Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 [All]

Author Topic: Empires speculation  (Read 12088 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

trivialknot

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 757
  • Respect: +1174
    • View Profile
Empires speculation
« on: May 12, 2016, 08:49:10 pm »
0

Between the Empires previews and Empires release, we only have two weeks for wild mass guessing!  What will the $14 event do?  How will we be able to bid? etc.

Post your most wild-eyed ideas here.  If you were correct, you will earn bragging rights, and if you were incorrect we'll just pretend it was a fan card all along, well it is the fan card forum.  Obviously playtesters can't participate.
Logged

pacovf

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3500
  • Multiediting poster
  • Respect: +3839
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #1 on: May 12, 2016, 08:56:06 pm »
+2

Since both are sideways, and who said that cards were the only things that could have multiple types

Quote
Sanctuary: Event-Landmark, 2$
Put a card from your hand facedown under this.

When scoring, 1VP per card if there's a copy of it under this.

Probably rife with balance problems, but eh. Obviously cards in the Sanctuary don't count as being in their original owner's decks.
Logged
pacovf has a neopets account.  It has 999 hours logged.  All his neopets are named "Jessica".  I guess that must be his ex.

singletee

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 915
  • Shuffle iT Username: singletee
  • Gold, Silver, Copper, Let's Jam!
  • Respect: +1609
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #2 on: May 12, 2016, 08:56:51 pm »
0

Bidding will be a once-per-turn event that players can buy. When someone buys it, everyone will be able to bid VP chips to receive some kind of cool reward, like an extra-powerful card. Bidding will be once around, with the player whose turn it is having the final bid, because who has the time for multiple rounds of bidding in a turn?

trivialknot

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 757
  • Respect: +1174
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #3 on: May 12, 2016, 09:01:14 pm »
0

Bidding could be a sort of dutch auction.  For example:

Victory/Gathering card - 12 debt
4 VP
When anyone buys a kingdom card, place a debt token on this supply.  When you buy this, remove all debt tokens from this supply, and lose an equal number of debt tokens.
Logged

pacovf

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3500
  • Multiediting poster
  • Respect: +3839
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #4 on: May 12, 2016, 09:03:16 pm »
0

It looks likely that the bidding will be triggered by an event, and that it will be done with debt tokens, rather than VP tokens.
Logged
pacovf has a neopets account.  It has 999 hours logged.  All his neopets are named "Jessica".  I guess that must be his ex.

singletee

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 915
  • Shuffle iT Username: singletee
  • Gold, Silver, Copper, Let's Jam!
  • Respect: +1609
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #5 on: May 12, 2016, 09:33:47 pm »
+1

It looks likely that the bidding will be triggered by an event, and that it will be done with debt tokens, rather than VP tokens.

I do see a potential problem with bidding using debt. On particular boards where stuff can be accomplished without buying, taking a lot of debt is not much worse than taking a little debt. So we might end up with a situation where everyone keeps bidding higher with no incentive to stop. Even if you limit bidding to one go-around, it would still be a competition to see who can name the highest number (hint, it's whoever gets to bid last). Either of these is pretty bad. You could avoid it by placing a cap on the amount of debt you can bid, but that seems inelegant.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9191
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #6 on: May 12, 2016, 09:41:35 pm »
+1

It looks likely that the bidding will be triggered by an event, and that it will be done with debt tokens, rather than VP tokens.

I do see a potential problem with bidding using debt. On particular boards where stuff can be accomplished without buying, taking a lot of debt is not much worse than taking a little debt. So we might end up with a situation where everyone keeps bidding higher with no incentive to stop. Even if you limit bidding to one go-around, it would still be a competition to see who can name the highest number (hint, it's whoever gets to bid last). Either of these is pretty bad. You could avoid it by placing a cap on the amount of debt you can bid, but that seems inelegant.

