Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - Bianary

#1
Feature Requests / Re: Ban n Cards in Rated Games
10 July 2017, 01:59:39 AM
Quote from: Jacob Marley on 09 July 2017, 11:32:35 PM
Quote from: Bianary on 09 July 2017, 11:09:00 PM
Quote from: WhiteRabbit1981 on 02 June 2017, 05:24:57 PM
I understood that i can only be matched against players who have the same "dislikes" as i have. Of curse it makes more sense if possession would just not appear in the kingdom, i got that wrong.

I still love possession games, so thanks a lot that you made that card. I even liked it more in its 1st Edition style because of some interesting variants with VP-point gainers (you triple posses me? play all my bishops-fortresses). Then again, i just had a really great game with possession and capital where not paying back debt protected from successfull possessions.
Cutting out that special card everyone else hates would indeed make the game less enjoyable for me, because i would miss those strange interactive plays. And thats the reason i dont want a card-ban system and vote against it.

I understand noone should be forced to play something they dont like. If a game starts and pre-turn 1 my opponent chats something like "lets ban rebuild to avoid the mirror and have a more interesting game", i always agree. Of course, if i chat "lets ignore TAX and Wolf Den" it wouldnt affect the game too much  :o

In RL-games, we like to ban "shuffle-heavy" cards like Hunting Party or Scrying Pool. In online games, i would rather ban click-heavy spam cards like Moat in a Minion game.
The problem with possession isn't fun things like apprentice on colonies, it's the way it doesn't restore the new mechanics:

  • Cards being removed from tavern mats (Such as Royal Carriage)
  • Cards being left on tavern mats (Such as wine merchant)
  • Coins earned on your turn being spent
  • Prince (I prince'd an opponent's Embargo once.
  • Journey Tokens
  • +Buy/+Card/Trash/etc. tokens

There were a few cards that were impacted before (eg native village) but the number of destructive interactions has gone up so they happen a lot more frequently when possession is available.  So while it's kinda fun in certain decks, it's just frustrating in so many more now.

You hit the nail on the head.  The fundamental problem with Possession is that it does not (and cannot) have the "attack" type, but over time it has become a de facto attack.  When it was introduced, this was not the case, except in the interaction with Masquerade, but now so many new mechanics have been added that Possession broken in the sense that it cannot be an attack because it does affect all other players, and cannot be a non-attack because it is allowed to act as an attack with the new interactions.

So, in my opinion, Possession should be removed entirely from the game.  There is no fixing it.
I think you could fix it, but it would need a new, wordy clause: Cards may not be set aside or moved on or off of mats, and any tokens owned by the other player are ignored while possessed.

So if you put a -card or -coin token on them then possessed, you'd not suffer those drawbacks.  You also couldn't set aside Prince, turn over journey tokens, or spend coins that the other player had.

This would limit it back down to lower than the damage it could do before (Since you couldn't screw with their native village mat anymore, either) while not weakening it in most use cases.  Unfortunately, it's way too many words to fit on the card so would have to be an off-card errata (Maybe noted on the card to go read that?)
#2
Feature Requests / Re: Ban n Cards in Rated Games
09 July 2017, 11:09:00 PM
Quote from: WhiteRabbit1981 on 02 June 2017, 05:24:57 PM
I understood that i can only be matched against players who have the same "dislikes" as i have. Of curse it makes more sense if possession would just not appear in the kingdom, i got that wrong.

I still love possession games, so thanks a lot that you made that card. I even liked it more in its 1st Edition style because of some interesting variants with VP-point gainers (you triple posses me? play all my bishops-fortresses). Then again, i just had a really great game with possession and capital where not paying back debt protected from successfull possessions.
Cutting out that special card everyone else hates would indeed make the game less enjoyable for me, because i would miss those strange interactive plays. And thats the reason i dont want a card-ban system and vote against it.

I understand noone should be forced to play something they dont like. If a game starts and pre-turn 1 my opponent chats something like "lets ban rebuild to avoid the mirror and have a more interesting game", i always agree. Of course, if i chat "lets ignore TAX and Wolf Den" it wouldnt affect the game too much  :o

In RL-games, we like to ban "shuffle-heavy" cards like Hunting Party or Scrying Pool. In online games, i would rather ban click-heavy spam cards like Moat in a Minion game.
The problem with possession isn't fun things like apprentice on colonies, it's the way it doesn't restore the new mechanics:

  • Cards being removed from tavern mats (Such as Royal Carriage)
  • Cards being left on tavern mats (Such as wine merchant)
  • Coins you earned on your turn being spent by the opponent possessing you
  • Prince (I prince'd an opponent's Embargo once.)
  • Journey Tokens
  • +Buy/+Card/Trash/etc. tokens

There were a few cards that were impacted before (eg native village) but the number of destructive interactions has gone up so they happen a lot more frequently when possession is available.  So while it's kinda fun in certain decks, it's just frustrating in so many more now.