Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

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.

Messages - silverspawn

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: 1 ... 800 801 [802] 803
20026
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Really bad card ideas
« on: January 27, 2014, 09:32:16 pm »
Masochism - Action - $8
Gain a Curse.


Bananas for Provinces - Action - 2$
Trash this. Discard your hand and drawing Pile, then gain all Provinces from the supply except for one, putting them into your hand. Put your discard Pile onto the Province Pile. People may buy cards from this pile for $8, regardless of what card lies on top. For the remainder of the game, whenever another pile from the supply is emptied, replace it with a random pile from outside the game.


Rampant Ambitions - Action - Victory - $5
Discard your hand. Set this card aside and return it to your deck at the end of the game. When you win this game, for every Copy of this Card in your Deck, double the amount of rating you would gain normally. When the game ends as a draw, win the game instead. Your opponent may not resign this game.
---
Worth -5VP


... and the frail sails of courtesy - Action - Duration - 5$
+1 Card
+1 Action
While this is in play, whenever another Player wants to play a Card, he may politely ask your permission first. If he doesn't, he gets five curses. Whenever a Player wants to play an Attack, he is obligated to apologize to everyone else in advance; if he doesn't, however, the Attack resolves as normal, but he must suspend from the remainder of the game to overthink his actions. Whenever another player buys a Victory card, he must offer it to you before he gains it. Take a Poverty counter which isn't worth anything for every Victory card gained this way.


Wings of Justice - Action - Attack - 4$
Choose a Player. If that Player likes Rap Music, he loses the game.


20027
dude, i'm so much more humble than you, don't even start.

Sure and I'm without doubt the most humble person in the world.

Anyway, while I see the point of the OP I just wanted to say "It's the internet. Bad manner happens everywhere. Saying gg in a 'wrong' occasion isn't the end of the world. Get over it." But that's just my opinion. As long as my opponent swears and give me bad nick names, I don't feel offended.

There is nothing to get over. I didn't wirte "people are so mean they are writing offensive gg's i can't handle it!!" in my opening post, I explicitly stated that I don't assume any bad intentions when someone does it. I even confirmed that I can't objectively prove that it's bm. I don't start raging when it happens, I don't even put people on my black list because of it. All I do is either leave the game as fast as I can or ask them to stop doing it in the future, and if they don't... well, then they don't. Humans are rude and intollerant by nature, just read through this thread.

20028
But Duchy is not a Prize.  We also don't rank Silver with the $3 cards.

you could actually totally do this. you always have to choose between silver and $3 cards, so why not put it in the list? obviously it's extremely board dependend, but so is any other card.

I usually think of Silver as a $2 value that costs $3 so that the Kingdom cards are often a better option. I would expect Silver to rank pretty low on the $3 list and likewise for Gold at $6.

would that be a reason not to list it?

20029
But Duchy is not a Prize.  We also don't rank Silver with the $3 cards.

you could actually totally do this. you always have to choose between silver and $3 cards, so why not put it in the list? obviously it's extremely board dependend, but so is any other card.

20030
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Really bad card ideas
« on: January 26, 2014, 10:00:58 pm »
Trampoline - Action - 5$

While this is in Play, anytime during your action phase, you may pay $1. If you do, target Nonterminal Action Card gets flying until end of turn. You may not use this to produce flying rats. When target card is trashed, it must remain hovering above the trash pile in about ten centimeters height for the rest of the game.

20031
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Really bad card ideas
« on: January 26, 2014, 06:27:13 pm »
Injured Survivors - Action - Ruins - 0$
Look at the top 2 cards of your deck. Put them back in any order.

Bookless Library - Action - Ruins - 0$
Draw until you have 2 cards in hand.