That's why I think it'll be a one-time bid at the start of the game.  The kingdom might have stuff that lets you get by without buying anything, but you won't be able to buy that stuff until you pay off your starting debt.
Logged

trivialknot

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 757
  • Respect: +1174
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #7 on: May 12, 2016, 09:44:39 pm »
0

Maybe something like this:
Quote
Auction - $1 Event
Once per turn: +1 Buy.  Choose a non-victory card in the supply.  Each player may call out a positive integer, starting with the player on your left.  The person who called the highest number takes that number of debt tokens and gains the card.

Obviously you'd need a way to deal with ties, and it's already too many words.
Logged

trivialknot

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 757
  • Respect: +1174
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #8 on: May 12, 2016, 09:46:23 pm »
0

If the bidding is attached to an event, then you can't buy it unless you've already gotten rid of all your debt.
Logged

ConMan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1400
  • Respect: +1706
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #9 on: May 12, 2016, 09:53:37 pm »
0

I can imagine a Landmark that's something like

"When you buy this, you may overpay. For each $2 you overpay, you may take 1 VP token from this. | At the start of each player's turn, add +VP to this."

It's the old "overpay for VP" Event/card that kept getting identified as kind of broken, but if the number of VP is limited by the number of turns it's maybe not so bad.

Alternatively, one that has you place a huge stack of VP tokens on it at the start of the game, and each turn you can either pay $1 or $2 for each token on it to get them all, or else remove a token.
Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7096
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9416
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #10 on: May 12, 2016, 10:14:16 pm »
+2

I'm uncertain why no one has suggested simultaneous blind bids.  That's what I'd expect rather than going around the table.
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9713
  • Respect: +10779
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #11 on: May 12, 2016, 10:51:45 pm »
0

I'm uncertain why no one has suggested simultaneous blind bids.  That's what I'd expect rather than going around the table.

I don't see how that's practical in real life play. I suppose you could take some number of VP chips from the supply and hide them under your hand, but people could get an idea of how many are left. You can't just do that with your own chips because people could see how many you have left.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7096
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9416
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #12 on: May 12, 2016, 11:48:00 pm »
0

I'm uncertain why no one has suggested simultaneous blind bids.  That's what I'd expect rather than going around the table.

I don't see how that's practical in real life play. I suppose you could take some number of VP chips from the supply and hide them under your hand, but people could get an idea of how many are left. You can't just do that with your own chips because people could see how many you have left.

"Setup: Each player takes 10 VP tokens at the start of the game."
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

spiralstaircase

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Respect: +453
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #13 on: May 13, 2016, 03:00:16 am »
0

Since both are sideways, and who said that cards were the only things that could have multiple types

Yeah - I'm guessing this will also turn out to be why we have the Gathering type.

Quote
Blathering - Event-Landmark - $0
Once per turn: +1 Buy; Put a VP on every non-Gathering supply pile. When any player buys a card from those piles, they take the VP.

...or something along those lines.
Logged

Accatitippi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1153
  • Shuffle iT Username: Accatitippi
  • Silver is underraided
  • Respect: +1798
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #14 on: May 13, 2016, 03:57:23 am »
+1

I'm also in the camp that believes bidding will happen with vp's. As others said, debt could be broken with power gainers, and bidding debt at the start of the game could work but it sounds kinda unfun. But who knows. A landmark that dishes out vp's for debt at the start of the game wouldn't be unbalanced, but, again, will it be fun? I mean, there's a player that won't start playing for a while, I'm not sure I'd be thrilled.
Anyway, I'm more interested in knowing what we'll be bidding for. The right of selecting first a unique card from a pool at the start of the game? The same thing at some key point of the game?

As a famous game designer once said, it's the goal that's important, not the bidding.
Logged

pst

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584
  • Respect: +907
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #15 on: May 13, 2016, 08:12:10 am »
+1

What will the $14 event do?

"The game ends now".

