Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 33 34 [35] 36 37 ... 327  All

Author Topic: Weekly Design Contests #1 - #100  (Read 1639174 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

UmbrageOfSnow

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 167
  • Shuffle iT Username: Umbrageofsnow
  • Respect: +301
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #850 on: November 29, 2018, 02:51:11 pm »
0

Gilt feeds you other stuff when trashed,
If that is your intention, you have to word it differently. As it is currently worded it only trashes a Treasure at the end of the turn if it is in play, i.e. if you trash Gilt via another card like Lilies this Upgrade effect doesn't happen.

It's worded how I mean it to be worded, I think it might be perfectly reasonable to get a Spice Merchant with Gilt/Lily, and that shouldn't gain anything. I just mean that it is capable of basically being trashed twice if you're gaining a $2, but I've also updated the wording in regard to the Estates, because I do think that was an over-nerf on reflection.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2018, 02:52:40 pm by UmbrageOfSnow »
Logged

UmbrageOfSnow

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 167
  • Shuffle iT Username: Umbrageofsnow
  • Respect: +301
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #851 on: November 29, 2018, 02:55:10 pm »
0


Sure, the Transmogrify / Salt of Earth like pile control is nice but in order to pull that off you'd need to draw 10 cards: 5 Lilies and 5 cards you don't want anymore. And this or next turn you'd have to regain 5 cards to feed Lilies.
I don't see any craziness.

You gain mid-turn from Lily. You don't need 5 cards you don't want anymore, you need 1 province and 4 cantrips.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +382
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #852 on: November 29, 2018, 03:26:25 pm »
0

It's worded how I mean it to be worded
Fine but then there is nothing special about Gilt being fed to Lily except for being cheap which only matters if Buys are cheap to come by.
Logged

UmbrageOfSnow

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 167
  • Shuffle iT Username: Umbrageofsnow
  • Respect: +301
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #853 on: November 29, 2018, 03:45:25 pm »
0

Fine but then there is nothing special about Gilt being fed to Lily except for being cheap which only matters if Buys are cheap to come by.

On one hand I don't want to continue this because it feels like it's pointless and you've made up your mind, and also like some of your concerns were addressed by what I changed, but I do feel like you're missing something here.

If there is a $2 Action in the kingdom and you spend $1 and 1 Buy getting a Gilt, you trash it twice before you have to buy another one, because you gain another card to trash. (And it used to be Estates, but I decided that was too nerfed with regard to the early game.)

$1 and a Buy every two turns is not a big ask of the kingdom, there are (lazy approximation using Ctrl + F) 58 + Buy cards, it's not that rare to have a +Buy, and you usually want it. And when the endgame comes around and you're buying multiple victory cards, you're not trashing Gilts, it's a middlegame thing, where sometimes you get a $5 and a $3 on that $8 hand, but often you have 2 Buys and $6 and get a $5 or whatever.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +382
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #854 on: November 29, 2018, 03:58:51 pm »
0

Fine but then there is nothing special about Gilt being fed to Lily except for being cheap which only matters if Buys are cheap to come by.
If there is a $2 Action in the kingdom and you spend $1 and 1 Buy getting a Gilt, you trash it twice before you have to buy another one, because you gain another card to trash. (And it used to be Estates, but I decided that was too nerfed with regard to the early game.)
I have no idea about what this is supposed to mean. Gilt trashes a card and (potentially) gains a card. It isn't, as you seem to imply, a net-gainer and thus doesn't contribute in this way as Lily fodder provider.
What I meant with cheap or spammable Buy is something like Market Square. Lots of Kingdoms have no extra Buys at all and lots of them have only terminal cards that provide the extra Buys. Terminal space is nearly always scarce so the Woddcutter variants compete with other engine components and it takes quite some effort to build your engine such that you always have several extra Buys per turn that allows you to regain Gilts.

