Original Base & Intrigue Cards

Previous topic - Next topic

Olimar_Prime

I'm excited to get to play with the newly updated second edition cards from Base and Intrigue.  However, I just wish it didn't come at the expense of losing access to the original cards from those sets.  Many of us have been playing with the original cards since their release and might like the option to select from the full library of cards, including both the original and second edition cards for Base and Intrigue.  I'm a big believer in options are always good.  I realize there will probably be people who will argue that the second edition cards are better, and that's fine for them.  For those folks who don't like the original cards, they can choose not to play with them, but I would prefer the ability to select from all the cards that have been released for the game, just like I can do with my physical copies.  I think more variety improves the game, and I appreciate the nostalgia of the original cards.  And some of the replaced ones were ones that I enjoyed from those sets, and am sad to see replaced.

Thank you for your consideration. 

Olimar_Prime

I should add, I noticed the comment about these cards in the FAQ.  I know that implementing the old cards is not a current priority, and I appreciate that y'all answered this question directly there, but I do hope that we will see the original cards before too long.

Thanks again!

bonygniz

strongly support the notion!
give me back my scout! no joke, it is the cornerstone of my victory cards based board.

Philothea

Me, too. I would love the option to use "retired" cards. Tribute!

santamonica811

In a physical deck, I totally get no longer giving the old cards...extra space, extra expense, etc.  But in "virtual" decks, it's really strange.  A tiny bit of time to add programming for these extra "old" cards, and then Shuffle has them forever in its records.  It would then be super-easy for us to go to Familiar cards and select them, if we wanted to play with some or all of them again. 

I mean; it's not like the old ones were particularly awful or were so powerful that using them ruined the games.  I guess my reaction is:  Why on earth not give the option?

I must be missing something.  :-)

Icehawk78

Quote from: josh bornstein on 16 January 2017, 04:18:38 AM
I mean; it's not like the old ones were particularly awful or were so powerful that using them ruined the games.  I guess my reaction is:  Why on earth not give the option?

I must be missing something.  :-)

According to Donald X, they were all removed for being particularly and notably bad, and we generally all replaced with other cards that did essentially the same "concept" but better.

See the secret history post here for more details: https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1648227/secret-history-dominion-2nd-editions

twasa

I fail to get the nostalgia for the replaced cards. They rarely got bought in almost any kingdom, since they were generally not useful. I would rather the developers spend effort on other improvements, than implementing the replaced cards.

AdamH

I don't carry any of the removed cards around in my IRL box except for Coppersmith, and I don't miss any of the ones I don't have in that box. I don't really miss them on the online client either.

That said, I would like the option to play with them if I wanted to. Obviously implementing all of the actual cards (srsly when is that going to be finished? The release was over 2 weeks ago) and several other things are a higher priority, but I can't imagine it's hard to do them.

Some people don't want it, some people do. So like, it should be done and then there should be an option to not do it. Seems really simple.

007Bistromath

Quote from: Icehawk78 on 16 January 2017, 08:05:17 AM
According to Donald X, they were all removed for being particularly and notably bad, and we generally all replaced with other cards that did essentially the same "concept" but better.

See the secret history post here for more details: https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1648227/secret-history-dominion-2nd-editions

The decisions mostly make sense, but Spy and Feast were good. I can understand not wanting Spy from a design standpoint; if you're playing with somebody that doesn't know what they're doing, a decision per player per Spy can be a drag. Learning to use them right is easy though, and there's lots of engines they fit well in. As for Feast, 4 is often littered with fairly meh cards. One or two Feasts in the early game lets you turn "guess I'll buy another silver" into a jumpstart. They also sometimes feature in the "embarrass your opponent" phase of a successful engine.

Replacing Feast with Artisan is particularly confusing. The topdecking is neat, but ultimately it has the same problem as Adventurer: I have six. I'm buying gold. Something has to be seriously compelling to make me do something else at that price, and Artisan isn't it unless my deck already has lots of stuff that synergizes with it, which means I'm probably starting to buy victory anyway.

Jacob Marley

Generally I found myself buying Spy because I had 4 and there was nothing else (even silver) that I wanted below 5 so, might as well in case it helps a bit.  Not really a ringing endorsement.

Feast guarantees the key 5, but often buying a silver also gets you there and the silver has future utility.

kieranmillar

Feast and Spy were terrible bad cards, and Artisan is an insane power card. There's my hot take.  8)

IRL I have removed the first edition cards from my box and the games are so much better now. I can actually safely feel like I can do a totally random base-only board with brand new players and it will be excellent, instead of most likely being filled with too many weak terminals. I am glad they are not in the online game either so the boards are more likely to be cool and good.

