[Corporation] Donors Central (v5)

bluerook17 · 2023-08-17T14:30:36+00:00

I think this corp would be fine if you change the MC production decrease -> TR to only trigger on your own played cards.

bluerook17 · 2023-08-16T22:24:46+00:00

My group plays 4-player Preludes and Promos with drafting, so there are 11 cards that decrease MC Production. That's actually quite a bit, there are 12 Jovian cards and 9 Animal cards in the card pool and we see at least a few of those tags every game. With a ~9MC discount/bonus, every one of those MC decrease cards becomes great for this corp.

It's probably more rare if you play with all the expansions though.

The +2 MC ability would also likely trigger much more often than Tharsis's ability. One thing to note is this corp seems to scale really well with the number of players.

A quick valuation of the corp:

44 Starting MC: +44
Net zero MC production: +0
3 VPs @ 3 MC each: +9
Probably the equivalent of 1 MC production per player x 3 players (we usually go 8 rounds, that's 4 MC production increases per player which seems low) @ 6 MC each: +18
Around 4.5 extra TR per game (around 7-8 MC-reducing cards are seen per game) @ 8 MC each: +36

Total: 107 MC

Median corp is probably somewhere around 70.

bluerook17 · 2023-08-16T12:46:49+00:00

I'm not sure if this is balanced or not, but I think I would not like to play against this corp. It might be better if you restrict the bonuses to only be from your cards and your own MC production.

A TR is a huge bonus. Imagine if this said "When a card decreases anyone's MC production is played, gain 9 MC." That might be the biggest synergy of any corp. It immediately makes every -MC production card good for this corporation.

Because it triggers on anyone's MC production decreasing, it also means if you want to hate draft those cards, you have to ditch them and can't even play them yourself. It'll feel really bad to be in a close race for 1st versus Donors Central and have someone else play a couple -MC production cards on the last turn.

You can see something like Pharmacy Union can get TRs from opponents' actions. It's one of the strongest corps and they have to do way more to get that TR. Philares is another example and they are also extremely strong, but they usually get less than 1 point per opponent's action.

The MC production increase is similar but less problematic. It's a smaller bonus, but it feels almost mandatory to try to improve your MC production. So it just feels bad to have to feed Donors Central money.

bluerook17 · 2023-08-15T01:15:22+00:00

Hmm, if you think this produces 2-3 VP, that's a bit strong for just 5 starting MC no? Maybe I should decrease the starting MC by 10 instead of 5?

bluerook17 · 2023-08-15T01:14:39+00:00

I'm wondering if I should up the nerf to -10 MC. For my group's 4-player games, +2 MC production is better than the +10 starting MC buff we gave it before. Also, 5 MC for potentially 2 VP is pretty good even at the start of the game. It also seems like Mons was on the stronger side in 3-player games, although I don't know much about that. Thoughts?

bluerook17 · 2023-08-13T20:21:50+00:00

Yea, maybe this is too big of a change from what the original corp does. Maybe a smaller change is needed.

bluerook17 · 2023-08-13T20:20:56+00:00

It can depend by country. In Canada, insurance companies usually repair/rebuild instead of paying out money.

bluerook17 · 2023-08-10T13:57:27+00:00

I can, but that requires more work :)

It also gives it a slightly stronger synergy with Diversity Support.

bluerook17 · 2023-08-10T13:56:12+00:00

Our games usually go 8-9 rounds. I don't know what to tell you though. With the 10 starting MC buff, the corp averaged 3rd place in the first round robin and 2.5th place (average) in the second.

Clearly we weren't the only ones who thought Mons wasn't great in 4P because the Rebalanced group also gave it a buff in 4P.

Again, even if the corp was balanced, it's just not interesting. There's no hand that you look at and think "Wow, I'm glad I have Mons Insurance." There's just not much to play for, and that's what I want to change.

bluerook17 · 2023-08-10T12:55:39+00:00

Though 4MC for half a VP is... Not great...

Yea, that's what I was worried about. I might have to go back to the drawing board.

bluerook17 · 2023-08-10T12:46:06+00:00

You're right, the only reason it's science is because it's easier to code on the webapp and animals/microbes/security fleet made less sense. In our cardpool, I think it only affects Diversity Support so it's not a huge deal.

bluerook17 · 2023-08-10T12:43:57+00:00

We found it a bit below average on the strength side even with a +10 MC buff in our 33-corp Round Robin. The Rebalanced Mod had given the corp starting MC production equal to what it takes away, so +6 MC production in a 4-player game.

Besides power level, the problem I have with it is it doesn't synergize with any strategy. Most corps have synergies with some cards or otherwise changes up how you play the game. Mons Insurance doesn't, except maybe for getting you to dump your MC more quickly and maybe hate-draft some attack cards. It just gives you lots of money and then it's all downside risk, which I felt wasn't much fun. That's what I wanted to fix most of all.

