Print

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

[ImACat]

I haven't really sat down to collect my comprehensive thoughts on the matter, but here are a few observations:

1) Balance between card types - Crossroads seems to single-handedly remove the penalty of having green in your deck. Meanwhile, I can't count the number of games where poor foresight led to a deck full on dead Spice Merchants and Stables. The action only decks of pre-Hinterlands, while still rather strong, are no longer a no-brainer. I suspect this actually a top priority for Donald (perhaps he can comment and correct me if I'm wrong) and overall I think it's wonderful for the game. However, I feel that it leads to more variance as it becomes much harder to be able to design an engine with a high probability of activating off of a hand of 5 random cards if a higher proportion of cards are treasures and victory cards (thought I guess this is why... we have the following).

2) Variance reducers - Embassy, Oracle, Inn, Scheme, Mandarin, Cartographer. That's a lot of cards in one set that improve your hand (whether the current or ones in the near future) especially when it comes to how to properly handle "cloggers" (victory points, treasures, terminal actions) or key starters for action chains.

3) Winner ends the game on his terms - Is it just me or are fewer games ending on Provinces/Colonies? With all the alternate victory cards as well as massive alternate gaining/buying (Border Village, Develop, Haggler, Farmland), 3 piles seems to be en vogue now. I've found that it's not always the player/deck with the most buying power and potency that wins, but the one with the prowess to end the game whenever a lead, however slight, is achievable. Here's an example of a game where my decision to go Transmute (a card that almost NEVER had utility before) and Develop seems to have given me the advantage due to the ability to end on Duchies before my opponent, who seemed to be going for standard big money to Provinces (though there was a possibly reactionary shift to Develop as well), could amass a large enough lead. It certainly wasn't a blowout and his next turn would've been a menacing Tactician one, but even then I doubt he could've ended the game thus giving me more tries to eclipse him and end again on my terms.

http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201110/19/game-20111019-130611-94866314.html

UPDATE: Here's another game where Provinces looked wholly unattractive from the get-go. 19 out of 25 buys were Victory cards (the other 6 were Silvers) and I didn't even begin to touch what would've been 4-5 point Gardens!

http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201110/19/game-20111019-231449-d195c9d2.html


Or have I read too much into these games?


What do you all think? Any other major trends you see stemming from Hinterlands?

[olneyce]

What do you all think? Any other major trends you see stemming from Hinterlands?

Games take forever, with the endless re-shuffling of hands, drawing cards and discarding them, forcing your opponent to draw and then discard, etc.

I almost can't imagine playing Hinterlands in real life, with all the complex interactions.

[lympi]

What do you all think? Any other major trends you see stemming from Hinterlands?

Games take forever, with the endless re-shuffling of hands, drawing cards and discarding them, forcing your opponent to draw and then discard, etc.

I almost can't imagine playing Hinterlands in real life, with all the complex interactions.

Call me old fashioned, but I vastly prefer playing good ol' meatspace Dominion, rather than isotropic. Nothing against isotropic, I love its elegance, but if I had to pick one or the other, I'd go with the genuine article.

That said.

This brings up an interesting thought, could Hinterlands be considered the first "post-isotropic" expansion? We know Donald and the gang have playtested on isotropic in the past, but could Hinterlands be the first time the majority of the playtesting was done online rather than offline? Donald mentioned a good chunk of Hinterlands was developed in 2010, which means it's certainly a possibility.

I can't help but think that if playtesting still took place exclusively IRL that Hinterlands would have wound up less complex.

Not that I'm complaining. I for one can't wait to go to the (semi)FLGS in a few weeks and buy Hinterlands and splay out a ton of cards on the table in front of me each turn, throw some back on top of the deck, and gain some more cards like a fool, lather, rinse, repeat. It's just interesting to think about.

[ackack]

I've barely played physical Dominion - probably a handful of base set games - but I'd imagine that a lot of these cards would be better in person. The marginal gain in tedium is less (since you're already doing all that shuffling anyway) and it's likely to be a far better social experience, mitigating what boredom there is.

[jonts26]

Not many, but some cards are in fact quicker to play IRL, eg. navigator, hamlet, etc. That said, I find online and offline dominion to be two different experiences, both of which I enjoy immensely. Online is much faster paced and competitive while offline is better for socializing and playing casually. This is somewhat reflected in the fact that I play almost exclusively 2p online and 3-5p offline.

Of course, there is the option of playing online with people in the same room on laptops.