Collapsed Mine - Action - Ruins - 0$
You may play a copy of Collapsed Mine from your hand. If you do, +1$

Zombie Village - Action - Ruins - 0$
You may discard 2 cards. If you do, +1 Action

Rotten Market - Action - Ruins - 0$
Name a card. During your buying phase, when you buy the named card, you may buy another one if you pay an additional 1$

20032
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Really bad card ideas
« on: January 26, 2014, 01:59:37 pm »
Bureaucracy - Action - 3$
Put a card from your hand aside. You may remove any number of cards you have in Play from the game. If you did, return all of them back into Play in an order you choose. You may look at the backside of the card that is second from bottom of you Deck. Put any number of Transfusion, Scout and Chancellor cards on top of your Deck, then draw X cards, where X is the number of cards you put on top total. Gain a VP Token, then lose a VP Token. During this turn, you may play Action cards without paying an action for them, however, you may only use this once. When you didn't use it, during your buying phase, whenever you play a Card that is called Diadem, +1 Coin. Return the card you put aside to your hand.

+1 Card

20033
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Really bad card ideas
« on: January 26, 2014, 01:06:16 pm »
Recurring Monument - Action - 10$
+1 VP
While this is in Play, whenever you gain a VP, gain a VP.

20034
For once I agree completly, though bag and diadem are close. I love the idea of diadem in a KC deck where you KC - {KC - AnyCard - AnyCard}repeat; your whole deck and end up with 1232143 actions leftover, but that's too rare to really be relevant.

20035
Quote
He also thinks Lookout is the best $3 trasher.  So, you know, grain of salt.

i've written a program which compares look/look, look/amb and amb/amb by playing the scenario with reasonable choices, simply boards and random shuffle luck, simulating all three 1000 000 times to see which is better, so it's probably a good idea not to argue about that anymore.

and for the record: i never actually said that lookout is the best trasher, except in my first post, which was clearly just an expression of my personal opinions. the discussion which followed (which btw was way too long and going nowhere so pls don't bring it back to life) wasn't actually about which card is better but about whether you can know how good a card is. And i'll stand by that, stats can't prove anything. I think university > familiar because there are a lot of cards which beat familiar. Amb is one of them, so is lookout, but forager works too, hermit, chapel, doctor, junk dealer, masquerade, upgreade, sometimes even forge, lighthouse, altar, trading post, some strategies don't care about curses in the first place and I'm sure I forgot something. Now if you could at least pretend to be tolerant enough to accept that I disagree that would be amazing.

20036
this is so wrong. i woud've #1'd university. it's skippable on fewer boards than familiar. can't believe it's #7

University
Vineyard
Familiar
Scrying Pool
Alchemist
Apothecary
Golem
Possession
Ph. Stone
Huge Gap
Transmute

20037
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Nonterminal percentage
« on: January 24, 2014, 08:12:23 pm »
I just feel like it makes the game harder, because you constantly have to consider whether it's worth buying something that could be swindled into something you don't want, or if you rather just buy gold.
Would you rather buy something that you want but could be swindled into something you don't want, or just simply buy something that you don't want? If you need the Gold, go for it. If you don't need a Gold, don't.

sure, but if you have $5 you need to decide whether you get a $5 card which could be swindled into a duchy or rather a silver.

generally silver is awesome but not so much in dominion -.-

20038
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Nonterminal percentage
« on: January 24, 2014, 06:48:33 pm »
Without any proof, I'm guessing that the motivation to do duration cards in the first place was to decrease shuffle luck. That could be achieved by a card which shemes itself, but it would be unnecssary complicated. That, however, has no weight when you compare them on an objective level.

Improved shuffle luck?  I don't want to speak for Donald X., but I would be floored if this were even partially his motivation.  Repeating an effect next turn is an interesting way of publishing a bunch of vanilla cards (e.g. Wharf, Caravan, Fishing Village, Merchant Ship), as well as implementing novel ideas (e.g. Lighthouse, Tactician, Outpost, Haven).

well, that's what makes them great in my mind, so I'd be really surprised if it were just a side effect. The only way we'll ever know if he continues his interview thing.

