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 - segura

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 66
26
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #227: Shadows
« on: August 17, 2024, 09:16:47 am »
Shed by Jonatan Djurachkovitch
6/10
Not much to say here. The likelihood of Shadow whiffing is decreased by the abilities and I like that the topdeck ability also interacts with non-Shadows.

Furnace by Tiago
2/10
So Furance potentially topdecks Furnace. This would be nice with a normal Smithy, but what is the point of it given that you can play that bottom-decked Furnace anyway as if in your hand? That makes no sense and if anything that ability is a nerf so the card is weaker than Barge.

Kamidana by BryGuy
0/10
The second version was solid and I liked it a lot (8/10).
This is version is far too good (the only card besides Royal Blacksmith which can net draw 4) and also too complex (the discarding Debt part, you won't ever need that unless there are Debt-costed cards in the Kingdom).

Shaded by binbag420
7/10
A Shadow trait is fairly natural and I really like the downside.

Doppelganger by NoMoreFun
4/10
I don't know. Suppose there is Ironworks and Dopperganger in the Kingdom and you always blow up your Doppelgangers. Ironworks constantly gains Doppelgangers, so here we have -1 Card. Doppelganger Thrones those cards so we have +1 Card at best. The vanillas cancel each other so Ironworks kind of works like Throne Room.
At worst, i.e. if Doppelganger is in your hand or in your discard pile, which will often happen in this scenario due to Ironworks, we have net vanillas of -1 Card. So no, I am not convinced.
On the other hand, it is a one-shot $2 so it should be weak.

Pickpocket by X-tra
2/10
This does not excite me. Guaranteed spiking to $5 after the first shuffle is nice but that is really all that this card achieves.
Baseline scenario is terminal Silver. Sure, you can be thin and have no Treasures (terminal Gold) or you have to discard a Silver (terminal Copper), but terminal Silver seems to be the most likely and also the average case.
Compared to other terminal Silvers that draw like Cargo Ship (get that $5 the very next turn), Fortune Hunter (can make $4 or $5) or Garrison (draws potentially a lot), this seems weak, boring and not worth the terminal space.

Monopoly by faust
8/10
This is super novel and obviously brilliant. The only thing that does not convince me is the card effect, it is very extreme. I am also not a huge fan of the war of attrition-ish minigame that arises once everybody can draw their deck.
Compared to e.g. Flag Bearer or Treasurer, which feature similar minigames, the minigames occur here less often, the payoff is larger and the cost (Flag Bearer can be gained without being bought) is also larger.

Fairies by DashingEpistocrat
2/10
So Scheme but with cards from your hand and potentially more than 1 Card.
I think this does not work. In a decent engine, which is kind of the main situation in which your want this, you often draw your Fairies during your turn so it is no longer a cantrip.
In a decent engine, you can draw stuff dead but you mostly have your good stuff in play.
Increasing consistency with a card that is not all that consistent is not a decent insurance policy.

Stalker by silverspawn
9/10
Unlike the previous two Smithies that could be weaker, this is a proper Smithy+. It simple, it is either a Smithy or a Hunting Grounds, and the only thing that we can discuss is the parameter of 4 cards.
In a normal draw deck it is OKisk, because you can pull Village-Stalker-Village-Stalker with the second Stalker being buffed. I also think this illustrates that the first version with 5 cards was likely wrong.
In a deck with many Durations and cantrips, like Peddlers or splitters or whatever, this will shine.

Badge/Sheriff by LibraryAdventurer
7/10
Badge is vanilla-wise a Copper, a Treasure-Peddler (not underpriced like Supplies), a Fugitive or a Lab. Although it is obviously stronger in Kingdoms with Attacks, I like that you made sure that it is also decent in Kingdoms without such that those Sheriffs might see the light of day.
Sheriff is vanilla- wise often something like +2 Cards +2 Coins +1 Buy. This is pretty strong (and totally fine for the lower part of a split pile) given that +2 Cards +2 Coins is probably a $5.

Kappa by fika monster
?/10
I have a hard time to judge the strength of this:
Inn sifts with a net draw of -1.  This is a DoubleVillage with, at best, a net draw of -2. Seems weak.
On the other hand, a ShadowVillage is strong and massively increases the consistency of your deck.

Dojo by LTaco
10/10
I really like this Throne. It is very clear and "sharp", i.e. the advantage and disadvantage relative to Throne Room are immediately apparent.
It is slightly more (emergently) complex than Throne: Throne is good once you have a decent Action density whereas this also makes you want to build a deck with a variety of Actions.

Private Shrine by emtzalex
8/10
I have a soft spot for trash-for-Debt cards because unlike many trashers they are non-trivial to analyze and because they amplify the "payload trough" problem of trashing.

Swordsmith by AJL828
5/10
Similar to Conjurer. I think this could be simpler as the conditional non-terminality will rarely trigger.