[Jimmmmm]

I tend to enjoy playing IRL more, but started playing online when I didn't have anyone else to play with me. I agree, though, that they are quite different experiences. Some cards are arguably more fun online: buying a bunch of stuff after playing a bunch of Goons is quite satisfying online, whereas IRL it results in some painful arithmetic.

I played a game with real cards yesterday with two other people, one of whom had played once before, and the other had never played. We played only one game with the suggested first game in the Base set. It was a long and slow game, with much explanation needed throughout the whole game, but overall it was a refreshing change of pace to go back to Dominion grassroots.

[ChaosRed]

I was taught the game in the exact same way you describe, if memory serves, I kept buying Markets.

I had an excellent teacher though, a game store employee who sat with my wife and I for our first few turns. That was just a few months ago now, the base set is a really elegant set. I think it might be my favorite of them all.

As for Hinterlands, it's an expert set, no question. However, cards like Lookout, Bishop and Trade Route require tactical skill as well, so it is not without precedent. It's just that Hinterlands requires a lot of attention and a lot of practice.

[Karrow]

Some straight Hinterlands kingdoms are going to be pretty intense.  Face-to-face games are going to be great, tracking what is being done and discussing buy vs gain vs discard card effects.  I'm all for the complexity creep.

In the full mix randomizer kingdom, that base set starting to look a little lame now in comparison.  I'm sure some kingdoms will come up now that will be pretty boring face-to-face.  But I know for "new players" I will no longer just run the full randomizer.  Everyone I've trained so far has been former Magic players, so it's pretty straight forward to explain even with a full radomizer mix.  But now I think I'll be staging a first game a bit.  Not the beginner-basic recommended, but just try to keep it to base-intrigue-seaside sets.

And for Isotropic, I do see the complete opposite reactions.  All of the cards take so many clicks to play.  For automatches and 3+ player games I expect hinterlands to be way up on the veto list once the new factor wears off.  Isotropic people can be insanely impatient.  Even I suffer the same effects.  Scrying Pool is tops on my veto list simply because of the time to play it as it usually gets lots of them along with other annoying cards just as spy/wishing well, and so on.  The last Scrying Pool game in real life I played 4-player.  I gave directions to everyone, "if it's a copper put it back forever, you don't have to keep revealing it, otherwise discard it."  (had a cutpurse as a terminal).  So everyone took care of the attack effects themselves.  I had pearl divers, and half the time I didn't even look at the bottom card, I just said leave the bottom card where it is.  And it still took forever.  The thought of doing the same on isotropic gives me carpal tunnel just thinking about it.  Thinking about a straight 4-player Hinterlands on Isotropic with a Scrying Pool gives me a headache already.

[DG]

It's certainly not simple. I'm guessing that the key to the expansion is getting benefits from multiple abilities of the cards. If we consider the simple looking but actually quite taxing Mandarin, it's certainly not worth 5$ if you put 5 coppers back on your deck immediately and will put an estate back onto your deck every time you play it. If you can find a time to buy it when the treasure wants to go back on your deck, and the haven effect can be an advantage as much as a penalty, then the Mandarin becomes excellent value.

[Empathy]

It's certainly not simple. I'm guessing that the key to the expansion is getting benefits from multiple abilities of the cards. If we consider the simple looking but actually quite taxing Mandarin, it's certainly not worth 5$ if you put 5 coppers back on your deck immediately and will put an estate back onto your deck every time you play it. If you can find a time to buy it when the treasure wants to go back on your deck, and the haven effect can be an advantage as much as a penalty, then the Mandarin becomes excellent value.

I've had a situation where the mandarin definitely made me steal a game.

I had gold+silver in my hand, and knew my coppers were coming up, so I bought mandarin, which enabled me an extremely early KC (as well as an ok target for it).

So mandarin definitely helps hitting 7s consistently if you keep track of what's left in your deck, and if you have high value money. I would suspect it also helps hit platinum pretty consistently.

[Mean Mr Mustard]

Yes, in my opinion this expansion is a complete departure from the old way of playing Dominion.  I think it now matters more <i>how</i> you gain and play the cards than simply which cards you add to your deck.  There were certainly cards in the previous sets that required tactical finesse, but not at all to the extent of Hinterlands.

Thank you Donald, for putting out a set that I can play with much less fear of losing to people who simply copycat my buy strategy. 

[timchen]

I think the variance issue is indeed a concern. It's quite interesting, though. Can the deck-organizing cards come to work in time? Some of the games are just too quick, or too swingy that facing a good luck opponent you don't even have the time for those cards.