Well, we can look at the cards which exist.  If the motivation were to decrease shuffle luck, then we'd expect to seem a few Durations that say "Now and at the start of your next turn: X" where X is some typical card effect.  But we don't see that.  Half of the Durations are "Now and at the start of your next turn: vanilla" and the other half use the Duration type to implement effects that could not have otherwise been implemented (at least not without jumping through hoops).  Now, obviously the X couldn't have been too wordy, but there are plenty of non-vanilla cards whose text could have fit.

Edit:  Additionally, and perhaps more importantly, we can think about what we know about Donald.  What has motivated him elsewhere?  He has talked a lot about vanilla bonuses and the need for less complex cards.  Has he ever expressed a worry about shuffle luck?  Not that I can recall.  Rather, he has expressed a preference for luck several times.  He likes that Swindler's randomness takes the pressure off the game, and was worried that if you always drew your entire deck before reshuffling (and hence saw each card each shuffle) that there might be too little shuffle luck.

Well, I'm not going to argue about that, since It was just a guess in the first place. YOu might very well be right. Off topic, If swindler is supposed to take pressure away from the game, it doesn't work for me at all. I just feel like it makes the game harder, because you constantly have to consider whether it's worth buying something that could be swindled into something you don't want, or if you rather just buy gold. Counting vp's becomes more difficult too.

20039
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Nonterminal percentage
« on: January 24, 2014, 05:15:47 pm »
Without any proof, I'm guessing that the motivation to do duration cards in the first place was to decrease shuffle luck. That could be achieved by a card which shemes itself, but it would be unnecssary complicated. That, however, has no weight when you compare them on an objective level.

Improved shuffle luck?  I don't want to speak for Donald X., but I would be floored if this were even partially his motivation.  Repeating an effect next turn is an interesting way of publishing a bunch of vanilla cards (e.g. Wharf, Caravan, Fishing Village, Merchant Ship), as well as implementing novel ideas (e.g. Lighthouse, Tactician, Outpost, Haven).

well, that's what makes them great in my mind, so I'd be really surprised if it were just a side effect. The only way we'll ever know if he continues his interview thing.

20040
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Nonterminal percentage
« on: January 24, 2014, 04:36:33 pm »
now compare it to wharf, and you'll have to admit that wharf is the same only that it requires 1 less action.

Wharf also gives you 1 more card (since it stays in you're play area to do something when you already have a 5-card hand).
it doesnt, if you play wharf you start with 7 cards, if you play this -> next turn it goes to your hand -> 6 cards -> play it -> 5 cards -> draw 2 -> 7 cards -> start with 7 cards, but have -1 action.

it would be 1 less card if it just "shemed" itself instead of going right into your hand.

Quote
It doesn't make any sense to compare it to the first one, because the first one uses this new, invented "super-terminal" mechanic.  It's a terminal the first turn you play it, and the second turn you play it; that's not something any official card does, so it's not something that we expect when we're just talking about arbitrary terminals.  The fact that Wharf is "less terminal" than the card you described only implies that Wharf is not a "super-terminal"; it says nothing about whether Wharf is actually terminal or non-terminal.

The reason such a card doesn't exist is that it's simply a less elegant version of the duration cards we have now. Without any proof, I'm guessing that the motivation to do duration cards in the first place was to decrease shuffle luck. That could be achieved by a card which shemes itself, but it would be unnecssary complicated. That, however, has no weight when you compare them on an objective level.

What does matter is what the card does, and the return-to-hand card actually comes a lot closer to wharf, because it decreases the chance for your next hand to be dead. after all, that's the reason why wharf is one of the strongest cards in the game, because whenever you are at a point where you play 2 each turn, the chance for you to draw a dead hand is next to zero. You have to compare wharf to a card which shemes itself in one way or another, because only then you have the extra ensurance. Even if you can create a white card which has double the effect, and works simliar if you have half as many in your deck, it's still not the same because wharf plays itself twice when you pay an action once.