So there isn't much interaction between the cards (as they are both slow trashers they are substitutes rather than, as it should be, complements). It seems far more likely that you will simply feed anything to Lily or use it to pile-drive Provinces.
Logged

UmbrageOfSnow

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 167
  • Shuffle iT Username: Umbrageofsnow
  • Respect: +301
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #855 on: November 29, 2018, 04:03:01 pm »
0

Okay, I get what you are saying now, almost want to delete my old comments, I feel dumb about this, wasn't getting quite what you were saying, and wasn't communicating well. Also, mid-typing I confused myself with a previous, unposted, version of the card and that further muddied things. Almost want to go delete things, but that would be even more confusing for poor souls reading this.

Anyway, a lot of what I was trying to say is about having 5 of them potentially being broken in not-that-rare kingdoms. Broken when you have a solid engine = broken.

The underdog player not having to lower piles was a thing I was meaning to talk about somewhere in there. And I do believe costing $1 is a form of synergy, as is being able to gain Lily by trashing Silver, as is being able to put Gilt back on top of the Lily remaining in the pile. Also, Gilt is only a copper trasher, which I think is relevant.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2018, 04:05:52 pm by UmbrageOfSnow »
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +382
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #856 on: November 29, 2018, 04:17:05 pm »
0

Anyway, a lot of what I was trying to say is about having 5 of them potentially being broken in not-that-rare kingdoms. Broken when you have a solid engine = broken.
Yeah, I totally agree with that although I think that it has more to do with the pile control than the VPs.


Quote
The underdog player not having to lower piles was a thing I was meaning to talk about somewhere in there. And I do believe costing $1 is a form of synergy, as is being able to gain Lily by trashing Silver, as is being able to put Gilt back on top of the Lily remaining in the pile.
$4s are never hard to get. I agree though that blocking the Lilies via Gilts returning to the pile is a nice feature.
What you seem to underestimate though is that the very situation in which you wanna actually use Gilts as Lily fodder requires and engine with decent draw and lots of Buys and my naive question is: can such an engine not do much better?

So I fear that the Lilies will never see the sun in lots of games. If you ignore Lily, Gilt is just a Copper trasher so you want at most 1 or 2 of them. Perhaps 3 to pull of some Upgrade tricks but then Gilt returns to the pile and makes it less likely that Lilies will appear.

I hate to sound harsh but there are simply too many issues with this to work well. You need a stronger Treasure on top with either independent strength or far stronger synergies (I understand why you limited the amount of Lilies to 3 but this comes at the cost of looser ties between bottom and top card; why work card for Gilt as fodder if there are only 3 Lilies) to make this split pile thingy work.
Logged

UmbrageOfSnow

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 167
  • Shuffle iT Username: Umbrageofsnow
  • Respect: +301
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #857 on: November 29, 2018, 04:29:42 pm »
0

I mean, part of it is that I think being ignored about 20-30% of the time is something to aim for. The problem is overshooting and winding up with Royal Seal.

I think/am worried that having 1 more Lily than your opponent gives enough endgame control that it's a big deal.

And yes, if it were it's own pile and didn't have anything else going on, you'd want 1 Gilt. But the upgrading Copper to Gilt on the way to oblivion is mandatory, it's a bit Rats-like (but admittedly less-so.)

So if both players go for it the pile will get moderately low without a lot of effort, you don't want it to self-trash the first time, but if both players wind up with 3 in deck at the same time, that's 1 left on the pile. The question is when only one player goes for it I think, but if it's the only copper trasher that seems unlikely, as well as if there is a bad trasher and you want some additional non-terminal trashing. If Counterfeit didn't have the +Buy and cost less, would it be ignored too often?
Logged

Kudasai

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 470
  • Respect: +289
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #858 on: November 29, 2018, 06:31:02 pm »
0

CHALLENGE #8 SPLIT PILE W/ ACTION AND CHEAPER TREASURE

Card Splits:
2-Players: 4 Timberlands on top / 4 Treants on bottom
3-6 Players: 6 Timberlands on top / 6 Treants on bottom

   

