Print

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

[dondon151]

Regardless of what you think, the cards simply aren't being bought and used effectively when I play online and in person.  I'm going to change the cards I play with a bit to help with that when I play in person.  If they work for us, then who cares what you think.  Get over yourself.

Man, not every card can be the strongest card ever. I've made every card in your list work before, and I've probably played fewer games than you have. Wanting to fix things that ain't broke is a scrub mentality. You're going to get used to playing the doctored versions of your cards, and then when you play a game using non-variant rules, you'll find yourself relying on strategies that don't exist. You might also be inadvertently making some cards super overpowered (your version of Tribute is definitely way too strong).

I wouldn't mind having a cooler Transmute, Counting House, or Scout, but every other Dominion card has its place and is just fine as is. (And Transmute, Counting House, and Scout already have their own places.)

[jonts26]

At the end of the day, anyone can just do whatever they think is the most fun. If that involves a dominion variant where Pearl Diver is a must buy, or you can spend an action to pass your curses to another player or whatever else, sure why not. You are free to do whatever you want.

However, you came to this board talking about how to fix some cards which don't see much play. Now, in my opinion, and likely this is a common one from the people who frequent this board, cards which are often weak except on a small percentage of boards are just fine, good for the game, actually. In fact, I find it to be super rare that all the cards are going to be strong on a particular set up. And recognizing when a weaker card is going to shine brings a lot of fun to the table. I remember the first game where I got beat by counting house, and it was great. If every card was equally balanced (something which I think would actually be impossible) you don't get those games where something weaker shines through.

And there are other cards which will never really shine, but are often decent enough support cards, like pearl diver. And hey, support cards are needed, too. Even if they arent ever really exciting.

Now I'm not saying Dominion and every card in it is perfect, and there are probably tweaks that could be made to improve the experience, and well that's pretty subjective anyway, so there's no point in getting offended (OP and other's) when someone wants to try to change dominion to suit themselves better.

My only real advice to the OP is this: play a TON of games with the cards just as they are, looking for ways to make the worse cards shine, before you decide that they need a 'fix'.

[KingZog3]

Regardless of what you think, the cards simply aren't being bought and used effectively when I play online and in person.  I'm going to change the cards I play with a bit to help with that when I play in person.  If they work for us, then who cares what you think.  Get over yourself.

Actually, we don't care what you do. Really, we don't. We also aren't self centered, or think we're better than you. And we don't have to get over ourselves. I don't think anyone here is an annoying teen girl. You asked, we replied.

If you want, you could add +$20 to all the cards if you think that makes the game fun. If you want to make the changes, you can, because the point is to have fun. What we are saying is your changes, in terms of balancing ALL the cards, seem not great. For us that is. I like the cards as they are. The only card that is not bought in my play group is Counting House. I do buy it sometimes to have fun with a weird strategy, but otherwise its the only card that isn't used in some way or at some point. Even Chancellor is used. And we aren't bad players. All around 5500 on Goko, so we know how to play. But if you guys want to change something to make use the cards more, then go ahead. Have fun. We take out Goons because we don't find it fun. That's all there is too it. I'd rather enjoy myself without Goons than leave it in for the sake of the game. You do that too if you like.

[forthemame]

If they work for us, then who cares what you think.  Get over yourself.

If you don't care what we think, then why did you bother posting?

The thing is, the people who posted here are trying to be helpful and show you why they do/don't think your changes will make Dominion a better game, because by posting, you implicitly asked for them to do that.  If you're going to ignore their advice anyway, then there wasn't much point in posting this thread.

Anyway, most of the card you mentioned are weak, but not so much so that they need changing.  I think it would be disappointing if you found a game where a normal Bureaucrat could have been awesome for whatever reason, but everyone is getting them anyway because gaining Silver to hand is so good.  And there are some minor variants you could make that probably wouldn't hurt the game at all, but if you buff all the weak cards until they're not weak, then you just get a new batch of weak cards that get ignored.  Maybe that makes for an interesting metagame, if that's what you're going for, but I can understand why the general consensus of the people here think it's a bad idea.  It's impossible to perfectly balance all the cards in the game, you might as well just settle for DXV's attempt.

