Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2] 3  All

Author Topic: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages  (Read 2730 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

SignError

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 103
  • Shuffle iT Username: SignError
  • Respect: +230
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #25 on: January 05, 2024, 12:35:24 am »
+5



Quote
Redoubt
$3 - Action - Looter

+3 Actions

Gain 3 Ruins to your hand. This turn, after playing a Ruins, return it to its pile.

It uses ďafterĒ instead of ďwhenĒ in the same way that Inspiring does.  The timing of the return to pile matters for Way of the Mouse using Redoubt as the set aside card.

Redoubt is a friendly Looter like Death Cart.  You are tempted by the possibility of Peddler or a Lab.  But some combinations are comparable to $2-cost cards (e.g. Ruined Village x2 + Ruined Mine ≈ Squire). The best effects hinge on Ruined Library.  Careful play order is needed so that the desirable Ruins donít get buried deep.  Lean too heavily into Redoubt, and the opponent may just gain and trash the Ruined Libraries, leaving you with a mess of stop-cards.  Itís still a double Necropolis if you can get draw elsewhere and have a way to deal with the undesirable terminal Ruins.  And it helps counter the unfriendly Attack - Looters.

Redoubt could partially replace Beggar as a card that gains a lot of cheap cards to your hand.  It has strong synergies as does Beggar, but Redoubt is more usable in a normal kingdom without those specific combos, while Beggar usually just sits there.   Another 2E card can replace Beggarís defensive Reaction.
Logged

segura

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1551
  • Respect: +1435
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #26 on: January 05, 2024, 04:32:37 am »
+1

:)
Quote
Ruinous Route ē $4 ē Action - Looter
You may gain a Ruin to your Deck's top to trash two cards from your Hand.
Choose one: +1 Action and +$1; or play up to two Ruins from the Trash.
:)
Sadly there are only three official Looters, but none of them allow you to use them as Actions - Death Cart merely uses them as fodder. Cultist and Marauder use Ruins like Curses.
This uses Dark Age's theme of self junking, like Beggar, Death Cart; Count.
:)
Early on, i.e. until the Ruins are out, it net trashes one, gives you two vanillas and basically something like -1 Card as the junk is topdecked.
That is really similar to Forager but I think that I would prefer Forager.

So I think that this has to be buffed (e.g. don't topdeck the Ruins) or be reduced in price to $3.

Quote
This would replace Beggar - a card i have never bought, nor have seen a kingdom where it would be of much use. I would also toss-out Survivors.
Beggar is pretty decent in Knight games and centralizing with Guildhall.
Logged

segura

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1551
  • Respect: +1435
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #27 on: January 05, 2024, 04:42:37 am »
+1



Quote
Redoubt
$3 - Action - Looter

+3 Actions

Gain 3 Ruins to your hand. This turn, after playing a Ruins, return it to its pile.

It uses ďafterĒ instead of ďwhenĒ in the same way that Inspiring does.  The timing of the return to pile matters for Way of the Mouse using Redoubt as the set aside card.

Redoubt is a friendly Looter like Death Cart.  You are tempted by the possibility of Peddler or a Lab.  But some combinations are comparable to $2-cost cards (e.g. Ruined Village x2 + Ruined Mine ≈ Squire). The best effects hinge on Ruined Library.  Careful play order is needed so that the desirable Ruins donít get buried deep.  Lean too heavily into Redoubt, and the opponent may just gain and trash the Ruined Libraries, leaving you with a mess of stop-cards.  Itís still a double Necropolis if you can get draw elsewhere and have a way to deal with the undesirable terminal Ruins.  And it helps counter the unfriendly Attack - Looters.

Redoubt could partially replace Beggar as a card that gains a lot of cheap cards to your hand.  It has strong synergies as does Beggar, but Redoubt is more usable in a normal kingdom without those specific combos, while Beggar usually just sits there.   Another 2E card can replace Beggarís defensive Reaction.
I like this but I am pretty sure that this is a $4. Anything but Ruined Village and Survivors is decent. Supposed you get Library, Mine and Market. Then you get Market + 2 Villages.  Suppose you get two Mines and whatever, then this is strictly better than Conclave.