Quote
The significance of being terminal is that each terminal in your deck increases the likelihood of terminal collision.  Adding a Wharf to your deck increases that chance by roughly the same amount as adding any other terminal to your deck would (slightly more since it's a drawer, but slightly less since it misses the re-shuffle more often).  The first card you described increases the chance of terminal collision much more than most (all?) existing terminals, so saying Wharf is "less terminal" than it doesn't mean that it's closer to non-terminal than terminal.

we haven't made any distiction between terminals who draw and terminals who don't, so you can't just compensate the fact that wharf has less collision chance because it disappears for your next turn with the fact that it draws. Aside from that, measuring how often your terminals collide is a great idea, which underlines my point, because wharf collides less often than another terminal with +2 cards. Whenever there aren't any villages, you'll always be willing to buy more orange terminals than you would buy white ones.

Quote
That couldn't be a legit card because of accountability issues, but let's assume it's online-only. Now compare it to Smithy, and you'll have to admit that Smithy is the same, only that it requires 2 less actions. In this way, Smithy isn't 1/3 terminal, it just gives you a bigger effect for the same cost (1 card and 1 action). This is why more powerful cards have to cost more $ (or P), and this is also why Wharf costs $5 and is still incredibly powerful.
dude, no. a card which comes back in the turn you play it is something completely different. You are forcing players to pay multiple actions within the same turn. I'm simply finding another way to execute a card which already plays itself twice.

20041
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Nonterminal percentage
« on: January 24, 2014, 03:30:37 pm »
Quote from: Awaclus
Rephrasing Smithy like that is, indeed, balls. That's what I was demonstrating. Rephrasing cards like that is balls.
well, no. imgagine a card which says
+2 cards
+1 buy
at the beginning of your next turn, put this into your hand

that could be a legit card, only that it would be too weak for $5 (and you have to rephrase slightly so it only comes back once). now compare it to wharf, and you'll have to admit that wharf is the same only that it requires 1 less action. in this way wharf is half terminal

of course, you can also compare it to this card:
+4 cards
+2 buys
and then you have a card which does the same only that you require half as many to do it. in this way wharf is terminal, only it has, as you put it, a limitation.

which way you choose to look at it seems competely arbitrary. I come from the angle of "how many can you support without villages" and therefore I'd say wharf is half terminal.

20042
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Nonterminal percentage
« on: January 24, 2014, 02:30:16 pm »
And I would totally buy two $5 cards that just say +4 cards, +2 buys if I was playing big money. That card is ridiculously overpowered.
wharf does just that, except that you need twice as many of them. but you wouldn't buy two +4cards+2buys if you draw your deck anyway with a stables or hunting party engine. the point is simply that you only need one action to support two wharfs in a working deck, so it only costs 1/2 action. rephrasing smithy like that is balls, because it happens in the same turn

20043
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Nonterminal percentage
« on: January 24, 2014, 01:56:33 pm »
If you get to play an action card without using one of your actions, then whatever allowed you to do that is non-terminal in the same sense as Throne Room, King's Court, Procession and Golem.

If Fishing Village only gave +1 Action on the current turn, but still +1 Action next turn, it would still be a village.
But you don't actually play Fishing Village again. You play it once, and it gives an action to replace the action you spent. Later, it gives you an extra action. Just like Village, except that Village gives the extra action immediately.
But I'm not comparing the single Wharf to two terminals, I'm comparing the latter half of the previous Wharf and the first half of a currrent Wharf to two terminals.  Okay the distinction is minor, but the Peddler still costs $4 less instead of $2.  Or your single Wharf from last turn is like playing a nonterminal Smithy this turn.

So yes a Wharf is terminal, but it's kind of like a terminal*.. the functionality is different, and you probably require less Villages compared to regular terminals as someone mentioned.
Peddler is an edge case. Your single Wharf from last turn is more like playing a Council Room last turn, except that the effect is just spread over two turns and is more powerful. It's true that you require less villages, but that's because Wharfs stay out and miss the reshuffle a lot.