I care to change the cards and would like input on how to do it.  The suggestion that changing the cards is pointless because they have a niche use doesn't help the overall goal to make these weaker cards viable as non-niche-only cards.

Regardless of anyone's opinion on whether or not to make the changes, it's going to happen as we feel the need to compensate for stale kingdoms with several of these cards.  I care about everyone's opinion on how to better these cards, which is why I posted.  Telling me I need to learn how to play better isn't really going to fix any of the issues at hand.

[eHalcyon]

If they work for us, then who cares what you think.  Get over yourself.

If you don't care what we think, then why did you bother posting?

The thing is, the people who posted here are trying to be helpful and show you why they do/don't think your changes will make Dominion a better game, because by posting, you implicitly asked for them to do that.  If you're going to ignore their advice anyway, then there wasn't much point in posting this thread.

Anyway, most of the card you mentioned are weak, but not so much so that they need changing.  I think it would be disappointing if you found a game where a normal Bureaucrat could have been awesome for whatever reason, but everyone is getting them anyway because gaining Silver to hand is so good.  And there are some minor variants you could make that probably wouldn't hurt the game at all, but if you buff all the weak cards until they're not weak, then you just get a new batch of weak cards that get ignored.  Maybe that makes for an interesting metagame, if that's what you're going for, but I can understand why the general consensus of the people here think it's a bad idea.  It's impossible to perfectly balance all the cards in the game, you might as well just settle for DXV's attempt.

I care to change the cards and would like input on how to do it.  The suggestion that changing the cards is pointless because they have a niche use doesn't help the overall goal to make these weaker cards viable as non-niche-only cards.

Regardless of anyone's opinion on whether or not to make the changes, it's going to happen as we feel the need to compensate for stale kingdoms with several of these cards.  I care about everyone's opinion on how to better these cards, which is why I posted.  Telling me I need to learn how to play better isn't really going to fix any of the issues at hand.

Power wise, these ones are probably too strong after your changes:

Bureaucrat -- Gaining Silver to hand makes it worth ~$5.  If you really want it buffed, maybe offer a choice of topdecked Silver or +$1.

Moat -- Cards and money are (very roughly) comparable, so adding +$1 to Moat puts it pretty well on par with Smithy, a $4 card.  I really can't think of any change that works because Moat is all about the reaction, and sometimes that reaction just has no use on a board.

Tribute -- Counting duplicates, you pretty much always get an effect which is worthy of a $6 cost.  How about revealing 3 cards and you get to choose which 2 to count (still no duplicates).

Lookout -- Already decently fast trashing, doesn't need to be safer.  Again, I don't have a suggestion because Lookout is not that weak.  I use it often for early game trashing.

There are others I'm less sure about.

[ftl]

A reasonable change to spy (and Scrying Pool!) would be to speed it up by taking the choice away. Donald X. eventually decided that Rabble was the right way to do top-deck attacks: "every player reveals the top [X] cards, discards the ones that match some criterion, and puts the others back on top". That way, one player doesn't have to sit there agonizing about decisions for themselves and three other people.

So a reasonable change to Spy or Scrying Pool would be to change the attacking part to "Every other player reveals the top card of their deck; if it is a Victory card or a Curse, they put it back on top, otherwise they discard it." Or you can make Victory cards and Curses and Coppers go back on top, or something. Or copy Rabble's wording and have actions and treasures discarded. It's not necessarily a change for balance, the power level would decrease a little, but it would be a change for faster play and less AP.
 

[SirPeebles]

I don't think anyone here is an annoying teen girl.

Whoa, that was uncalled for.

[rspeer]

Tribute -- Counting duplicates, you pretty much always get an effect which is worthy of a $6 cost.  How about revealing 3 cards and you get to choose which 2 to count (still no duplicates).

Whoa, a Tribute you can control? That's way too strong.