Clarifications:
-Victory cards with a scaling VP amount (Gardens, Duke, Vineyard, Fairground, Silk Road, Feodum, Humble Castle, King's Castle and Pasture) cannot be used with Timberland. :(
-Monster is a type I made up to help players remember that while that card is in the Supply, it has an effect on certain parts of the game. In this case, Victory cards cost $2 more.
« Last Edit: December 01, 2018, 01:58:55 pm by Kudasai »
Logged

terminalCopper

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 331
  • Respect: +759
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #859 on: November 30, 2018, 02:59:24 am »
+1

CHALLENGE #8 SPLIT PILE W/ ACTION AND CHEAPER TREASURE

   

Clarifications:
-Victory cards with a varying VP amount (Gardens, Duke, Vineyard, Fairground, Silk Road, Feodum, Humble Castle, King's Castle and Pasture) cannot be used with Timberland. :(
-Monster is a type I made up to help players remember that while that card is in the Supply, it has an effect on certain parts of the game. In this case, Victory cards cost $2 more.

According to what the cards do, Treant is closer to be a treasure than Timberland. I think that Treant is OP. But aside from not really being a treasure, Timberland looks decent.
Logged

terminalCopper

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 331
  • Respect: +759
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #860 on: November 30, 2018, 03:11:42 am »
0



I think/am worried that having 1 more Lily than your opponent gives enough endgame control that it's a big deal.

Certainly not, and it is not even close.
A normal engine often catches up a 3-5 province split against BM, corresponding to 12 lily plays. Also, almost no board will give you the time for that, most engine boards end before T15. I don't expect your first lily play
much before T10, unless you buy gilt early, which is terrible, similar to opening small castle.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +382
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #861 on: November 30, 2018, 07:57:20 am »
0

I don't know, Timberland is as aweful for Copper trashing as Raze (yet Raze is cheaper and can trash other stuff) while the Stonemason tricks with Silver and Gold don't seem to make it shine that much.
So I fear that in any game with other trashers those Treants will never see the light of day. The interaction with Treant, i.e. conversion into Peddlers, is also not that huge.

Perhaps give Timberland 2VPs?
Logged

Kudasai

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 470
  • Respect: +289
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #862 on: November 30, 2018, 02:56:54 pm »
+1

First I should mention I've changed Timberland and Treant a bit (v0.2), but the basic premise is the same so I think I can still respond to comments about v0.1 without too much confusion.

I don't know, Timberland is as aweful for Copper trashing as Raze (yet Raze is cheaper and can trash other stuff) while the Stonemason tricks with Silver and Gold don't seem to make it shine that much.
So I fear that in any game with other trashers those Treants will never see the light of day. The interaction with Treant, i.e. conversion into Peddlers, is also not that huge.

Perhaps give Timberland 2VPs?

With Timberland I think you might have missed that the cards gained cost less than Timberland and not the Treasure returned to the Supply. I think this makes it quite a bit more powerful. Too powerful in my mind so I changed it around a bit. My hope is that Timberland is a weak $4 cost at the start of the game and then when the Treant pile is revealed it gets a big boast. In addition to Treant being able to turn Timberland into a Peddler, the very addition of having Treant in the Supply makes Timberland cost $6 and thus it can now gain cards costing up to $5.

Timberland is a great value at this point, but the big question is how fast can you get to that point? Are all the good $5 cost cards gone by then? Are all those Timberlands you bought getting in the way? I don't really have answers to these questions yet. :(


According to what the cards do, Treant is closer to be a treasure than Timberland. I think that Treant is OP. But aside from not really being a treasure, Timberland looks decent.

Aside from the challenge calling for a Treasure card, Timberland is mainly a Treasure so that it can get rid of itself if needed later in the game. It's a pretty bad trasher so I thought this should at least be included.

Treant is quite strong, but there a few things that hopefully keep it in check: (1) It cost $8. (2) It relies on Victory cards that generally are dead cards in your deck to function, so there is a lot of risk there. (3) Victory cards cost $2 more while Treant cards are in the Supply, so it's much harder to get the Victory cards required to make Treant function.