So when this is in play even a small lead is a threat of immediate win.
Logged

LostPhoenix

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 272
  • Shuffle iT Username: Lost Phoenix
  • Your resident lurker
  • Respect: +326
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #16 on: May 13, 2016, 10:08:55 am »
+2

Some names I think may show up: Amphitheater, Aqueduct, Bailey, Arch, Forum, Realm.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2016, 12:39:27 pm by LostPhoenix »
Logged

spiralstaircase

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Respect: +453
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #17 on: May 13, 2016, 12:11:55 pm »
+1

Usurer
Action - Attack - $4
+$2
Each other player takes  ⟨1⟩
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9713
  • Respect: +10779
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #18 on: May 13, 2016, 12:37:27 pm »
+3

I'm guessing we won't see an attack that gives other player's debt, because it's basically just a more harsh version of the - token.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

Gubump

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1538
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gubump
  • Respect: +1685
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #19 on: May 13, 2016, 12:38:35 pm »
+2

Usurer
Action - Attack - $4
+$2
Each other player takes  ⟨1⟩

Except for the edge cases of Storyteller and Coppersmith, isn't this strictly better than Cutpurse, since it never misses and takes away the same amount of $?
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Shard of Honor and his Dominion Card Image Generator (the new fork).
If you're having font issues with the generator, click this link and click on the button to request temporary access to the demo server that loads the font.

spiralstaircase

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Respect: +453
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #20 on: May 13, 2016, 12:41:16 pm »
0

Both fair points.  I was more concerned with showing off that i'd found some good brackets to use for debt costs than I was with balance :-)
Logged

Elestan

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 472
  • Respect: +429
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #21 on: May 13, 2016, 12:49:37 pm »
+1

I'm guessing we won't see an attack that gives other player's debt, because it's basically just a more harsh version of the - token.

Also because if you give someone a debt token when they happen to have no economy, they're pinned forever.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9191
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #22 on: May 13, 2016, 02:02:41 pm »
+1

I'm also in the camp that believes bidding will happen with vp's. As others said, debt could be broken with power gainers, and bidding debt at the start of the game could work but it sounds kinda unfun. But who knows. A landmark that dishes out vp's for debt at the start of the game wouldn't be unbalanced, but, again, will it be fun? I mean, there's a player that won't start playing for a while, I'm not sure I'd be thrilled.
Anyway, I'm more interested in knowing what we'll be bidding for. The right of selecting first a unique card from a pool at the start of the game? The same thing at some key point of the game?

As a famous game designer once said, it's the goal that's important, not the bidding.

I feel like bidding with VP isn't great because the value of 1VP swings so wildly depending on the board.  Sometimes 1VP decides victory, sometimes the margin is in the triple digits.  I guess coin/debt value can swing too, but I think it's a much smaller range.



Maybe the bidding will be something else entirely, like...

Landlord
Landmark
Setup: At the start of the game, each player may bid* from 0 to 6, taking that number of Estates and twice that number of VP tokens.  Each player's starting deck consists of 7 Copper and those Estates.

*Simultaneously, using VP tokens or something.

I think VP tokens work here because it's not auction-style.
Logged

Accatitippi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1153
  • Shuffle iT Username: Accatitippi
  • Silver is underraided
  • Respect: +1798
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #23 on: May 13, 2016, 02:10:35 pm »
0

Moving here the discussion about Landmark speculation:
I think there will be at least one that cares about Curses. +1 vp token when you gain a Curse would be interesting, I think.
One for trashing Provinces could be cool, but it would need to be balanced against Province mills. 3-4vp per trashed Province could maybe kinda work?
Logged

trivialknot

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 757
  • Respect: +1174
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #24 on: May 13, 2016, 02:17:59 pm »
0

How would a debt attack work?  Maybe something like this:

Quote
Action - $5
Until your next turn, when anyone buys a card, they take 1 debt.  Now and at the beginning of your next turn, +1 Buy.
-------
While this is in play, cards cost $1 and 1 debt less, but not less than zero.
Logged

spiralstaircase

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Respect: +453
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #25 on: May 13, 2016, 02:22:49 pm »
0