I agree that most of the proposed changes are examples of RIFLE IS FINE. Lookout burned you too many times? That should be a reason to learn when not to play it in future games, not to change the card into one that doesn't burn you.

Now of those changes, I vaguely approve of adding +1 Action to Transmute. Then maybe it's not so bad that one of its effects gives you more Transmutes; at least they're nonterminal. The +Buy on buy is unnecessary in that case, though. The possible drawback is that it detracts from the glorious one game in a thousand where you win because you bought Transmute.

[HiveMindEmulator]

Do you really think the Tribute change is OK?  It seems too powerful to me.  I mean, I guess it is checked by the inherent unreliability -- maybe I just want cards but I keep getting coin instead -- but counting duplicates just makes all possibilities so strong.  +$4, +4 Cards, or +$2 and +2 cards... all are great and worth more than $5.  I am discounting the effect of Curses and actions though.

I guess it's probably too strong when you hit 2 Coppers early. But otherwise it doesn't matter that much, so it's probably okay. Goes from being weak to being strong early, but I don't think it's ridiculous. Maybe it is though. Haven't tried it.

No card is a strategy by itself. Except Rebuild and sometimes Jack of all Trades.

No card is ever a good strategy by itself. Sometimes simple seems good because you beat people doing something too complicated that they don't do it right, but if you buy just 1 kind of card, most of the time you're doing it wrong. Exceptions might be terminal draw cards, since sometimes the risk of dead-draw outweighs the other benefits of adding different cards.

And on the topic if it's a good idea to change so many things: it's probably not. If you change 20 cards at once, then you just get a completely different game. Maybe this is what you want, since then you get to learn what's "good" again, but if you haven't really learned how to use the existing cards yet, you might as well do that instead. It could be just as fun, and then you're learning the same game as the rest of us! You say that you don't like "niche" cards, but maybe you're underestimating the size of the "niche".

Some specific examples:
 - A lot of people think Counting House is just never good becasue they tried it like 3 times when it wasn't and then gave up. But there's actually a large proportion of time when it's actually good. Like any Colony game where you can't trash/cycle away your Copper.
 - I've started using Bureaucrat a lot more just recently, after playing thousands of games. In addition to being good in slogs, it's good in a lot of engines when your opponent greens before you. Like Rabble, it punishes early greening. Gain a Silver is worse than +3 cards for an engine, but the attack part is often just as good, so it works as a late add if the Silver gain doesn't hurt you that much.
 - In big draw engines where you can't/don't trash your Copper, Coppersmith is stupid-good. If you think this "niche" is too small, maybe you're not just missing out on Coppersmith, but a lot of good light-trashing engines that don't involve Coppersmith...

[UmbrageOfSnow]

I agree that most of the proposed changes are examples of RIFLE IS FINE. Lookout burned you too many times? That should be a reason to learn when not to play it in future games, not to change the card into one that doesn't burn you.

WHY YOU WANT +$ FOR MOAT? IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH AS PROCURED FROM RIO GRANDE GAMES? YOU THINK NEEDS IMPROVEMENT? THEN MAYBE YOU FIND JOB WITH JAY TUMMELSON! YOU HAVE DRINKS WITH DONALD X. VACCARINO, TRADE STORY OF MANY GAMES DESIGNED AND DETAILS OF SPIEL DES JAHRES!

OR MAYBE YOU NOT DO THIS. PROBABLY IS BECAUSE YOU NEVER DESIGN GAME IN WHOLE LIFE. YOU LOOK AT FINE AMERICAN GAME, THINK IT NEED CRAZY JUNK STICK ON ALL SIDES OF CARDS. YOU HAVE DISEASE OF BGG SCRUB, CHANGE THING THAT IS FINE FOR NO REASON EXCEPT BE DIFFERENT FROM COMRADE. YOU PUT CHEAP +CARD OF CHINESE SLAVE FACTORY ON ONE CARD, YOU PUT BAD +BUY OF AMERICAN MIDDLE WEST ON OTHER CARD, YOU PUT FRONT PISTOL GRIP ON SCOUT SO YOU THINK YOU ARE LIKE AMERICAN MOVIE GUY JOHN RAMBO. MAYBE YOU PUT SEX DILDO ON SECRET CHAMBER TO ENJOY MAKING SHAMEFUL TRAVESTY OF GAME OF DONALD X. VACCARINO, NO?

