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 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 62
476
I think it's okay to let the judging address some card issues. Posting ways to improve a card can be done after a contest is complete.
Dude, demanding that a discussion shall be silenced or postponed ain't cool.
The point of the contests is not so much the judgement and who wins (that is just the framework) but the general discussion about card ideas. It is great when people take a lot of effort when they judge the cards but it is not like that is the only feedback that is useful for the card designers.


477
Sure, but then it will still be stronger than Prince. Of course you can Exile too much with too many Collectors in play. But if you manage it wisely, the benefit of Exiling stuff and the flexibility this has relative to Prince dominate the „over-Exiling“ downsides.
So you either gotta make it more expensive than $8, which might be a dubious price range, or nerf it further.

478
Isn't this strictly stronger than Prince?

Yes, but i think prince is way too weak tbh
Well, it surely is not as automatic as Citadel (which is a Princed Throne Room) and wrong in a significant faction of Kingdoms. But it is not weak and I think that it is a far better design than some of those expensive Projects.

On a sidenote, do you also think that Hireling is weak? If you compare your card with Hireling it should become obvious that Collector is far too strong.

479
Malaise
Action/Duration - $3
Gain a card from the Trash.
For the rest of the game, at the start of each of your turns, trash an Action card from the supply. (This stays in play)
This looks like a weird auto-three-pile, Lurker, Feast thingy.
Three-pile is obvious, Lurker because there are positive externalities, Feast because it is a one shot that is cheaper than Feast yet slightly better (except for the first copy that is played).
If it were not for the crazy fast piling this would be an interesting card.

480
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: April 05, 2021, 01:46:28 pm »
Why would it make more sense for some Actions to take 2 to play but most to take 1? There's no precedent for that either. And anyway, why are you using precedent to justify what does or doesn't make sense on a competition that's literally about fan mechanics. There's no precedent for anything we do here, by definition. Being able to go negative on a resource is not so outlandish a concept that it doesn't appear in other games.
I totally disagree. None of the boardgame that I know does feature a negative counter of any resource except for VPs.
There is debt in quite some games, including Dominion, but debt is not negative money or coins.

I don't disagree that it is technically feasible. Of course it is. My argument is rather that the concept is counterintuitive and leads to avoidable rule issues, i.e. I don't see any benefits of the cards (all I see is that relative to "spend an Action", the card is better for BM) that is worth the extra fuss.

Action management is one of the core gameplay concepts of Dominion. If you mess (we don't talk about a fan card that comes with a new add-on-ish mechanic) with the basics, you should have a very good reason to do so.

481


This is an old one.

It uses the Season mechanic to scale well. First I wanted to do this as an Event but you gotta track the Debt anyway. Furthermore an Event or a hand-gaining Night or a "play this when you gain it" (an idea I briefly considered) are too automatic in the endgame, you simply go for them if you cannot hit $8 in one of the latest turns in order to reach it next turn.

482
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: April 03, 2021, 02:06:23 am »
Actions are a resource in a Dominion that you can spend. It makes absolutely no sense to have negative Actions. You can only spend resources that you actually have.

And you're free to have your cards follow that rule if you wish. As of now, there is no ruling one way or another on whether Actions or Buys can go negative, so you can't really say whether it makes sense or not if there's no precedent. Actions are only a counter after all, and there's nothing inherent to them that demands non-negativity.
None of the 4 basic resources of the game can become negative. It is common-sensical, you can only spend stuff that you have.
Coins also cannot become negative, Debt is a totally different mechanism.

I'm not sure what your concern is, of course none of the 4 basic resources go negative in the base game, that's the entire point of fan mechanics. If it were already part of the game, then we wouldn't be discussing it here. Coins and the like cannot become negative because there are no cards with negative vanilla bonuses, that's the entire point of this contest. And regardless, the possibility of negative actions doesn't mean you can continue to use actions while negative to become even further negative. If you have 0 or less actions, you can't play any actions. Your statement "you can't spend what you don't have" isn't applicable here. None of these fan cards allow you to do that.
So your card implies that you can once go under zero with Actions but once you are in the negative realm you cannot play another card with -Actions.
Dude, that’s hyperunintuitive.

Spend X Actions is a fine mechanism. -X Actions with some weird „you can go once below zero but once you are you cannot play other -X Action cards“ rule is not.

