Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Honkeyfresh]

I'm wondering why Dark Ages needs a second edition. That feels like a solid set with almost no duds. I'm struggling to think of a single card in the set that feels like it needs replacing actually, despite it being a very large set.

Rebuild is pretty much guaranteed to go away if there is a 2E.

Cornucopia feels like a very solid set with the only card that could be potentially considered a dud being Fortune Teller.

A Cornucopia 2E could, potentially, just add cards, turning it from a small set into a normal-sized set. (If that happened, it would presumably have to be done at the same time as something similar happening to Guilds.) I'll bet some Prizes would be replaced, though.

Tournament would be SO MUCH BETTER If you allowed for a full prize for both players.  Whoever wins the first prize (usually follower's or steed depending on the board) wins the game usually.  I'd be interested in the stats on this.  Same thing with Black Market too. I've in fact made a thread with this at the heart of it (along with the deck parameters manipulation aspect)
Both are way to swingy and unfair.

Would it be possible to have a "Dominion Labs" section on the Dominion game
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=20854.msg874615#msg874615

Anyone who has played with me has probably heard me throw in my philosophical opinions of certain aspects of dominions that I don't Like.  My most frequent is that I kind of hate Black Market and tournament because I find them fundamentally unfair.  The swings are so great with the prizes in Tournament that games are often almost over based on who gets the prize that is most useful in that particular kingdom (ie it lacks, actions, curses, buys, etc).  Same with Black market.  I once got a Fortune on t5.  That game was already over. Or a wall game where one person gets chapel and the other doesn't.  That game is essentially already over.  Because the uniqueness of the cards creates a wild imbalance.  IRL I rectified this by playing "Honkeyfresh's Black AF market" where I set up BM the same, but make TWO decks. One for each.  Then it truly is an easter egg game, where you start seeing cards appear in the other player's deck and get excited knowing what possibilities are out there.  I've also done this with tourney, but the prizes were just defaced coppersmiths that I turned into "Honkeyfresh's  Tourney for Two".  It is SOOOO much more fun and allows you to build the prizes to make a sweet engine, not by saying what do I have to get so that the other player doesn't first.  It would b really neat if somehow this tweak was added to the non rated games section to where you could play with two BM decks/prize piles, as it makes for a really fun, and eminently fairer game.

[Honkeyfresh]

I'm wondering why Dark Ages needs a second edition. That feels like a solid set with almost no duds. I'm struggling to think of a single card in the set that feels like it needs replacing actually, despite it being a very large set.

I can see these cards leaving, as DXV has actually called them out as design mistakes, could be improved upon or bad-to-print cards:

- Band of Misfits
- Cultist
- Procession
- Rebuild
- Sage
- Storeroom
- Urchin

In addition, do we really need Beggar and Pillage? Will you really miss these cards? That’s nine cards in total, just saying.

Oh I forgot Pillage.  Pillage is basically a slightly better Feast.  No one will miss this card.  We have archer now anyway for the hand attacking fans.

[Honkeyfresh]

- Procession

You can take my Processions over my dead Fortresses.

Don't you mean Undead Fortress

[Honkeyfresh]

Or maybe even making the potion give you +1$ every time you play it.

I REALLY like this idea.  Would make for super fun games. But I almost prefer the potion to have a plus buy because it would help with the times where the only potion cards are 2 or 3 p and it'd be a nice way to not punish hitting 6p on a board with university or crying pool.

[Imrahil3]

Did you really just respond 18 times?

You had me all excited, I thought new information had been posted.

[Awaclus]

I think less experienced players don't understand the fun and power of silk road until they get clobbered a few times with it.

According to markus stats, which only take into account the games from the top ~1% of players, Silk Road gets completely ignored 63% of the time, and on average, being the only player to gain it lowers your win rate to about 42% when corrected for skill.

Less objectively, eyeballing the Thunderdominion votes, there's a bunch of people I don't recognize (which nowadays doesn't automatically mean they're newbies) but also a bunch of people that I do recognize because they're top players, and it seems like most of the names I'm familiar with agreed with the overall consensus on Silk Road votes.

[Honkeyfresh]

I think less experienced players don't understand the fun and power of silk road until they get clobbered a few times with it.

According to markus stats, which only take into account the games from the top ~1% of players, Silk Road gets completely ignored 63% of the time, and on average, being the only player to gain it lowers your win rate to about 42% when corrected for skill.

Less objectively, eyeballing the Thunderdominion votes, there's a bunch of people I don't recognize (which nowadays doesn't automatically mean they're newbies) but also a bunch of people that I do recognize because they're top players, and it seems like most of the names I'm familiar with agreed with the overall consensus on Silk Road votes.

I can see that, and it really depends on the board.  But there is a lot of time where a sneaky silk road or hybrid late silk road barage can really do some damage.  But I agree it's not a must play/buy on any board. 

[Commodore Chuckles]

Silk Road always seemed weak to me. Would it be too good if it were 1 for every 3 instead of 1 for every 4?

[LastFootnote]

Silk Road always seemed weak to me. Would it be too good if it were 1 for every 3 instead of 1 for every 4?

I'm guessing that would be fine.

[faust]

Silk Road always seemed weak to me. Would it be too good if it were 1 for every 3 instead of 1 for every 4?

I'm guessing that would be fine.

I feel like then it would just be better than Duchy too often though. In a relateively normal game you expect to have 4 Provinces by the end of the game. If you also keep your Estates, it only takes 2 Silk Roads for them to be worth as much as Duchies.

[LastFootnote]

Silk Road always seemed weak to me. Would it be too good if it were 1 for every 3 instead of 1 for every 4?

I'm guessing that would be fine.

I feel like then it would just be better than Duchy too often though. In a relateively normal game you expect to have 4 Provinces by the end of the game. If you also keep your Estates, it only takes 2 Silk Roads for them to be worth as much as Duchies.

That’s a big if.

[kieranmillar]

It's extremely common to get Gardens to also be worth at least 3VP by the end of the game, even when trashing. It's no big deal.

[faust]

Something that I feel would be balanced would a formula like (1 VP per 3 cards) - 1 VP; it scales better but takes time to get to Duchy level. But of course that is probably too awkward to word.

[Holger]

It's extremely common to get Gardens to also be worth at least 3VP by the end of the game, even when trashing. It's no big deal.

That does not match my experience. If the board supports engine play, it is not as if those Gardens are somehow automatically worth 3VPs. You gotta work for that and adapt your play.

To me it seems like Silk Road is currently too bad, but would be too good if the ratio got changed.

If the board supports engine play, you'll usually trash your Estates ASAP, and you'll usually prefer Provinces over $4 Duchies.

The only problem with an improved SR might be a rush: Gaining all SRs and all Estates uncontested (and emptying a third pile) results in 19 VP cards, and 6 VP per SR (instead of 4 VP) would probably make this the dominant strategy on boards with good gainers, about as strong as Beggar/Gardens.

[Joxeft]

Previews are starting tomorrow!

[Holger]

Something that I feel would be balanced would a formula like (1 VP per 3 cards) - 1 VP; it scales better but takes time to get to Duchy level. But of course that is probably too awkward to word.

I think that formula would make SR even weaker as an occasional buy - it would only give more VPs than the original card if you have exactly 15, 18, 19 or ≥21 VP cards. Also, it reaches "Duchy level" at the same time as the original card, with ≥12 VP cards.

I think "1 VP per 3 VP cards that are not Estates" could work, essentially removing the SR/Estate rush strategy while making SR more interesting on boards with Estate trashing...