But that's significant when thinking of terminal collision, right? They stay out, which would change the collision probabilities (I would assume).

wharf is so ridiculous that you actually buy two of them without having any villages quite often. you would not do that if they wouldn't have the duration effect.

the way i see it is that it costs 1/2 action. notice that you could rephrase wharf to:

+2 cards
+1 buy
at the beginning of your next turn, move this to your hand, +1action and you have to play it immediately.

in that way it would also be "half" a terminal

20044
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Nonterminal percentage
« on: January 24, 2014, 07:21:40 am »
I don't think it makes a lot of sense not to count treasure cards. For the most part, treasures are non-terminals with the benefit that you can't draw them dead. So the stats would probably be more interesting if you counted (non-terminal + treasure)/(non-terminal + treasure + terminal) for every expansion. KC+TR+PR can also be counted as non-terminals because you want them to collide with other actions.

20045
Dominion General Discussion / Re: 206th card
« on: January 24, 2014, 07:15:48 am »
I was about to get pissed off if this was about a fan card or what-if, and not a promo.  I was not disappointed.

Please let me buy this with zaps....

20046
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Other types of attack?
« on: January 23, 2014, 04:52:14 pm »
Quote
On slowing yourself down -- yes, you do slow yourself down more.  Again, the hand-size attack hurts you more than your opponents.  They would get cut down to 4, but you get cut down to 3 (Confusion taking up a spot in your next hand, plus the card you would have to topdeck from playing Confusion).  And if you don't play Confusion, it still slowed you down (being in that hand) and will continue to slow you down after ONE reshuffle (being in a future hand).  The Ruins just means it will hurt some more in the shuffle after that.

no, you don't. the top deck on buy is optional, you can just gain it on your discard pile, then your next hand is unaffected and you still get the coin token.

and it's after 2 reshuffles, because after the first reshuffle, the ruin is in your discard pile. you need to reshuffle again to get it into your drawing pile

If you decline to top-deck, the Confusion is still in your discard.  After one shuffle, the Confusion itself goes into your deck.  That Confusion is junk that effectively Minion/Militias the hand it comes up in, so it slows you down.  The Ruins that comes after is just icing.

alright, so it hurts after one reshuffle, not two. but it still hurts after one reshuffle, not in your next turn.

you could tweak it so confusion itself goes onto your discard pile too after you shuffle it into your deck... which in consequence would mean that you never shuffle it into your deck, which means you also can't leave it on your discard pile. that would be pretty confusing.

20047
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Other types of attack?
« on: January 23, 2014, 04:42:43 pm »
Quote
On slowing yourself down -- yes, you do slow yourself down more.  Again, the hand-size attack hurts you more than your opponents.  They would get cut down to 4, but you get cut down to 3 (Confusion taking up a spot in your next hand, plus the card you would have to topdeck from playing Confusion).  And if you don't play Confusion, it still slowed you down (being in that hand) and will continue to slow you down after ONE reshuffle (being in a future hand).  The Ruins just means it will hurt some more in the shuffle after that.

no, you don't. the top deck on buy is optional, you can just gain it on your discard pile, then your next hand is unaffected and you still get the coin token.

and it's after 2 reshuffles, because after the first reshuffle, the ruin is in your discard pile. you need to reshuffle again to get it into your drawing pile

Quote
On the Stash thing -- yes, people will care.  People don't have to cheat -- they just have to forget.  It's very possible.  You say that the number will usually be zero because people want to get rid of them immediately, and I agree -- which is a major argument for just getting rid of the option entirely.  If it's an option that would be used almost never, then it's not worth cluttering up the card text

it's like the 3 estate option on hunting grounds. in most games you don't need it, but when you do it's crucial.