Trying to fix my card above, you could do something like:

Usurer
Action - Attack - $4
+$2
Each other player reveals their hand.  If they reveal more treasure cards than they have debt tokens, they take ⟨1⟩.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9191
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #26 on: May 13, 2016, 02:23:43 pm »
+2

How would a debt attack work?  Maybe something like this:

Quote
Action - $5
Until your next turn, when anyone buys a card, they take 1 debt.  Now and at the beginning of your next turn, +1 Buy.
-------
While this is in play, cards cost $1 and 1 debt less, but not less than zero.

It could be the long-awaited cost increasing card.

Tollgate
$4 - Action-Attack-Duration
At the start of your next turn:
+$3
+1 Buy

While this is in play, cards in the Supply cost <1> more.

The two main problem with cost increasers is that they can lock people out of the game (can't even buy Copper!) and they're confusing with cost reducers.  Using debt solves both of those problems.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2016, 02:25:03 pm by eHalcyon »
Logged

trivialknot

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 757
  • Respect: +1174
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #27 on: May 13, 2016, 02:26:05 pm »
+1

I feel like bidding with VP isn't great because the value of 1VP swings so wildly depending on the board.  Sometimes 1VP decides victory, sometimes the margin is in the triple digits.  I guess coin/debt value can swing too, but I think it's a much smaller range.
But the whole point of bidding is to determine the right price for something.  If we're playing a game where 1 VP is super valuable, then bids will be low.  If we're playing a game where 1 VP is nearly worthless, then bids will be high.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9191
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #28 on: May 13, 2016, 02:48:36 pm »
0

I feel like bidding with VP isn't great because the value of 1VP swings so wildly depending on the board.  Sometimes 1VP decides victory, sometimes the margin is in the triple digits.  I guess coin/debt value can swing too, but I think it's a much smaller range.
But the whole point of bidding is to determine the right price for something.  If we're playing a game where 1 VP is super valuable, then bids will be low.  If we're playing a game where 1 VP is nearly worthless, then bids will be high.

I'm thinking of the physical limitations.  You still need a way to track that, and there probably aren't enough VP tokens to account for the highs.
Logged

Elestan

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 472
  • Respect: +429
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #29 on: May 13, 2016, 03:54:24 pm »
0

Trying to fix my card above, you could do something like:

Usurer
Action - Attack - $4
+$2
Each other player reveals their hand.  If they reveal more treasure cards than they have debt tokens, they take ⟨1⟩.

Not all treasure cards give coin.  Crown, for example.  Even if they have treasures, they might be at risk from trashing attacks.
Logged

drsteelhammer

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1527
  • Shuffle iT Username: drsteelhammer
  • Respect: +1471
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #30 on: May 13, 2016, 03:58:49 pm »
0

Usurer
Action - Attack - $4
+$2
Each other player takes  ⟨1⟩

Except for the edge cases of Storyteller and Coppersmith, isn't this strictly better than Cutpurse, since it never misses and takes away the same amount of $?

No it's way worse than Cutpurse since it doesn't reduce handsize, the only thing Cutpurse is good for after the first reshuffle
Logged
Join the Dominion League!

There is no bad shuffle that can not be surmounted by scorn.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9191
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #31 on: May 13, 2016, 04:03:00 pm »
0

Usurer
Action - Attack - $4
+$2
Each other player takes  ⟨1⟩

Except for the edge cases of Storyteller and Coppersmith, isn't this strictly better than Cutpurse, since it never misses and takes away the same amount of $?

No it's way worse than Cutpurse since it doesn't reduce handsize, the only thing Cutpurse is good for after the first reshuffle

Cutpurse can still hit Copper after the first reshuffle...?

