrave, I get +3 cards, +1 buy, plus a bonus, and I get that every time I play it. If I buy Excavation, I have to play it 5 times just to get +3 cards, +1 buy. The lack of control over what you get probably hurts too.
It's a very cool idea, but I'm pretty sure that it's very, very weak; I don't think it's ever worth getting on boards without other Looters (and even then I'm not sure). It's just that spending a buy (and $2) to get a card that's going to be dead in your deck for most of the game is not worthwhile, even if it gives you a decent bonus later on. If you add +1 card that makes it a cantrip; maybe you could do that and bump the price up? That sounds really powerful, but thinking about it some more, I think it's worth testing it as a cantrip at $4. If it's too strong maybe bump up the price or bump down the vanilla bonus (maybe +1 action, +$1). It's tough to predict exactly how strong that effect is, but I'm pretty convinced that it's not strong enough to be worth buying on a card with just +1 action. As it is now, even if you offered to let me start the game with one in my deck, I don't think I would want it.
If there are no other Looters on the board (which will be the case most of the time), then each time Excavation comes up (until the megaturn), it will feel like a dead card in your hand. The reward that you get in exchange for having that "dead" card is that later on, you will get one more vanilla bonus added to your megaturn jackpot. Is that worth it? I doubt it. If it gained the ruin, played it, and returned it all in one shot, it would be terrible (buying it would almost be like buying a Ruin); but your version is clearly at least somewhat stronger than that, since it can save them up and capitalize on the Tactician principle.
Consider some of the things you could have saved up on your Excavation mat. If you played Excavation four times (which is like seeing a dead card four times), you could maybe get +4 cards; or +3 cards, +1 action; or +2 cards, +2 actions; or +$4; or +$3, +1 buy; or +3 cards, +1 buy. Those are probably the "best" effects. (Maybe Survivors would be good with +cards? Not sure.) Most of those are roughly $5-$6 effects. If I buy a Margrave, I get +3 cards, +1 buy, plus a bonus, and I get that every time I play it. If I buy Excavation, I have to play it 5 times just to get +3 cards, +1 buy. The lack of control over what you get probably hurts too.
It's a very cool idea, but I'm pretty sure that it's very, very weak; I don't think it's ever worth getting on boards without other Looters (and even then I'm not sure). It's just that spending a buy (and $2) to get a card that's going to be dead in your deck for most of the game is not worthwhile, even if it gives you a decent bonus later on. If you add +1 card that makes it a cantrip; maybe you could do that and bump the price up? That sounds really powerful, but thinking about it some more, I think it's worth testing it as a cantrip at $4. If it's too strong maybe bump up the price or bump down the vanilla bonus (maybe +1 action, +$1). It's tough to predict exactly how strong that effect is, but I'm pretty convinced that it's not strong enough to be worth buying on a card with just +1 action. As it is now, even if you offered to let me start the game with one in my deck, I don't think I would want it.
2569
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Homage to the Best Card
« on: July 18, 2013, 04:09:19 pm »
I'm not sure what that means. I was using quickmeme, so I guess that's why it didn't work. Ironically, the meme that I made was Sudden Clarity Clarence with the text "We could have an entire conversation using just memes".
2570
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Fan card: Fruit Market
« on: July 18, 2013, 04:02:10 pm »
Vander Vendor Venture Adventurer, Action/Vendor, $6
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal two Vander Vendor Venture. Put the Vander Vendor Ventures into your hand and discard the other revealed cards. This card is way overpriced.
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal two Vander Vendor Venture. Put the Vander Vendor Ventures into your hand and discard the other revealed cards. This card is way overpriced.
2571
Dominion Articles / Re: Article: Forager
« on: July 18, 2013, 03:40:06 pm »You didn't mention Graverobber and Rogue.... These are very bad for Forager because they steal your very valuable treasures out of the trash....Rogue is a mixed bag, since it's probably the thing that gets your good treasures into the trash, but then takes them out. Since it's terminal, if you're not the one going for it, it might be more likely that you play more Foragers while Silver/Gold is in the trash than your opponent? Still, don't intentionally trash Silver/Gold to power up Forager if Rogue is on the board. If your opponent doesn't have Foragers, getting Rogues might be a good way for you to power yours up.
2572
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Homage to the Best Card
« on: July 18, 2013, 03:30:51 pm »I can see it.No, I mean I tried to post an image in response to his, but it didn't show up.
Edit: Although I can't see how Fortress really counters Governor. It only does something against the remodel effect, as best I can tell, and that's the least used option on Governor. I guess the idea is if they start turbo remodelling at endgame you're getting maybe an extra Duchy out of it, maybe two? Ehh.
2573
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Homage to the Best Card
« on: July 18, 2013, 03:26:32 pm »Wow, I just realized that Fortress is, like, the ultimate Governor counter.
You forgot to meme. Here, I'll do it for you.
Edit: Image is not showing for some reason?
2574
Puzzles and Challenges / Re: Easy Puzzles
« on: July 17, 2013, 07:41:14 pm »You can get 3 peddlers by the end of turn 2 in a solitaire game.Wow, very nice!
Open 5C.
Turn 1: Spend coin token, buy Stonemason and gain 2 Nomad Camps to top of deck. Draw them with Necropolis and 2C.
Turn 2: Play everything to get 6 coins, 3 buys, and peddlers down to a cost of 2. Buy 3 Peddlers (or a Peddler and a Stonemason).
2575
Dominion General Discussion / Re: When opening terminals miss the reshuffle
« on: July 17, 2013, 04:07:42 am »I wouldn't mind at all if I never read the words "strictly better" on this forum ever again (I know this won't happen).It won't happen if you keep arguing about the meaning of "strictly better".
Or even if you just read this post.