GAME IS FINE. YOU CHANGE IT, IT ONLY GET BORING AND YOU STILL NO HIT FOUR PROVINCE BY TURN SEVENTEEN. GO TO INTERNET, PRACTICE WITH MANY MATCH OF GAME, THEN YOU NOT NEED DUMB CRAP PUT ON BOTTOM OF CARDS.

[Warfreak2]

Bureaucrat -- Gaining Silver to hand makes it worth ~$5.  If you really want it buffed, maybe offer a choice of topdecked Silver or +$1.

Bureaucrat gains a Silver because bloating your deck with Silver is an effective way to stop you from playing five Bureaucrats every turn, which would be an easy-to-set-up pin.

[Davio]

Regarding Saboteur, I don't think its main problem is the attack part, it's just that it doesn't provide any resources to the player playing the card, like Sea Hag. As printed, the card exists for the sole reason of hassling other players. Luckily, it's a usually a pretty crappy card, but when it's good it can really make games not fun anymore.

Build up, trash everything, build up again (or pile out), it just makes the game twice or three times as long for no good reason.

So I could live with a little bonus for the attacker in exchange for lessening the attack part to achieve two things: Make it a decent option in more (random) kingdoms and not let the games where it's now great get out of hand an last unnecessarily long.

Proposal:
Saboteur - $5
Each other player trashes the top card of their deck and may gain a card costing at most $2 less than it. You may gain a card costing up to $3 more than it that is not a Victory card.


The idea here is more important than the specifics of the card: Still have opponents trash cards, but they can now sometimes be Coppers or Curses and let you gain something based on what they trashed.

[Warfreak2]

There are already plenty of top-card trashing attacks, Saboteur is interesting because it hunts for something to trash. +$1 wouldn't be so bad; the simplest fix would be making the opponent's gain mandatory, so they have to take a Copper when their Silver gets hit.

[dondon151]

Dude, that is like, so amazing in engines.

I care to change the cards and would like input on how to do it.  The suggestion that changing the cards is pointless because they have a niche use doesn't help the overall goal to make these weaker cards viable as non-niche-only cards.

Every card is, by definition, a niche card. Some niches are bigger than others.

Regardless of anyone's opinion on whether or not to make the changes, it's going to happen as we feel the need to compensate for stale kingdoms with several of these cards.  I care about everyone's opinion on how to better these cards, which is why I posted.  Telling me I need to learn how to play better isn't really going to fix any of the issues at hand.

You're always going to have weak cards. Say you make 20 of them stronger; you're still going to have another 20 that you'll almost never use because their roles have been displaced by the cards that you strengthened.

[brokoli]

but when it's good it can really make games not fun anymore.

False.
Saboteur games are part of the most interesting and fun games in Dominion, seriously.
Ok, it's my opinion. I love games where you have to change your initial plans. If your opponent destroy your deck, you have to "rebuild" it in a way that your deck is better defended.
And Sabs games are not so much longer, really.

[awildnoobappeared]

The one card I'd fix more than any other is Scrying Pool. It's not that it's so good it breaks the game, it's just that the spy attack adds nothing of value to the card and slows the game down to a crawl especially when you're chaining them (and for what, you get to leave a single junk card on their deck which they discard with their own SP)

I don't think the card would suffer at all if the attack portion of the card was removed, and remained the same otherwise.

[LastFootnote]

Saboteur - $5
Each other player trashes the top card of their deck and may gain a card costing at most $2 less than it. You may gain a card costing up to $3 more than it that is not a Victory card.


The idea here is more important than the specifics of the card: Still have opponents trash cards, but they can now sometimes be Coppers or Curses and let you gain something based on what they trashed.