20048
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Other types of attack?
« on: January 23, 2014, 03:51:11 pm »
Quote
It is absolutely worse than Stash.  Stash has a unique back card for this very reason.  You can flip the discard over and easily find the Stash cards.  You can't just remember how many are in your deck because some could be in your hand, or set aside on a mat (NV, Island).  In games with 3+ players and Masquerade, it is impossible to track because it's not public knowledge which cards are passed.
Does anyone really care about that? I don't play dominion offline which people who're cheating. So you only need to know how many of those you have in your deck, and that number will usually be very low, mostly zero because you want to get rid of them in the turn you get them.
I really don't see this being a problem.

Quote
I'm not sure about this.  In rush strategies, losing one card doesn't really hurt.  Rush strategies usually operate by gaining cards quickly, using gainers like Ironworks or +Buy to run out cheap cards.  Either way, 4 card hands are enough.  Having to buy one of these every turn is far more likely to slow you down than your rushing opponent.
meh, i mostly just meant if one guy starts buying provinces and the other one tries to get a really cool engine working. At least I had countless of those games in the past.

The biggest problem here is that the sheme effect can actually be of help to your opponent, if he draws too much money in one turn, so it's a double edge sword... you still only give him 4 cards each turn instead of 5 though. It could still be tweaked to a top-deck gain instead of inhand, but I think that would be to strong, because then you effectively reduce his hand to 3 every turn, and there's nothing he can do about it unless there's trader or watchtower on the board.

Quote
Not sure what you mean by "effective" and "uneffective" hand size reduction.  A top-deck attack like Ghost Ship differs from a discard attack like Militia in that top-decking slows down the opponent's deck cycling.  This is better in the early game, when you want to cycle your good cards back into your deck, but worse in the late game, when you want to keep Victory cards from cycling back in.  If forced to top-deck, you can't choose Victory cards with impunity because they'll show up in your next hand.  But you can also take advantage of it by using it as a sort of Scheme, so that's a wash.  The anti-cycling is the main difference.

discard is uneffective because you can simly discard bad cards that you don't need. top deck is reliable damage beause if you topdeck bad cards you draw them next turn, and if you topdeck good cards you dont have them this turn. yea, you can distribute your power between the two turns, but you always have less power overall.

Quote
As for the alt VP example, the problem here is that you also confer the advantage onto your opponents.  Yes, you get a way to obtain more cards... but so do your opponents.  So why should you buy this at all?  My point is that the advantages do not outweigh the disadvantages.
you're assuming that both players go alternative vp every time, which isn't the case at all. if both players do it, then there's no point.

Quote
Barring a few edge cases, you don't know what your hand will be in the next turn so there's no way to know if you'll want the Scheme effect.  It's actually much worse than a Scheme effect too, because it effectively cuts you down to a 3 card hand.
if you are really good at the game you know it every time your drawing pile is getting thin. and yea, it's obv not as good as sheme. but i still see it being useful a lot of times, though there's no way to proof this without playtesting it.

Quote
Unless there is only like one Province left, it's probably not worth junking your own deck more just to get a coin token.  Again, you end up slowing yourself down more than your opponents.  You also have to consider the opportunity cost.  Instead of junking your own deck (or hurting your next hand) to get a coin token, you could actively improve your deck by buying Silver or some other action card!
You don't have to topdeck it, and if you don't you aren't slowing yourself down at all, at least not until you reshuffle your deck twice. In games with large decks there are a lot of turns within the spawn of the second last reshuffle to the end. I remember several games in the past where i would've bought Confusion, just to get a coin token for the next turn. Although, obviously, it'd be sad if that's its main purpose.

Another reason which I just thought of today is simply to avoid a reshuffle, if the drawing pile consists of 4 cards only and your precious mountebank is one of them.

20049
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Other types of attack?
« on: January 23, 2014, 10:39:08 am »
Quote
[Wording issue: "when you buy this, you may return it to the supply" is technically impossible.  When you buy it, you have not actually gained it and it is still in the supply.  A fix would be, "When you buy this, you may choose not to gain it.  If you do gain it, take a coin token..."  Still a bit awkward, but it works as you intended.
oh yea, that's true.