Having a smaller handsize doesn't usually hurt outside of whatever it was in your hand that was lost.  Sometimes it matters (e.g. Cellar) but mostly it's about what you had to throw away.  It's rarely a problem to discard two Estates to Militia.  Cutpurse mainly hurts because you lose $1 when it hits, which is what that version of Usurer is doing.
Logged

Mic Qsenoch

  • 2015 DS Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1709
  • Respect: +4329
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #32 on: May 13, 2016, 04:54:29 pm »
+4

Cutpurse can still hit Copper after the first reshuffle...?

Having a smaller handsize doesn't usually hurt outside of whatever it was in your hand that was lost.  Sometimes it matters (e.g. Cellar) but mostly it's about what you had to throw away.  It's rarely a problem to discard two Estates to Militia.  Cutpurse mainly hurts because you lose $1 when it hits, which is what that version of Usurer is doing.

I can't say I agree with what drsteelhamm3r said about Cutpurse, but usually losing cards from your hand, even crappy ones, is a lot worse than you're suggesting. You can't use them for the  Cellar-types and you can't trash them as easily. You can't Ambassador them or pass them with Masq. If you reshuffle during your turn then they're in your deck, which is bad if they're junk and can also further disrupt certain drawing cards (Herald, SP, etc.). It means you need more draw before you have the whole deck in hand to do gain and play.

There are some kingdom cards where having the junk cards in the discard is a boon, but overall the balance is strongly with having them in hand. And it can really matter for how good your turns are and how quickly you get your deck in order.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9191
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #33 on: May 13, 2016, 07:16:15 pm »
0

Cutpurse can still hit Copper after the first reshuffle...?

Having a smaller handsize doesn't usually hurt outside of whatever it was in your hand that was lost.  Sometimes it matters (e.g. Cellar) but mostly it's about what you had to throw away.  It's rarely a problem to discard two Estates to Militia.  Cutpurse mainly hurts because you lose $1 when it hits, which is what that version of Usurer is doing.

I can't say I agree with what drsteelhamm3r said about Cutpurse, but usually losing cards from your hand, even crappy ones, is a lot worse than you're suggesting. You can't use them for the  Cellar-types and you can't trash them as easily. You can't Ambassador them or pass them with Masq. If you reshuffle during your turn then they're in your deck, which is bad if they're junk and can also further disrupt certain drawing cards (Herald, SP, etc.). It means you need more draw before you have the whole deck in hand to do gain and play.

There are some kingdom cards where having the junk cards in the discard is a boon, but overall the balance is strongly with having them in hand. And it can really matter for how good your turns are and how quickly you get your deck in order.

Fair enough.
Logged

pst

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584
  • Respect: +907
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #34 on: May 14, 2016, 12:20:14 am »
0

What will the $14 event do?

"The game ends now".

So when this is in play even a small lead is a threat of immediate win.

Not correct, so this was obviously a fan card all along. I think now it should yield you some negative VP before ending the game, so that not a very minor lead is enough. Then I think it could work, but I haven't tested.
Logged

drsteelhammer

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1527
  • Shuffle iT Username: drsteelhammer
  • Respect: +1471
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #35 on: June 01, 2016, 07:16:51 pm »
+2

So far, I find the split piles mechanic the most interesting. Since our statisticians predict more split piles than we have already seen, what could those be?

So far, we had a terminal money card that has a way to get to the bottom card which is a lot more money, so basically a combination of ecnomoy/payload with a little synergy. Then we have a village where you have to dig through a less desirable pile of cards, but they become pretty good after getting some of the villages aswell. Lastly, we had an attack that needs support, and the support comes with it! I'm pretty sure Catapult will become one of my favourite cards.

So, what other synergistic concepts are possible with this?

I expect that there will be a split pile with a draw card the bottom since there hasn't been any yet. My idea would be a terminal draw card at the bottom with some cheap cantrip on top for $2-3, which you may play from your hand after the terminal draw card (basically giving you the +action back you needed to play the draw card).