But...isn't that even more swingy? When they trash a good card, you gain a good card. But when they trash a bad card, you gain a mediocre card. Right?

[Awaclus]

The one card I'd fix more than any other is Scrying Pool. It's not that it's so good it breaks the game, it's just that the spy attack adds nothing of value to the card and slows the game down to a crawl especially when you're chaining them (and for what, you get to leave a single junk card on their deck which they discard with their own SP)

The point is not to leave a junk card on their deck, the point is to skip their good cards. Which makes it a little swingy, because sometimes it skips five Scrying Pools and sometimes there's an Estate on top of the deck already. Though I agree that it didn't really need the attack.

[KingZog3]

The one card I'd fix more than any other is Scrying Pool. It's not that it's so good it breaks the game, it's just that the spy attack adds nothing of value to the card and slows the game down to a crawl especially when you're chaining them (and for what, you get to leave a single junk card on their deck which they discard with their own SP)

The point is not to leave a junk card on their deck, the point is to skip their good cards. Which makes it a little swingy, because sometimes it skips five Scrying Pools and sometimes there's an Estate on top of the deck already. Though I agree that it didn't really need the attack.

I thought DXV said the in secret histories that the only reason it's an attack was to have a second attack in Alchemy.

[RTT]

having scrying pool as an attack also changes some reaction interaction (gain silvers with beggar, Horsetrader + Cards, SecretChamber)
also you cant then get it via squire if the attack is missing.
but I agree that the attack is extremly annoying and weak at the same time.

[dondon151]

SP is not really a weak attack.

[Warfreak2]

I think Scrying Pool's attack is quite important against non-mirrors; sure, an opponent's Scrying Pool can discard the junk card you left on top, but that assumes your opponent is going for Scrying Pools too. Against other strategies, especially without +buy, you often need the attack to slow down your opponent, so you have time to build. The attack itself isn't weak if you are playing many Scrying Pools per turn - with enough of them, you can discard Coppers, if you're likely to find something worse - so it's more comparable to Fortune Teller than Spy. It also combos with trashing attacks, such as Saboteur or Rogue, which become much stronger when you play them multiple times per turn with control over what's on their deck. You can turn Jester into Witch.

[NoMoreFun]

I think Goons and to a lesser extent Margrave break the rule of having a strong attack on a card that you often don't buy for the Attack. I like the idea that with most other attacks, you go out of your way to be an attacker, so in friendly games you can avoid them and not really miss out on any crazy self tinkering you want to do. I'd like to be able to make a crazy Goons engine without rubbing it in everyone's face.

Scrying Pool's attack is not very strong but that's also definitely a card you don't buy for its attack.

[eHalcyon]

I buy Margrave for the attack.

[Fragasnap]

Now of those changes, I vaguely approve of adding +1 Action to Transmute. Then maybe it's not so bad that one of its effects gives you more Transmutes; at least they're nonterminal. The +Buy on buy is unnecessary in that case, though. The possible drawback is that it detracts from the glorious one game in a thousand where you win because you bought Transmute.

I do not approve. A nonterminal Transmute might make Transmute>Duchy rushing a thing-- which would be hilarious, mind you, but not very fun.

So I could live with a little bonus for the attacker in exchange for lessening the attack part to achieve two things: Make [Saboteur] a decent option in more (random) kingdoms and not let the games where it's now great get out of hand an last unnecessarily long.

I personally love Saboteur, even if Saboteur-wars take so much time. Knights take a lot of time too and they're actually decent cards!

If Saboteur was changed to give it some benefit for the player, the benefit should be inversely proportional to the detriment for other players.
What I'm saying is that if everyone trashes Provinces, you should be given less of a bonus than when everyone trashes Silver.

Saboteur

Each other player reveals cards from the top of his deck until revealing one costing $3 or more. He trashes that card and may gain a card costing at most $2 less than it. He discards the other revealed cards. If no cards costing $5 or more were trashed this way, ...

$5 ACTION - ATTACK

I don't know what the benefit should be though.