Quote
Is this card worth buying?  That will depend on how badly it hurts opponents.  So let's say that another player buys a Confusion.  Now I have to put one in my hand.  On my turn, I can play it (and since it's non-terminal that's no big deal) but then I have to put a card on top of my deck.  Note that multiple Confusions go away in one fell swoop, as well they should -- stacking would be really annoying.

So in most cases, this is just a mini-Ghost Ship.  That is actually an extremely mild attack.  Extremely weak, certainly not worth a $3 buy.
yea, if you do it to hurt your opponent, it's an "effective" card reducing of one, so it does exactly half as much as a ghost ship. but: it can't be countered and it returns to the supply after your opponent got rid of it, so you can do it over and over again. it'll shine if your opponent tries to end the game early, and you're going for a slower deck with a high payoff. Just buy one of those every turn, and you'll buy yourself some extra time.

Quote
Players also have an option to not play it.  The penalty is that it will cause you to gain Ruins when you reshuffle, if it is in your discard.  Practically speaking, this is not so good either.  It means that every time I shuffle, I have to reveal my entire discard to other players and find every copy of it there.  I can't just look through it myself either; I have to reveal my discard for accountability.  That slows the game down a lot.  I can't think of a good way to fix this.

i thought that's completely fine. Online it'll do it itself and offline you just have to remember how many of those you have in your deck. In most cases, it wont be more than one, so it wont take much time. It certainly isn't worse than stash

Quote
If you ever try to trash the card, you have to discard a card.  This seems unnecessary.  I'm already using an action to trash this Confusion, when I could have been trashing something else.  In some cases, maybe it doesn't matter much or maybe it's even a bonus (e.g. Remodel into a $5), but that's fine.  You could probably leave out the entire on-trash effect, saving space and design complexity.
I don't want this card to be trashed. It's supposed to be an everlasting option throughout the game.

Quote
Going back to the choice of keeping the card... you get a Coin token and you may put it on your deck.  Is the coin token worth junking your own deck?  Note that the Confusion you would gain yourself does not go into your hand.  That actually makes it more damaging to you than anyone else.  If you put it on top of your deck, then your next hand is automatically cut to 4 cards (not counting Confusion) and possibly down to 3 cards (if you choose to play Confusion and have to discard something).  That's a bigger hit than the others face, since they would only be dropped down to 4 cards.  And if you choose not to top-deck it, then you've effectively given yourself a Confusion and a Ruins.  Not good.  That's probably never worth the coin token.  You could streamline the card even more by omitting the option and simply having the buyer leave it in the supply every time.
I thought it was useful in a lot of cases. The first one is if you need the sheme-effect for next turn, either because there's a potion without enough support, a KC without any action cards or a single treasure map. In all of those cases, you'll be more than happy to spend $3 if it a) let's you sheme your key card, b) slows down your opponent and c) gives you a coin token.

Another case is: you're playing a junked BM deck and struggle to get to 8. Simply buy a Confusion twice in a row, slow down your opponents, make it even less likeley that they ever reach 8, and get 2 coin tokens. Then buy the province with 6+2.

Then there are the games where the first one to get to $7 and buys a KC wins. If you know how the remainder of your drawing pile looks like, you can buy a Confusion, put it on top of your deck; next turn use it to top deck your biggest money card; then in the following turn get the KC.

Or imagine if you want to boost vineyards/gardens/fairgrounds. With the reshuffle thing my primary goal was to delay the disadvantage that you get if you leave it in your deck as long as possible. You buy it, then you use your remaining drawing pile, then you reshuffle, and only once you reshuffle again the ruins is in your drawing pile. So you can buy some Confusions, have the coin token and attack benefit, and let them generate nice ruins in your kingdom that make your vineyards all the more attractive. It's +2 action cards if triggered once, and +2 differently named cards for fairgrounds.