Tuna byMochaMoko
1/10
What other posters said: far better than Plunder. Also, a deck with Market and 4 Tunas might not really want to green (quickly). That is more of a theoretical thing but it highlights the issue of pairing Coffers with VPs on a non-terminal.
I like the idea of a Treasure-Shadow that can work like a Treasure-Peddler though.

Manhunt by Snorka
0/10
This is a boring BM card. Spike to a Manhunt, buy a Copper (to be able to produce 8 Coins) and then just buy Manhunts/Provinces.

Silhouettist by infangthief
9/10
Basically a Shadow version of Courier. I like it, simple yet complex and it feels like it could be an official card.

Coffee House by grep
10/10
Man, this is sweet. Kudos for making a Lab via a pure Reaction.!
You often have no discard so this does not work as a mono-engine card. It could be a $4 but to test it $3 is the right price.

Portent by JW
4/10
The sifting makes this is too similar to Rustic Village for my taste.
The increase of consistency a Shadow splitter provides is nice but like with Kappa, a net draw of -1 can hurt you.


Lots of interesting cards so no easy choice. The winner is Coffee House by grep.



27
Them Monkeys love Bureaucracy.

28
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #227: Shadows
« on: August 16, 2024, 02:32:10 am »
Judging will be in roughly 24 hours. You can post until the very end.

29
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Rising Sun Rulebook Is Out
« on: August 11, 2024, 10:32:32 am »
Most of the time, not counting Omen impacts, Tea House (double Peddler) has the same purpose as Gold. But it’s much better than Gold (Gold = Tea House + Copper, approximately) and costs $5 instead of $6. To me, that makes for less interesting games.
Yeah, it is just too straightforward. Other DoublePeddlers like Vassal, Conspirator, Grand Market and Highway are conditional and thus more interesting.

Donald even started with a more interesting version of the card, per the Secret History: https://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=22007.msg910514#new

Quote
Tea House: The premise was, an Omen that changed after the Prophecy happened. It started out as $5, cantrip +Sun, if the Prophecy has happened +$2 else +$1. Really, it could just be cantrip +$2 all the time, and so it is. I still liked the changing Omen concept, but didn't manage to make one of those.
Totally agree, this City-ish version sounds more interesting, more balanced and more in line with other $5 Peddler+.

30
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Rising Sun Rulebook Is Out
« on: August 11, 2024, 03:29:52 am »
Most of the time, not counting Omen impacts, Tea House (double Peddler) has the same purpose as Gold. But it’s much better than Gold (Gold = Tea House + Copper, approximately) and costs $5 instead of $6. To me, that makes for less interesting games.
Yeah, it is just too straightforward. Other DoublePeddlers like Vassal, Conspirator, Grand Market and Highway are conditional and thus more interesting.

31
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Rising Sun Rulebook Is Out
« on: August 11, 2024, 01:16:32 am »
The Other Secret History of the Prosperity Cards
Quote
Grand Market: Originally it cost $7 and was "+1 Card +1 Action +$2." People sure complained about it not having +1 Buy. "How is it a Grand Market?" they'd say. So I added +1 Buy, and then later took the anti-Copper clause from another card.
And originally Market cost $5 and just had +1 Buy with nothing else, but we don't use that as a benchmark either.

Indeed, that first version clearly *wasn't* worth $7, given that it ended up getting changed

Tea House really seems more like a Conspirator that is automatically activated every time, with the +1 sun added to it
You are often willing to „pay“ 7 or 8 (you spend 6 while having one or two Coppers in hand) for Grand Market. You are willing to work hard to make a Conspirator deck work. So yeah, I feel safe in claiming that 5 for a DoublePeddler is too cheap.

32
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Rising Sun Rulebook Is Out
« on: August 09, 2024, 02:21:52 pm »
I'm surprised by Tea House—it's so much cheaper than Grand Market!
Yeah, it seems kind of weird to have a $7 at a price of $5.

How is Tea House a $7?

The Other Secret History of the Prosperity Cards
Quote
Grand Market: Originally it cost $7 and was "+1 Card +1 Action +$2." People sure complained about it not having +1 Buy. "How is it a Grand Market?" they'd say. So I added +1 Buy, and then later took the anti-Copper clause from another card.

33
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Rising Sun Rulebook Is Out
« on: August 09, 2024, 01:46:05 pm »
I'm surprised by Tea House—it's so much cheaper than Grand Market!
Yeah, it seems kind of weird to have a $7 at a price of $5.

34
Weekly Design Contest / Weekly Design Contest #227: Shadows
« on: August 07, 2024, 04:09:45 pm »
As the new expansion will soon be out, let’s do something with the new card type Shadow. Keep in mind that the subtype is not restricted to Actions. Bonus point for funky type combos (e.g. Shadow-Reaction, pure Shadow or perhaps even a landscape) and nice flavour&art.

35
Thanks for the win!

36
Fugitive for $4 is already OP.
These cards can exist because 'OP' isn't really a problem in dominion
Nope. You cannot ignore powerlevel, especially not around the critical 4-5-threshold.