Think about when you would go below zero. I never stated my card allows you to go below zero once. The rules around my card were "Do what the card says. If you do not have 1 or more actions afterwards, you cannot play another card", just like any other card. If you play a -1 Action card, that means you had 1 action, and were thus allowed to play a card, now having 0, do what the card says, and now have -1. You cannot play another action. It's exactly the same as playing any other terminal. You are not "allowed to go below once and then not again", you are simply allowed to play any action card if you have 1 action available, and if you are at 0 you can't play an action card period. It would be less intuitive if you couldn't play a -1 Action card while having 1 action. And anyway, the only time it matters whether or not you have 0 or -1 is when it comes to how many villagers you need to get back to 1 action. Once again, you are free to implement it however you wish.
Dude, you explicitly said that Steel Foundry means that you can end up with -1 Action and you just said it again. So according to you you can most definitely go below zero with the Action counter.
My point is that this is a total mess rule-wise (gee, the very fact that we have this discussion shows this). It makes far more sense to implement it Storyteller-style as „spend an Action“ which means that you need two Actions to play Steel Foundry.

Spending resources is cool, it is a basic mechanism familiar to anybody who plays Euros. But being able to spend stuff that you don’t have, man, just no. There is no precedent for this in Dominion, it will lead to quite some confusion and it also makes the card itself behave very weird (no idea about why you sting to it, all it achieves is make the card better suited for money).

483
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: April 02, 2021, 03:43:03 pm »
Actions are a resource in a Dominion that you can spend. It makes absolutely no sense to have negative Actions. You can only spend resources that you actually have.

And you're free to have your cards follow that rule if you wish. As of now, there is no ruling one way or another on whether Actions or Buys can go negative, so you can't really say whether it makes sense or not if there's no precedent. Actions are only a counter after all, and there's nothing inherent to them that demands non-negativity.
None of the 4 basic resources of the game can become negative. It is common-sensical, you can only spend stuff that you have.
Coins also cannot become negative, Debt is a totally different mechanism.

I'm not sure what your concern is, of course none of the 4 basic resources go negative in the base game, that's the entire point of fan mechanics. If it were already part of the game, then we wouldn't be discussing it here. Coins and the like cannot become negative because there are no cards with negative vanilla bonuses, that's the entire point of this contest. And regardless, the possibility of negative actions doesn't mean you can continue to use actions while negative to become even further negative. If you have 0 or less actions, you can't play any actions. Your statement "you can't spend what you don't have" isn't applicable here. None of these fan cards allow you to do that.
So your card implies that you can once go under zero with Actions but once you are in the negative realm you cannot play another card with -Actions.
Dude, that’s hyperunintuitive.

Spend X Actions is a fine mechanism. -X Actions with some weird „you can go once below zero but once you are you cannot play other -X Action cards“ rule is not.

484
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: April 02, 2021, 07:55:44 am »
Actions are a resource in a Dominion that you can spend. It makes absolutely no sense to have negative Actions. You can only spend resources that you actually have.

And you're free to have your cards follow that rule if you wish. As of now, there is no ruling one way or another on whether Actions or Buys can go negative, so you can't really say whether it makes sense or not if there's no precedent. Actions are only a counter after all, and there's nothing inherent to them that demands non-negativity.
None of the 4 basic resources of the game can become negative. It is common-sensical, you can only spend stuff that you have.
Coins also cannot become negative, Debt is a totally different mechanism.

485
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: April 02, 2021, 03:04:07 am »
Actions are a resource in a Dominion that you can spend. It makes absolutely no sense to have negative Actions. You can only spend resources that you actually have.

486
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: April 01, 2021, 04:11:54 pm »
Stock Exchange is a weird one, it is too good and too expensive at the same time.

487
Indeed. I'd even argue that in terms of creating player interaction this is the most important element of the game.

488
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion: Cool Dudes
« on: March 23, 2021, 01:57:54 am »
Panner is a no go! You buy a copper and get an alchemist or a grand market or, or, ... ? ? ?


I agree that this has the potential to be broken when there are expensive Actions in the Kingdom.
But if you compare it with Haggler it is not that impressive. Haggler usually nets you a Province or whatever, a Gold and a $5 or a $5 and a $4.
This initially usually nets you a Silver and a $5 Action; it takes time to get to Gold. And then your deck is flooded with stop cards you don't really want.

489
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Money Bags
« on: March 19, 2021, 02:16:35 am »
Pilgrim's Route is weaker than TR yet costs more.

I disagree. First, there's the MB option to trade a coin for a Action, which you get to decide on after the effect has resolved for a second time (allowing you, for example, to replay a Smithy instead of a Village, knowing you won't draw Actions dead). More importantly, Pilgrim's Route can replay the card that drew it. I certainly have had the frustrating experience of playing a cantrip as the last Action card in my hand and drawing a TR or KC. The fact that this avoids that is non-nominal improvement.