JW

#11
Quote from: 007Bistromath on 16 January 2017, 10:58:13 PM
Replacing Feast with Artisan is particularly confusing. The topdecking is neat, but ultimately it has the same problem as Adventurer: I have six. I'm buying gold. Something has to be seriously compelling to make me do something else at that price, and Artisan isn't it unless my deck already has lots of stuff that synergizes with it, which means I'm probably starting to buy victory anyway.

The fault is not in our Artisans,
But in ourselves, that we buy victory too soon.
And Gold too much.

Artisan is good. Try a board like the following, which I recently randomly got IRL for 2e Base/Intrigue (2 players). Artisan, Courtier, Replace, Patrol, Market, Throne Room, Conspirator, Village, Masquerade, Moat.




007Bistromath

That hardly seems like an argument in favor of Artisan to me. The thing that makes it an essential buy in that set is Throne Room, which is always disruptive. If TR/KC are on the board, then any number of terminals which are usually "maybe if I have time after I get established" become "I will pay any price for that."

As for Feast vs. Silver, I tend to find that in any game where the choice is between those two, I wind up with too many silvers and getting lots of 5-7 when I should be going faster. Feast serves the same purpose while allowing your deck to be just a little thinner. It's not great, but it generally worked for me. I'd like it back.

LastFootnote

007Bistromath, three things.

First, nice Douglas Adams reference.

Second, Artisan is strong. The boards where I would buy Gold over Artisan on my first $6 hand are rare. It doesn't need an engine (or Throne Room) to be great.

Third, it's worth buying good $5 cards over Gold extremely often. If you're auto-buying Gold at $6 most of the time, well, that's an aspect of your game you could easily improve!

JW

Quote from: LastFootnote on 17 January 2017, 04:05:40 AM
Third, it's worth buying good $5 cards over Gold extremely often. If you're auto-buying Gold at $6 most of the time, well, that's an aspect of your game you could easily improve!

This is great advice, and it's also worth noting that on a large percentage of boards you don't want to buy Province the first time you have the ability to do so.

anaslexio

artisan with chapel or other good card trashers + actions is terribly op. if there are no good trashers or actions it's meh, unless there are no buys so you can get more juice out of it than workshop probably.
Talking about  the thread I'm glad that thief got replaced with bandit (it was pretty much useless for 2 player games), Idk what was so bad about adventurer, it had it's uses, surely you don't usually buy cards which cost 6 because of gold but in a game with a lot of curses + mine adventurer could prove to give you a guaranted amount of coins based on your deck while skipping everything else.
I feel that the biggest loss was woodcutter. In a game with base cards woodcutter is pretty much a sure buy early unless you can get festival or market and now there are less buy cards in the base set.
spy was a pain in the ass, specially when you had a lot and revealed a victory card or curse, the next times you used spy you would need to click keep again and again. Sentry is better in my opinion and it's faster because it's not an attack so games are now more fluid with less attacks

007Bistromath

I always got more mileage out of Spy by not automatically keeping bad cards, actually. If you're chaining several of them together, it's worth it to dig under that estate to dump the silvers and witches it was protecting. Even with only two spies, if it's a copper, I might dump it, because if I get another copper it's way more of a problem for my opponent. I pretty much only put junk back on the last spy.

LastFootnote

Quote from: 007Bistromath on 23 January 2017, 09:14:54 PM
I always got more mileage out of Spy by not automatically keeping bad cards, actually. If you're chaining several of them together, it's worth it to dig under that estate to dump the silvers and witches it was protecting. Even with only two spies, if it's a copper, I might dump it, because if I get another copper it's way more of a problem for my opponent. I pretty much only put junk back on the last spy.

Well not to make a habit of contradicting you, but I think you actually just feel like you got more mileage out of Spy that way, when in reality you were helping your opponent. Or at least not hurting them as much as if you'd stopped on the first Victory or Curse cards.

007Bistromath

Definitely not. It's a bit of a gamble, that's true, and it's certainly not worth it early in the game. But later on, it works fine. Think about it from the perspective of the guy being attacked. I don't care if there's an estate in my hand; I'm at the point where, in three or four cards, I've got five coins and some cool cantrip. Then I see all that stuff just fall off the top of my deck. It's a tactic that works best when there's good trashing, because it interferes with efforts to optimize.

Ingix

You only think it works fine because you clearly remember the few cases where you actually did remove a few of opponents good cards, which was exciting for you and thus made a big impression on your memory. You just don't remember as well the many cases where you removed good and bad cards in equal measure. You probably also forget the cases where you removed a victory cards and a silver, to leave another victory card on top in the end (which feels as it was good for you but in reality it was good for opponent)

If you remove a bad card on an opponent with a spy on the grounds that you have still 3 more spies in hand and that you can then remove good cards as well, you set yourself up to *on average* improve opponents deck. Just as often as you remove good cards (or even a critical card like a witch), you will remove average cards and get him the critical cards sooner.