It is well established that Fugitive as a Kingdom card would be a $4.5 which is why it does not exist and why Ferryman, Fugitive with a bonus, costs $5.

A card basically stronger than Fugitive at $4 is now official (Alley)
That is like claiming that Conspirator is a DoublePeddler so DoublePeddler is fine at $4. You cannot ignore conditionality.

Also, Alley is at best a Fugitive, it is never stronger, always weaker with Thrones …. and whenever it is not on the top of your deck it is extremely weak (a cantrip that handsize attacks yourself).

What DXV wrote about Adventures still applies:
„Fugitive was an old old card, from the 2nd expansion before it split into Seaside and Hinterlands, that didn't exist previously because it was too strong at $4.“

37
Global rule changes are a fairly natural thing to implement on a landscape.

What makes this shine is that they are not just there during the entire game or whatever but happen in the mid- or endgame and that there is no fixed timer, like turn X or whatever, but a timer that is Kingdom-dependent (e.g. the two cantrip Omens will see more play on average than the terminal) and influenced by player decisions.

38
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #226: The Count!
« on: August 05, 2024, 02:46:59 pm »


I tried.

I agree with segura that it is confusing. It’s not clear to me what the card is intended to do.

I was trying to figure out what "plays as buys" in the teaser could possibly mean, and well this is not it. I'll change my submission to a better wording.
I think it is much better now. Even though it is implicitly clear, I would add „gained this turn“.

39
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #226: The Count!
« on: August 05, 2024, 12:13:59 pm »


To clarify, can the same option be picked multiple times?
Yes. Is there perhaps a clearer wording?

40
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #226: The Count!
« on: August 05, 2024, 02:13:49 am »


I feel like it should give more options, even if the options are bad.

Suggestions for what they could be: put that a card from your hand onto your deck(or maybe it could be “set it aside for next turn”?);gain a spoils; gain a will o wisps (this option is probably too good)  ; discard the top card of your deck and look through your discard pile, putting a card from it onto your deck.


Idk if these are good ideas but i just feel that you will have more then 3 differently named cards in your hand a lot of the time
All these ideas have merit but would make my card for too wordy.

41
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #226: The Count!
« on: August 04, 2024, 01:08:06 pm »
This wording is confusing. Do you perhaps mean: "+2 Coffers unless you have more copies of Town Square in play than you bought this turn."

42
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #226: The Count!
« on: August 04, 2024, 11:06:44 am »

43
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: August 03, 2024, 05:59:32 am »
Dune is a very fine game and there is nothing "off". It can only work with a rotation market and it is nonethless a high-skill game because deck building is only a minor element in it.
Pure deckbuilders like Ascension or Star Realms with rotating markets are of course too luck dependent.

44
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: August 02, 2024, 11:19:50 am »
Most contemporary games with deckbuilding have as much to do with Dominion as a game with worker placement has to do with Caylus.

45
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #226: The Count!
« on: August 02, 2024, 02:11:27 am »
You cannot apply such simple additive logic. Build-up cards are usually undervalued.

46
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #226: The Count!
« on: July 31, 2024, 02:26:25 am »
Party
Action - $2
+1 Card
+$1
+<1>, then +1 Action per <> you have
Why this mess with Coins and Debt instead of simply: "+1 Action per Party you player this turn"?

47
I don’t think that monoengines are fun.

48
Dude, your card is a $5, you mispriced it at $4 and don’t care. There is nothing else to say if you are willfully ignorant and don’t care.

It is like designing a Lab variant (not a nerfed Lab like Advisor or Lab but Stables or Hunting Party), pricing it at $4 and asking for an explanation for what the issue with that is supposed to be.

In that case the issues would be:
1) Making other draw variants obsolete on boards with this hypothetical card.
2) Strategies in games with this card becoming too similar, with enough easy to gain terminal draw you can just fill your deck with it.
I have no idea what you are talking about here. Your card does not net draw, it is a sifter. If you think that it is no biggie that you mispriced a $5 self-gaining sifter at $4 because sifters are somehow a card category that is somehow exempt from elementary design principles you are woefully mistaken.

49
Dude, your card is a $5, you mispriced it at $4 and don’t care. There is nothing else to say if you are willfully ignorant and don’t care.

It is like designing a Lab variant (not a nerfed Lab like Advisor or Lab but Stables or Hunting Party), pricing it at $4 and asking for an explanation for what the issue with that is supposed to be.

50
Fugitive for $4 is already OP.
These cards can exist because 'OP' isn't really a problem in dominion
Nope. You cannot ignore powerlevel, especially not around the critical 4-5-threshold.

It is well established that Fugitive as a Kingdom card would be a $4.5 which is why it does not exist and why Ferryman, Fugitive with a bonus, costs $5.

Explain to me why I cannot ignore it around the 4-5 threshold.
You really want an explanation for why one should not cost a $5 as a $4? Like, seriously dude?

If you don’t care about basic design principles, that is your prerogative. Just don’t expect a round of applause for mispricing cards.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 66

Page created in 0.054 seconds with 18 queries.