Quote
One final issue is how this pile scales with number of players.  It is a junk card, but it is not like other junk cards.  If you look at Curses and Ruins, these piles will scale.  In a 2p game, there are 10.  In a 4p game, there are 30.  So does the Confusion pile scale as well?  Is it still a kingdom card?  If it doesn't scale then the pile runs out far more quickly than other such junk cards.  Granted, the scaling might matter less since these cards will (usually) keep returning to the supply instead of staying in decks or getting trashed.  So there's that.
yea, you gave the answer yourself, it's supposed to never run out, because it always returns to the supply.

Quote
Hmm... this card concept could probably be written in a much simpler manner and achieve nearly the same effect.  The effect of gaining a Confusion into your hand is basically a choice between a discard attack or gaining a Ruins.  A difference is that the Confusion would be a persistent threat of gaining Ruins until you accept the discard attack.  But even so, there is something to be said for removing excess complexity.  So you could rephrase a lot of it as:

Quote
When you gain this, return it to the Supply.  Each other player chooses one: he discards down to 4 cards in hand; or he gains a Ruins.

Again, it's not exactly the same, but it's close and it's much simpler and more concise.  It could be reworded slightly different to have the player put cards on top of his deck instead of discarding, but that's a small change.

I wouldn't like the card at all if it worked that way, because the goal of this card was to have something that's skill dependent, situational yet useful in a lot of different cases, and never runs out.  If you do it like that, neither of those goals is achieved. It's just a junker, neither something new nor something very exciting or complex. And it most certainly doesn't want to be a discard, because on-deck is something very different to discarding, it's what I call the difference between "effective" and "uneffective" hand size reducing.

Quote
Phrased this way, I recognize another potential issue -- this is an on-buy discard attack that is always on the board.  I recall that Donald X. mentioned in a Secret History (one of the last ones, for all the outtakes, I think) that he tried a Militia variant that attacked when you bought it, like Noble Brigands.  Apparently it didn't pan out because the ever-present threat was just too oppressive.  That doesn't mean that a concept like this wouldn't work, but it's something to keep in mind.  If you want to refine this concept, it would be worth finding that particular discussion from Donald X. to mull over.
Maybe... never heard about that.

20050
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Other types of attack?
« on: January 22, 2014, 08:43:02 pm »
Quote from: eHalcyon
Also, there is a practical issue -- the cards simply don't have enough space to support all that text.  Take a look at Ironmonger:
It's already full.  It only addresses three card types and it only gives each of them one line.  Adding in the Curse type is a stretch already.  Making them give anything more than vanilla bonuses is pretty much impossible because then each card type will need two lines.  Giving each card type a choice between two bonuses... it's just not going to happen.

Are any of these cards going to happen? I wasn't really trying to make something that fits onto a card. But you're right, it woudln't fit.

How about this one:
Confusion - 3$
+1 Action
Return this and any number of copies from your hand to the supply, then put a card from your hand on top of your deck.

When you buy this, you may choose not to gain it. If you do gain it, gain a Coin Token and you may put it on top of your deck. Either way, each other player gains one, putting it into his hand.
When you trash this, discard a Card.
Whenever you have to shuffle and this is in your discard pile, after you finished shuffling, gain a ruins.


I know that Confusion was originally the name of a dead card without any effect that didn't make it into the game. It should also fit onto a standard sized card.

Quote
So a nonterminal attack which is brutal when played three times in a turn, which gives a lot of options, and has VERY strong "vanilla" bonuses... for $5... This might need a nerf.
maybe... terminal?
It's weird because it seemed completely fine when I made it, but you're right it's too strong. If you hit copper, which you'll probably do in most cases, it's already +2$ -1$, so in a way as good as a gold. Too strong for a card that excels when you have lots of it.

Pages: 1 ... 800 801 [802] 803

Page created in 0.683 seconds with 18 queries.