The notion that the opponent might gain and trash Ruins seems dubious, self-junking is after all a heavy price to pay. If you run 3 copies of Redoubt, he has to buy at least 2 Ruins to hurt you in turns in which you draw all 3 of them. And at worst you still got a Double-Necro whereas he had to self-junk & trash for little benefit.
Logged

fika monster

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 488
  • 27 year old swedish guy. PFP by haps
  • Respect: +491
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #28 on: January 05, 2024, 05:57:39 am »
+1



Quote
Redoubt
$3 - Action - Looter

+3 Actions

Gain 3 Ruins to your hand. This turn, after playing a Ruins, return it to its pile.

It uses ďafterĒ instead of ďwhenĒ in the same way that Inspiring does.  The timing of the return to pile matters for Way of the Mouse using Redoubt as the set aside card.

Redoubt is a friendly Looter like Death Cart.  You are tempted by the possibility of Peddler or a Lab.  But some combinations are comparable to $2-cost cards (e.g. Ruined Village x2 + Ruined Mine ≈ Squire). The best effects hinge on Ruined Library.  Careful play order is needed so that the desirable Ruins donít get buried deep.  Lean too heavily into Redoubt, and the opponent may just gain and trash the Ruined Libraries, leaving you with a mess of stop-cards.  Itís still a double Necropolis if you can get draw elsewhere and have a way to deal with the undesirable terminal Ruins.  And it helps counter the unfriendly Attack - Looters.

Redoubt could partially replace Beggar as a card that gains a lot of cheap cards to your hand.  It has strong synergies as does Beggar, but Redoubt is more usable in a normal kingdom without those specific combos, while Beggar usually just sits there.   Another 2E card can replace Beggarís defensive Reaction.

i think this could either be a $4 or just give 2 actions.
Logged
Swedish guy, Furry hipster otter

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5323
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3228
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #29 on: January 05, 2024, 06:46:04 am »
0

Remember not to make the card a 3$ if you think it's stronger than the average 4$. If you do, terrible things will happen. Donald X would never do this, either.

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5323
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3228
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #30 on: January 05, 2024, 06:49:04 am »
+6

On a serious note, I'd consider returning the card to the bottom of the pile to avoid playing the same Ruins over and over again, and I'd also consider making it more difficult to work with. Right now, it gives you actions to play 2 of the 3 Ruins, so if one of them is a Ruined Library (a whopping 48.8% chance), the card is completely self-sufficient. I think a powerful but difficult to use design (requiring other actions?) would generally be more interesting than a safe design.

JW

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 980
  • Shuffle iT Username: JW
  • Respect: +1793
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #31 on: January 05, 2024, 12:51:36 pm »
+1



Quote
Redoubt
$3 - Action - Looter

+3 Actions

Gain 3 Ruins to your hand. This turn, after playing a Ruins, return it to its pile.

It uses ďafterĒ instead of ďwhenĒ in the same way that Inspiring does.  The timing of the return to pile matters for Way of the Mouse using Redoubt as the set aside card.

Redoubt is a friendly Looter like Death Cart.  You are tempted by the possibility of Peddler or a Lab.  But some combinations are comparable to $2-cost cards (e.g. Ruined Village x2 + Ruined Mine ≈ Squire). The best effects hinge on Ruined Library.  Careful play order is needed so that the desirable Ruins donít get buried deep.  Lean too heavily into Redoubt, and the opponent may just gain and trash the Ruined Libraries, leaving you with a mess of stop-cards.  Itís still a double Necropolis if you can get draw elsewhere and have a way to deal with the undesirable terminal Ruins.  And it helps counter the unfriendly Attack - Looters.

Redoubt could partially replace Beggar as a card that gains a lot of cheap cards to your hand.  It has strong synergies as does Beggar, but Redoubt is more usable in a normal kingdom without those specific combos, while Beggar usually just sits there.   Another 2E card can replace Beggarís defensive Reaction.
I like this but I am pretty sure that this is a $4. Anything but Ruined Village and Survivors is decent. Supposed you get Library, Mine and Market. Then you get Market + 2 Villages.  Suppose you get two Mines and whatever, then this is strictly better than Conclave.

It takes actions to play the Ruins in that example.