It could still be broken though. This set came out a bit more complex than I had wanted and I'm now having a hard time determining if it's balanced. There is a lot of subtly between Timberland, Treant and numerous other cards that I can't really account for all the scenarios that could pan out. But hey, it doesn't actually have to be balanced. I just need Aquila to think it is! :)
Logged

Kudasai

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 470
  • Respect: +289
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #863 on: November 30, 2018, 03:10:29 pm »
0



Investment is inspired by Plowing from this very thread and similar to something that DXV did during playtesting. Could obviously be too crazy:

Quote
Early on I had a Duration card that sat there accumulating Coffers tokens until you popped it.

Banker creates an incentive to keep Investment in play longer than you want anyway. It also becomes better if there are other Durations in the Kingdom. It could still be too weak though and require something extra.

Really cool concept. Token generation each turn does seem quite strong. There doesn't seem to be a lot of drawback to just rushing Investments.

If this proved to be a problem, I could see this working well if a token or two were generated each time you reshuffled. Players would now have to choose between components that speed up their deck reshuffles or getting Investments. Banker's draw would also pair very nicely with this.
Logged

crlundy

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 269
  • Shuffle iT Username: crlundy
  • Respect: +324
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #864 on: November 30, 2018, 03:33:51 pm »
0



Investment is inspired by Plowing from this very thread and similar to something that DXV did during playtesting. Could obviously be too crazy:

Quote
Early on I had a Duration card that sat there accumulating Coffers tokens until you popped it.

Banker creates an incentive to keep Investment in play longer than you want anyway. It also becomes better if there are other Durations in the Kingdom. It could still be too weak though and require something extra.

Interestingly, Banker is also reminiscent of a Renaissance outtake:

There was also a duration cantrip giving +$2 next turn, that had a 2-sided State where the 2nd side had you draw a card per Duration at the start of each turn. It upgraded all your Durations. Then the States died, but I had a Project that did that, and I had the duration cantrip with no associated State.
Logged

UmbrageOfSnow

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 167
  • Shuffle iT Username: Umbrageofsnow
  • Respect: +301
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #865 on: November 30, 2018, 04:00:54 pm »
0



I think/am worried that having 1 more Lily than your opponent gives enough endgame control that it's a big deal.

Certainly not, and it is not even close.
A normal engine often catches up a 3-5 province split against BM, corresponding to 12 lily plays. Also, almost no board will give you the time for that, most engine boards end before T15. I don't expect your first lily play
much before T10, unless you buy gilt early, which is terrible, similar to opening small castle.

I agree it's irrelevant in Engine vs. BM, I'm worried about the split being too relevant in the Engine mirror in the cases where the card is relevant.
Logged

UmbrageOfSnow

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 167
  • Shuffle iT Username: Umbrageofsnow
  • Respect: +301
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #866 on: November 30, 2018, 04:56:14 pm »
0

CHALLENGE #8 SPLIT PILE W/ ACTION AND CHEAPER TREASURE

   

Would Treant's wording look better if it were something like:
Reveal and discard up to 3 cards from your hand. +1$ and +1 card per {VP} they are worth in isolation, ignoring all other cards you have ?

It's a bit longer I think, but avoids defining variable VP.  And slightly buffs the interaction with Castles I guess.

I'm just thinking that variable VP isn't an officially defined term anywhere, is it? And so isn't it worth something to not add that complication, even though everyone on these forums obviously knows what it means
Logged

Violet CLM

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 170
  • Respect: +450
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #867 on: November 30, 2018, 05:07:11 pm »
0

Would Treant's wording look better if it were something like:
Reveal and discard up to 3 cards from your hand. +1$ and +1 card per {VP} they are worth in isolation, ignoring all other cards you have ?
Might interact oddly with Wolf Den.
Logged

UmbrageOfSnow

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 167
  • Shuffle iT Username: Umbrageofsnow
  • Respect: +301
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #868 on: November 30, 2018, 05:10:27 pm »
0