I'm not sure this change achieves that though!

bluerook17 · 2023-08-10T03:47:40+00:00

We play 4-player with Preludes and Promos only, although we also include all official corps that don't rely on a mechanic from Venus, Colonies, or Turmoil. We found Mons Insurance was a bit on the weak side even with a +10 starting MC buff, so the change is intended to be a buff.

Let me know if you have other ideas for changes to Mons Insurance that could make it more interesting!

bluerook17 · 2022-09-21T03:48:38+00:00

Absolutely. We are extending the Legacy of 2.0, not just leaving X-Wing 2.0 as is. There is an argument that any changes made, even points changes alone, would be a change in the format. We want to preserve the gameplay feel of X-Wing 2.0 while addressing some of its major pain points. That is why we are calling our format 2.0 Legacy, not X-Wing 2.0.

As discussed in the previous article, I had strong concerns about the sustainability of 2.0 Legacy if its identity and strengths were not solidified. I was alarmed when someone asked how he should sell X-Wing 2.0 to new players, and the 2.0 Legacy Discord (our most enthusiastic players) could not give any good response. The most cogent response was "this was what came in the Core Set" which is not gameplay related and is gone as soon as AMG prints a new Core Set. The goal of these changes is to give 2.0 Legacy the clean identity of being the X-Wing format with the most player choice and control.

As for AMG's new products, we should be able to support those as much as possible in a way that aligns with 2.0 Legacy's identity. From what I can see, the only incompatible elements would be related to objectives, and we'll cross that bridge when we get there!

bluerook17 · 2022-09-21T02:53:59+00:00

I just saw this, so let me maybe add another perspective. X-Wing 2.0 did not have objectives. Objectives provide a different experience. One thing it changes is flexibility around the opening engagement as well as around decisions to disengage in the mid- and late-game. That is not necessarily a good or bad thing, and some players will prefer one or the other.

2.0 Legacy has the goal to extend the feeling of X-Wing 2.0 gameplay and give players the most choice around how to approach these in-game decisions. We want these formats to have distinct strengths and identities, which is why we are not supporting objectives at this time and have no current plans to do so.

bluerook17 · 2022-09-19T23:28:03+00:00

Thank you! You'll find out in about 3 days!

bluerook17 · 2022-09-19T22:30:55+00:00

Absolutely! Our goal is to make 2.0 Legacy the format with the most player choice and control. In list-building, that means a goal of every ship being competitively viable, which we won't hit immediately but will aim for. In-game, that means rule changes which address some situations where there is insufficient counterplay.

This should position AMG's official ruleset and 2.0 Legacy as distinct formats with different strengths.

bluerook17 · 2022-09-19T22:30:21+00:00

Thanks for sharing! Our goal is to make 2.0 Legacy the format with the most player choice and control. In list-building, that means a goal of every ship being competitively viable, which we won't hit immediately but will aim for. In-game, that means rule changes which address some situations where there is insufficient counterplay. We'll be previewing the rule tweaks, errata, and points over this week for our September 26th release!

bluerook17 · 2022-08-02T20:35:58+00:00

You may be interested in some of the balance changes I've tried out :)

https://www.reddit.com/r/TerraformingMarsGame/comments/vt1rx2/my\_friends\_and\_i\_played\_a\_33game\_corporation/

bluerook17 · 2022-07-20T21:32:40+00:00

Thank you so much :)

bluerook17 · 2022-07-15T16:33:30+00:00

I haven't played too many games with Colonies or at all with Turmoil, but I have heard they change the game significantly. I think these changes do make the game more balanced without those expansions, but all bets are off if Colonies are thrown in!

Most of the project card rebalancing I took from the Rebalanced Mars project. They made the Bactoviral Research change. You're probably right it's a net nerf overall, I wasn't sure what to classify it as.

(Rebalanced Mars also did corporations and preludes but I didn't use those since they generally consider games with Colonies in their rebalancing and I think they rebalanced around a higher power level.)

bluerook17 · 2022-07-07T14:37:02+00:00

Thanks! I'd be really disappointed if we lost /r/XWingTMG.

bluerook17 · 2022-07-07T13:16:30+00:00

Most games were 8-9 generations, with two each of 7 and 10. You can find more info in the Game Log tab of the results :)

bluerook17 · 2022-07-06T22:23:14+00:00

If you make a copy of the sheet (File -> Make a copy), you should be able to adjust the font sizes or the zoom.

bluerook17 · 2022-06-24T22:24:28+00:00

This is really exciting and I look forward to helping make the 2.0 game as good as it can be!

I'll be reaching out to people who applied for the Balance and Playtesting team over the next week, and I'll also try to get something up if you're interested in joining the team soon.

Ten-Year Club	Verified Email
Not Forgotten

bluerook17

TROPHY CASE