I also agree with silverspawn that returning the ruins to the bottom of the pile would make the card more interesting (and less powerful). Edit: to clarify, I donít think it needs to be less powerful; it doesnít seem strong as presented. If the ruins returned to the bottom of the pile, I think it could easily cost $2.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2024, 08:59:41 pm by JW »
Logged

faust

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3384
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +5161
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #32 on: January 05, 2024, 12:59:29 pm »
+4


Quote
Squatter - $2
Action/Looter

This turn, directly after you finish playing an Action costing $2 or less, +1 Action.
-
In games using this, when you gain a card costing $0 from the Supply, exchange it for a Ruins.

Dark Ages does not do enough with the Ruins pile, and a second edition would certainly need to change that. Here's a card that essentially turns any Curses into a Looter (at least until the Ruinses run out). It does other things too, and has a strange relationship with cost-reducers.

The restriction to "in the Supply" is necessary in the current format so that this does not mess with the Dark Ages non-Supply cards, but in an ideal world a second edition would give those cards non-zero costs analogous to what we have seen from non-Supply cards in later sets. In this case, the restriction could be dropped.
Logged
You say the ocean's rising, like I give a shit
You say the whole world's ending, honey it already did

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5323
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3228
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #33 on: January 05, 2024, 01:07:06 pm »
+1

^ I don't know how the rules work here; can you gain Curses once Ruins are out?

Zoyarox

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25
  • Respect: +29
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #34 on: January 05, 2024, 01:35:48 pm »
+1



Quote
Street Rat
$3 Action
+2 Actions
Look at the top card of your deck.
You may trash or discard it. If you did and it costs $2 or less, gain a Spoils.

Toss a Copper (and Shelters, Curses, Ruins, Rats etc.) to your Street Rat! Gets rid of them nicely, later still helps you pass green, while not forcing you to discard the upcoming good card.

EDIT: $1 -> $2; $1 was a leftover from an older playtest version, that turned out to be too good with $2 Treasures and Actions.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2024, 10:27:45 am by Zoyarox »
Logged

SignError

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 103
  • Shuffle iT Username: SignError
  • Respect: +230
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #35 on: January 05, 2024, 03:02:28 pm »
+4

I wasnít expecting this much discussion.  I originally had this at $4, but realized pretty early on it cannot cost $4.  An easy, quick comparison is Ironmonger.  You get a fixed +1 Card, +1 Action, and half Survivors, along with one of +1 Card, +1 Action, and +$1, which are the best bonuses to spam.

But in case you want to go into all the details, the following is a list of all the raw possibilities along with their probability of occurrence and estimated value.  You might notice that certain individual effects are valued higher than you would think; weíll get into more of that later.


+3 Cards (0.612%) Smithy, but better (~$5.5)*
+2 Cards +1 Action (2.296%) Lab ($5)
+2 Cards +1 Buy (2.296%) Silk Merchant, but better?!? ($5.3)*
+2 Cards +$1 (2.296%) Fortune Hunter, but better (~5.6)*
+2 Cards Survivors (2.296%) Oracle, but better (~$5.4)*
+1 Card +2 Actions (2.296%) Village ($3)
+1 Card +1 Action +1 Buy (5.102%) worse than Market Square (~$2. 8 )
+1 Card +1 Action +$1 (5.102%) peddler (~$4.5)
+1 Card +1 Action Survivors (5.102%) most comparable to Spy (~$3.6)
+1 Card +2 Buys (2.296%) multiple +Buy bad (~$3.3)*
+1 Card +1 Buy +$1 (5.102%) not a lot of reference (~$3. 8 ) *
+1 Card +1 Buy Survivors (5.102%) not a lot of reference (~$3.4)*
+1 Card +$2 (2.296%) could maybe justify this as a terminal Silver+ (~$3.9)*
+1 Card +$1 Survivors (5.102%) not a lot of reference (~$3.6)*
+1 Card Survivors x2 (2.296%) not a lot of reference (~$3.2)*