Getting a bit crazier: Maybe there is also an alt-vp card under a bunch of action cards? It would be a bit weird with the pile size, although you could play with 6action cards on top and four alt vp cards on the bottom and adding two alt vp cards in multiplayer. (4->6 seems in line with 8->12)
That said, it hasn't been mentioned that the split is 5-5 all the time, right? So it might happen. There could also be some other crazy splits like 4-4-4 or 4-4-2, which I would love to see aswell.
Logged
Join the Dominion League!

There is no bad shuffle that can not be surmounted by scorn.

Seprix

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5607
  • Respect: +3681
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #36 on: June 01, 2016, 08:03:44 pm »
+1

Having to spend 1 Debt to be able to buy a card isn't as scary as a stacking debt. I know it's basically just a silly variant of the -1 Card token with the version I'd like, but I wouldn't want to have people stacked with debt. I could see an attack giving up to 3 debt maximum per turn though, and that would be okay. It wouldn't even work if someone was 3+ in debt already.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2016, 08:05:36 pm by Seprix »
Logged
DM me for ideas on a new article, either here or on Discord (I check Discord way more often)

trivialknot

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 757
  • Respect: +1174
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #37 on: June 02, 2016, 05:25:56 pm »
0

Oh no, the rule book might appear at any moment and I haven't made enough speculations!

I think there will be a split pile where the top card can trash things from the supply, and the bottom card has an on-trash bonus.  For example:

$2 Action
+2 cards
Trash a kingdom card from the supply.

$4 Action-Victory
Trash a card from your hand.

2 VP

When you trash this, +2 VP.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2016, 05:27:08 pm by trivialknot »
Logged

Seprix

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5607
  • Respect: +3681
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #38 on: June 02, 2016, 05:28:46 pm »
0

...

Not a bad idea. There is another card that can trash from the supply, so it is possible for sure. There is already Gladiator, that allows you to get to Fortune quicker if you get a card your opponent does not have.
Logged
DM me for ideas on a new article, either here or on Discord (I check Discord way more often)

LostPhoenix

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 272
  • Shuffle iT Username: Lost Phoenix
  • Your resident lurker
  • Respect: +326
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #39 on: June 07, 2016, 12:52:48 am »
0

Some names I think may show up: Amphitheater, Aqueduct, Bailey, Arch, Forum, Realm.

Aqueduct, Forum, Triumphal Arch. Close enough.
Logged

Seprix

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5607
  • Respect: +3681
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #40 on: June 07, 2016, 11:13:33 am »
0

I actually expected an Emperor card.
Logged
DM me for ideas on a new article, either here or on Discord (I check Discord way more often)

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9191
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #41 on: June 07, 2016, 01:52:25 pm »
0

How would a debt attack work?  Maybe something like this:

Quote
Action - $5
Until your next turn, when anyone buys a card, they take 1 debt.  Now and at the beginning of your next turn, +1 Buy.
-------
While this is in play, cards cost $1 and 1 debt less, but not less than zero.

It could be the long-awaited cost increasing card.

Tollgate
$4 - Action-Attack-Duration
At the start of your next turn:
+$3
+1 Buy

While this is in play, cards in the Supply cost <1> more.

The two main problem with cost increasers is that they can lock people out of the game (can't even buy Copper!) and they're confusing with cost reducers.  Using debt solves both of those problems.

I think this can count as a prediction of Tax.
Logged

pacovf

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3500
  • Multiediting poster
  • Respect: +3839
    • View Profile
Re: Empires speculation
« Reply #42 on: June 10, 2016, 01:09:44 pm »
+1

I actually expected an Emperor card.

You can play Overlord as Crown. Then start spreading the Civil Code all over Europe.
Logged
pacovf has a neopets account.  It has 999 hours logged.  All his neopets are named "Jessica".  I guess that must be his ex.
Pages: 1 2 [All]
 

Page created in 0.063 seconds with 20 queries.