Would Treant's wording look better if it were something like:
Reveal and discard up to 3 cards from your hand. +1$ and +1 card per {VP} they are worth in isolation, ignoring all other cards you have ?
Might interact oddly with Wolf Den.
Wolf Den says "when scoring"
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9719
  • Respect: +10792
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #869 on: November 30, 2018, 05:47:17 pm »
0

Would Treant's wording look better if it were something like:
Reveal and discard up to 3 cards from your hand. +1$ and +1 card per {VP} they are worth in isolation, ignoring all other cards you have ?
Might interact oddly with Wolf Den.
Wolf Den says "when scoring"

And even if it didn't, it would have no impact here. Wolf Den doesn't make a single Province worth 3 instead of 6. The Province is still worth 6, and Wolf Den is worth -3.
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

Kudasai

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 470
  • Respect: +289
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #870 on: November 30, 2018, 05:48:50 pm »
0

CHALLENGE #8 SPLIT PILE W/ ACTION AND CHEAPER TREASURE

   

Would Treant's wording look better if it were something like:
Reveal and discard up to 3 cards from your hand. +1$ and +1 card per {VP} they are worth in isolation, ignoring all other cards you have ?

It's a bit longer I think, but avoids defining variable VP.  And slightly buffs the interaction with Castles I guess.

I'm just thinking that variable VP isn't an officially defined term anywhere, is it? And so isn't it worth something to not add that complication, even though everyone on these forums obviously knows what it means

Variable is not an official term, it's just a word I thought made sense. After reading your post though I can see some ambiguity with it. I don't think it's an official term, but the Dominion Strategy page for Victory cards defines that group as Scaling VP and that for me is a good enough reason to change it. Thanks for your input!
Logged

Aquila

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 525
  • Respect: +764
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #871 on: December 01, 2018, 03:29:47 am »
0

24 hours left before judgment.

   
I'm going to need to ask what you're doing with number of copies for each card Kudasai. I can't safely assume like with the other entries.
Logged

Tejayes

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 176
  • Respect: +132
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #872 on: December 01, 2018, 11:59:08 am »
+1

Busy week, and I was not feeling good. I was hoping to playtest this on Tabletop Simulator, and I still might if I get the chance today. Until then, here's the rough idea.



Quote
Magic Beans
Treasure - $2
-
$0
-
When you gain or trash this, trash at least one from your hand, then put this on the bottom of your deck.

Quote
Beanstalk
Action - $6
-
+1 Card
+1 Action
+$1
You may return a Treasure in your hand to the Supply, to gain a Gold onto your deck.

As I'm wont to do, I perhaps focused a bit more on the theme than the mechanics. But hey, I'm not looking to win this week (there are plenty of other split-pile ideas that I really want to see win and eventually play with).

Anyway, who in the right mind would trade away their belongings for a handful of so-called "Magic" Beans? They aren't worth a thing, and you can't even get rid of them that easily. Just you wait, though, as soon the Beanstalk with sprout. Then, you can finally make use of those silly Beans and even get yourself some Gold. Watch out for the Giant, though; he'll destroy your Beanstalk if he gets the chance and make you Curse ever getting those worthless Magic Beans.
Logged

faust

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3399
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +5206
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #873 on: December 01, 2018, 12:53:53 pm »
0

Can Magic Beans trash any number of cards from your hand? Then it seems a bit too good compared to Cemetery.
Logged
You say the ocean's rising, like I give a shit
You say the whole world's ending, honey it already did

Kudasai

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 470
  • Respect: +289
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #874 on: December 01, 2018, 01:58:03 pm »
0

24 hours left before judgment.

   
I'm going to need to ask what you're doing with number of copies for each card Kudasai. I can't safely assume like with the other entries.

That's probably an important thing to know. :) In keeping with how Victory card amounts change with how many players a game has, these are the following split amounts:

2-Players: 4 Timberlands on top / 4 Treants on bottom
3-6 Players: 6 Timberlands on top / 6 Treants on bottom

I'll update my Original Post as well with this information!
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 33 34 [35] 36 37 ... 327  All
 

Page created in 0.056 seconds with 21 queries.