+3 Actions (0.612%) strictly worse than Port, comparable to Snowy Village and Crossroads (~$3)
+2 Actions +1 Buy (2.296%) not a lot of reference (~$2.5)
+2 Actions +$1 (2.296%) worse than Merchant Camp (~$2. 8 )
+2 Actions Survivors (2.296%) not a lot of reference (~$2.3)
+1 Action +2 Buys (2.296%) multiple +Buy bad (~$1.5)
+1 Action +1 Buy +$1 (5.102%) worse than Candlestick Maker (~$1.9)
+1 Action +1 Buy Survivors (5.102%) bad, but not a lot of reference (~$1.7)
+1 Action +$2 (2.296%) Silver-ish (~$3)
+1 Action +$1 Survivors (5.102%) bad, but not a lot of reference (~$1. 8 )
+1 Action Survivors x2 (2.296%) bad, but not a lot of reference (~$1.5)
+3 Buys (0.612%) multiple +Buy bad (~$1.2)
+2 Buys +$1 (2.296%) worse than Squire (~$1.9)
+2 Buys Survivors (2.296%) multiple +Buy bad (~$1.5)
+1 Buy +$2 (2.296%) Woodcutter ($3)
+1 Buy +$1 Survivors (5.102%) bad, but not a lot of reference (~$1. 8 )
+1 Buy Survivors x2 (2.296%) bad, but not a lot of reference (~$1.3)
+$3 (0.612%) probably slightly better than Fortune Hunter (~$4.2)
+$2 Survivors (2.296%) Worse than Navigator, which was already bad (~$2.7)
+$1 Survivors x2 (2.296%) (~$1.4)
Survivors x3 (0.612%) Bad (~$1.1)

Remember not to make the card a 3$ if you think it's stronger than the average 4$.

Like I said, itís easy to think of the Labs and Smithies and Peddlers and forget all the other junk thatís possible.  If you tally the weighted value itís about $3.  Weighted value of everything above the line (with +Cards) is about $4, and weighted value of everything below the line (without +Cards) is about $2.

A lot like Knights, the value of Redoubt fluctuates based on what the top card of Ruins is at the start of the game.  Ruined Library and Ruined Mine provide the most value.  Ruined Village is good in the absence of a Village, and Ruined Market is great in the absence of +Buy.  Survivors is only good if the kingdom has no trashing and little draw.  So you can use the knowledge of the top card to adjust the probabilities and be more informed about the value of the card.

For example, say itís a 2-player game without Ruined Library on top.  The chance of NOT having Ruined Library in the next 2 cards is about 80%, so if you want your Redoubt drawing cards (the most valuable effect), then you have to get decently lucky.  If you really want to dig into the Ruins pile for that Ruined Library, you need to gain 3 Redoubts and collide them in the same hand (difficult in itself). Youíre most likely to get 1 Ruined Library (43%), with the next likely outcome being no Ruined Libraries (34%).  That leaves a (23%) of hitting 2 Ruined Libraries and those spicy $5+ effects.  Not very good odds.

Any combo using Ruined Library and other terminals is actually better than its face value because you can play some Ruined Libraries to potentially draw more villages before playing your last terminal card.  I already adjusted the card values for that above. (*)

Everything below the line doesnít have +Cards, so it tends to be worth a lot less.  You may notice I rate the bad terminal stop-card combinations a little higher than they deserve face value.  Thatís because you always have the option to not play the Ruins and keep the innate +3 Actions, which Iím valuing at about $3.  Then you could play other terminal draw for the chance at drawing more villages while risking junking yourself.  Or you could just play terminal payload and take the junk.

The notion that the opponent might gain and trash Ruins seems dubious, self-junking is after all a heavy price to pay.

Removing Ruined Library as an option lowers Redoubtís value to about $2, so itís worth it if your opponent has a ton of them and is using the draw a lot.  Itís kind of like when you have 1 Poacher and the opponent has 8; you just gain the last Poacher to turn them into Oasis.  But here you donít need to gain extra Redoubts or Ruins.  Just play one Redoubt (you probably got one early on), get the Ruined Library thatís 3 cards down, and thatís it.

And at worst you still got a Double-Necro whereas he had to self-junk & trash for little benefit.

To get the double Necropolis effect for ~$3, the opponent has to trash or keep in their deck the Survivors and other terminal Ruins, so thatís not free either.

On a serious note, I'd consider returning the card to the bottom of the pile

Returning the ruins to the bottom of the pile is something I hadnít considered, and could probably work.  My worry is that it makes it too unpredictable early and too uncontrollable late.  Remember the average effect is actually $3, and you have to work to make it worth more than that.  Also Black Market is supposed to put cards on the bottom of the pile, but dominion.games doesnít do that because then you have to track the pile (I think TGG lets you see the card order, but Iíve never been in a game that when through the whole pile to find out for sure).  But the Ruins pile is smaller unless you have a ton of players, so tracking is less of an issue here.  Iíd probably want to playtest it both ways to see how it works.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5323
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3228
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #36 on: January 05, 2024, 03:32:58 pm »
+1

Awesome analysis  :D

Remember not to make the card a 3$ if you think it's stronger than the average 4$.