(Whether it justifies going $4 to $5 is a different question, but I don't think you could price this the same as TR).
TR has an implicit +1 Action (in many Kingdoms TR is the main or only splitter). Pilgrim's Route only does if you play a Treasure.
The increase of control you mention is nice but does hardly compensate for the price increase and weaker effect. Not to mention that you cannot pull off TR+TR+... stuff.

So the card is a $3.

490
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Money Bags
« on: March 18, 2021, 08:08:08 am »
Pilgrim's Route is weaker than TR yet costs more.

491
Dominion Articles / Re: Menagerie Hot Takes
« on: March 14, 2021, 04:36:37 am »
Horses are not better, or worse, than drawing immediately. Paddock is the natural example: once the card is nonterminal the disadvantage of not drawing immediately sharply increases.
Horses also partly rely on intra-expansion synergies, Mastermind being the most obvious one.

492
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #105: Attack with Choices
« on: February 21, 2021, 02:56:17 am »
It's also a 5-cost card.  So people usually won't open with it (when a double-junk would hit the worst).
Well, you are the mathdude so let’s get mathy. Chances for one player to open 5/2 or 2/5 is 1/6. Thus the chance that at least one player can open with this is 30.5% in 2P respectively 42.1% in 3P.

Does not qualify as „unusual“ to me. Opening with a gainer or junker is usually good and if the card can do both, all the better.

493
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: February 19, 2021, 04:05:37 pm »
True that. But 2 Villagers is not a lot better than an Action and one Villager. Especially so if you most likely do have to spend that 2nd Villager immediately.

494
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: February 19, 2021, 03:40:33 am »
1. +1 Card, +2 Villagers is already an insane by itself, imo.
While I agree with your assessment of the card, I doubt that +1 Card, +2 Villagers would be overpowered at $5.

Why? Because DXV considered a cantrip Villager Village, i.e. +1 Card +1 Action +1 Villager, and viewed it as $4.5:

Quote
There was a village that was, cantrip, +1 Villager; man it's fine, you can argue about, does it need to cost $5, but it's nice.

495
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #105: Attack with Choices
« on: February 19, 2021, 12:55:47 am »
If you consider the Attack to be strong, you should think more than twice about making it a cantrip. The only two official cantrip Attacks are either weak or hard to get get.

496
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #105: Attack with Choices
« on: February 18, 2021, 12:14:58 pm »
2 Coins instead of 2 Cards would be a simple way to nerf it.

497
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #105: Attack with Choices
« on: February 18, 2021, 03:52:19 am »


Redoubt should probably be $4; compare it to Young Witch. Rook's wording is ambiguous as it could be parsed "When you [trash this or discard it] during Clean-up"; I don't think most people would interpret it this way but still.
I fear that this is even too good at $4. Sure, Young Witch is fairly weak so it is not the best benchmark but this looks far stronger.

498
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #105: Attack with Choices
« on: February 17, 2021, 02:13:08 pm »
I misread and though this includes the active player. My bad.

499
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #105: Attack with Choices
« on: February 17, 2021, 01:13:39 pm »


I found a way to make Scout viable. In some sense.
I like this but I am not sure whether it coul be too pile-y if it includes Green. If you play two of those in one turn, you can empty half the Province pile in one turn.

500
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #105: Attack with Choices
« on: February 17, 2021, 09:46:28 am »
Im a bit of a mess this week, but here is my current submission: a pillage variant with a choice for the victims



This is probably broken in some way. but ill fix it later

Edit 2:
I simplified the card, as it was too wordy. this should contain the essence of it, and still have choice. now its always a "pillage away their best card, but increase their handsize by one"


Edit 3:
Wording change to buff it a bit.


Edit 4: added art, cleaned the wording a bit per BBobs suggestion, and buffed it to +3 cards.


Im wondering if anyone has any further feedback or questions about it.
I think this can be brutal with a normal down to X handsize Attack. In the absence of other handsize Attacks it could be too weak. Sure, the opponents have to discard their best card but they nonetheless net draw one. But then again it could be too harsh in an engine, you simply first discard their splitters and then their non-terminals.

This is incredibly difficult to judge without having played with the card (we simply don't have enough experience with Pillage style handsize attacks, Pillage alone as one shot illustrates their harshness but that's about it) and my hunch that this could quickly switch from weak to harsh could be totally wrong. Definitely test it against money as a simple benchmark and as money decks don't rely on crucial cards like villages.

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 62

Page created in 0.349 seconds with 18 queries.