Like I said, itís easy to think of the Labs and Smithies and Peddlers and forget all the other junk thatís possible.  If you tally the weighted value itís about $3.  Weighted value of everything above the line (with +Cards) is about $4, and weighted value of everything below the line (without +Cards) is about $2.

Hm I thought the sarcasm would be obvious in the context of my previous posts lamenting the misuse of the overpowered concept. What I meant to say was: the idea that you have to figure out whether your card is above or below a certain powerlevel to figure out whether to price it at 3$ or 4$ is extremely silly. Imo you'd do better just not thinking about card strength at all when deciding this. The major thing you should think about is whether it would be fun if people can open with two of the thing. After that, I mean 3$ will allow people to buy it slightly more situations later in the game.

I made the reference to Donald X because he's released tons of busted 3$'s that are much stronger than 4$s. In fact it was sort of loosely held that the average 3$ is stronger than the average 4$ at some point (this probably isn't true nowadays), but in any case, it was common knowledge that "weaker cards cost 3$ and stronger cards cost 4$" isn't a thing. Apparently that's not common knowledge anymore, but it's still true.

In fact I vividly remember being a very nooby person in this forum and someone was indicated that 3$s are stronger than 4$s, and I was like, that can't be right, and then they were like, no literally, and I was like huh, but I didn't write it because back then I didn't admit mistakes.

Anyway your analysis convinced me that it's weaker than the average 4$, which has precisely zero bearing on how I would price it. (I'd price it at 3$ so you can open with two of them.)

SignError

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 103
  • Shuffle iT Username: SignError
  • Respect: +230
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #37 on: January 05, 2024, 03:34:01 pm »
+2

^ I don't know how the rules work here; can you gain Curses once Ruins are out?

From the Trader Official FAQ 2022:

Quote
You can only exchange if both cards are available to be exchanged; you have to be able to return the gained card to its pile (only possible if it came from a pile), and you have to be able to take the Silver.

So once the Ruins are out you can no longer do the exchange, and you gain the Curse



On a side note Squatter with lots of cost reduction means your Provinces turn into Ruins.  I actually think thatís neat; you just have to make sure what you want costs at least $1.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2024, 04:08:04 pm by SignError »
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5323
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3228
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #38 on: January 05, 2024, 03:41:18 pm »
+2

Also kudos for modeling proper drawing-without-replacement for the Ruins probabilities!

SignError

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 103
  • Shuffle iT Username: SignError
  • Respect: +230
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #39 on: January 05, 2024, 03:41:49 pm »
+1

Awesome analysis  :D

Remember not to make the card a 3$ if you think it's stronger than the average 4$.

Like I said, itís easy to think of the Labs and Smithies and Peddlers and forget all the other junk thatís possible.  If you tally the weighted value itís about $3.  Weighted value of everything above the line (with +Cards) is about $4, and weighted value of everything below the line (without +Cards) is about $2.

Hm I thought the sarcasm would be obvious in the context of my previous posts lamenting the misuse of the overpowered concept. What I meant to say was: the idea that you have to figure out whether your card is above or below a certain powerlevel to figure out whether to price it at 3$ or 4$ is extremely silly. Imo you'd do better just not thinking about card strength at all when deciding this. The major thing you should think about is whether it would be fun if people can open with two of the thing. After that, I mean 3$ will allow people to buy it slightly more situations later in the game.

I made the reference to Donald X because he's released tons of busted 3$'s that are much stronger than 4$s. In fact it was sort of loosely held that the average 3$ is stronger than the average 4$ at some point (this probably isn't true nowadays), but in any case, it was common knowledge that "weaker cards cost 3$ and stronger cards cost 4$" isn't a thing. Apparently that's not common knowledge anymore, but it's still true.

In fact I vividly remember being a very nooby person in this forum and someone was indicated that 3$s are stronger than 4$s, and I was like, that can't be right, and then they were like, no literally, and I was like huh, but I didn't write it because back then I didn't admit mistakes.

Anyway your analysis convinced me that it's weaker than the average 4$, which has precisely zero bearing on how I would price it. (I'd price it at 3$ so you can open with two of them.)

I absolutely agree with this, but mostly did the analysis for others who seemed more fixed on $4 cost.

The greatest difference between $4 and $3 is the double open, and this is fine there. You would rather have a cheap trasher or a guaranteed Silver to afford a good $5, and early Redoubt is a huge risk, given you donít know what the cards below the top one are.
Logged

n_sanity

  • Swindler
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17
  • Respect: +33
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #40 on: January 05, 2024, 04:04:12 pm »
+3

My entry:

Ruined Duchy
$4 Victory - Looter
3 VP
---
When you gain this, gain a Ruins.


« Last Edit: January 08, 2024, 09:37:11 am by n_sanity »
Logged

anordinaryman

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 378
  • Respect: +535
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #41 on: January 07, 2024, 10:40:13 am »
+3

Updated entry



Quote
Scavenger Dog | Action - Looter | $3
+2 Cards
You may play a Ruins from the Supply or your hand.
-
When you trash this, play it.

I've updated Scavenger Dog, it's now a soft-counter against most of the attacks in Dark Ages, similar to Watchtower was. You can choose to play a Ruins from the Supply which puts it in play without gaining the card, next turn it goes into your deck. Or, you could play a Ruins from your your hand, maybe you got junked by Marauder, or maybe you self-junked yourself with a previous Scavenger Dog. This doesn't defend against discard attacks though. Then there's the on-trash aspect, which defends against knights. I think the only interaction Scavenger Dog is missing is Spoils, but you can't put everything on one card then it would look like Junk as opposed to just a Junk Dog
Logged

fika monster

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 488
  • 27 year old swedish guy. PFP by haps
  • Respect: +491
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #42 on: January 08, 2024, 04:53:18 am »
0

Updated entry



Quote
Scavenger Dog | Action - Looter | $3
+2 Cards
You may play a Ruins from the Supply or your hand.
-
When you trash this, play it.

I've updated Scavenger Dog, it's now a soft-counter against most of the attacks in Dark Ages, similar to Watchtower was. You can choose to play a Ruins from the Supply which puts it in play without gaining the card, next turn it goes into your deck. Or, you could play a Ruins from your your hand, maybe you got junked by Marauder, or maybe you self-junked yourself with a previous Scavenger Dog. This doesn't defend against discard attacks though. Then there's the on-trash aspect, which defends against knights. I think the only interaction Scavenger Dog is missing is Spoils, but you can't put everything on one card then it would look like Junk as opposed to just a Junk Dog

You may want to add "other than in in cleanup" about the trash-play part to mimic trail
Logged
Swedish guy, Furry hipster otter

fika monster

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 488
  • 27 year old swedish guy. PFP by haps
  • Respect: +491
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #43 on: January 08, 2024, 05:11:50 am »
+1

my submission:
LOANSHARK.
(v3)





Quote
Loanshark:
$5 action-duration card.

Look through your discard pile, and Set aside an Action Card from it or your hand under this. Trash it at the end of your next turn.

Until then, when you play a copy of that card or a card from that pile, you first get +1 Card, +1 Action, +1 Buy and +$1.

Obviously busted with fortress, but a lot of things are.
v3: just buffed this across the board: now this makes whatever card you set under it a market for that turn (or two if you can set it up well), in exchange for trashing an action card.
Its essentially like getting to put every traveller card token on one pile temporarly.
Potential strong combos:
rats, magpie, trail, very cheap cards like poor house or pawn. It makes ruins good for a bit.

I considered making loanshark be +1 action, but that felt like it took away from the central dilemma of the card: sacrafice momentum and a good action card now, for a big boost that will get back at ya later.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2024, 03:32:17 am by fika monster »
Logged
Swedish guy, Furry hipster otter

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5323
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3228
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #44 on: January 08, 2024, 05:45:57 am »
+2

^ I think this needs to say "look through your discard pile" first (Eremit, and in general, you're not allowed to search it otherwise), and I think it also needs to be stronger to be viable. Right now, even if you get +2 Actions off of this (which you very rarely will), it's "+2 Actions, trash one card, discard this delayed", which is weak since you can't straight-forwardly use it on junk. And the floor is that you get no Actions at all. (Also, "action card" -> "Action card".)

fika monster

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 488
  • 27 year old swedish guy. PFP by haps
  • Respect: +491
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #45 on: January 08, 2024, 06:31:12 am »
0

^ I think this needs to say "look through your discard pile" first (Eremit, and in general, you're not allowed to search it otherwise), and I think it also needs to be stronger to be viable. Right now, even if you get +2 Actions off of this (which you very rarely will), it's "+2 Actions, trash one card, discard this delayed", which is weak since you can't straight-forwardly use it on junk. And the floor is that you get no Actions at all. (Also, "action card" -> "Action card".)

good points. Posting an updated version, added "+1 action +1$" and cards from that pile as well. so you can get the benefit from ruins, or split piles from later expansion
Logged
Swedish guy, Furry hipster otter

SignError

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 103
  • Shuffle iT Username: SignError
  • Respect: +230
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #46 on: January 08, 2024, 09:41:08 am »
+5

Updated entry



Quote
Scavenger Dog | Action - Looter | $3
+2 Cards
You may play a Ruins from the Supply or your hand.
-
When you trash this, play it.

You may want to add "other than in in cleanup" about the trash-play part to mimic trail

Trail needed it so that the trigger didnít happen when-discard during cleanup.  Fortress is fine without the non-cleanup clause, so Scavenger/Junk Dog should be too.

Edit: Fortresses probably isnít the best comparison here because it doesnít play itself.  There could be some really exotic combo like WotMouse Improve Tomb that generates infinite VP.  Still, there are infinite combos amoung the official cards, and making Junk Dog more complex just to kill a rare combo doesnít seem good.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2024, 11:09:25 am by SignError »
Logged

emtzalex

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 840
  • Respect: +1453
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #47 on: January 08, 2024, 12:58:23 pm »
+8

My Submission:



Quote
Feral Cat ē $2 ē Action - Reaction
+2 Cards

When you trash a card, you may play this from your hand.
Logged
he/him/his

Thanks to Shard of Honor for his Extended Version of the Dominion Card Image Generator, which I use to mock up my fan cards, and to Violet CLM, who made the original.

segura

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1551
  • Respect: +1435
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ag
« Reply #48 on: January 08, 2024, 02:13:47 pm »
+2

^ I think this needs to say "look through your discard pile" first (Eremit, and in general, you're not allowed to search it otherwise), and I think it also needs to be stronger to be viable. Right now, even if you get +2 Actions off of this (which you very rarely will), it's "+2 Actions, trash one card, discard this delayed", which is weak since you can't straight-forwardly use it on junk. And the floor is that you get no Actions at all. (Also, "action card" -> "Action card".)

good points. Posting an updated version, added "+1 action +1$" and cards from that pile as well. so you can get the benefit from ruins, or split piles from later expansion
It is still too weak. Even with Looters in the Kingdom, it would be highly unlikely that you can play splitter, Loanshark, 2 Ruins which is really the only situation in which this shines. Being able to play one Ruins is OKish, the card then had the same vanillas as Junk Dealer. But how often do these stars align (splitter, Loan Shark, Ruins in hand, identical Ruins in discard)? If you donít have a copy of that Ruins in hand, the card is kinda like  Ą+1 Card Trash a cardď which is worse than Maroon.

But why would I want to play Loanshark without Ruins? Even if you had a deck with two dead Actions, e.g. two Sea Hags after the Curses are out, you would not want Loanshark.

A simple buff, although unlikely to be strong enough, would be to postpone the trashing until the end of the next turn.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2024, 02:20:07 pm by segura »
Logged

fika monster

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 488
  • 27 year old swedish guy. PFP by haps
  • Respect: +491
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #208: Back to the Dark Ages
« Reply #49 on: January 09, 2024, 03:32:48 am »
0

my submission:
LOANSHARK.
(v3)





Quote
Loanshark:
$5 action-duration card.

Look through your discard pile, and Set aside an Action Card from it or your hand under this. Trash it at the end of your next turn.

Until then, when you play a copy of that card or a card from that pile, you first get +1 Card, +1 Action, +1 Buy and +$1.



Buffed loanshark across the board and made it cost 5$.
Logged
Swedish guy, Furry hipster otter
Pages: 1 [2] 3  All
 

Page created in 0.104 seconds with 22 queries.