From what I could gather:
(archaic) Used attributively after the noun it modifies.
(archaic) Used attributively before a vowel.
Yes, but it's a matter of how archaic.
Mine in the sense where in Contemporary Modern English we would almost always use my was originally used before a noun in most cases and after a noun in vocative expressions. So I might say "mine brother" if I was telling you about my brother, but "brother mine" if I was actually addressing my brother. (Unlike my which was used before the noun in either case).
That mine is only used before a vowel (or h) is a later case, though still archaic today, as my (which had been around as an alternative for such meaning since the Middle English period) became more popular. It's simply that many people thought mine sounded nicer than my before a vowel or h. You can think of it a bit like how we use a and an, though not as strict a rule, even then.
This trend came about during the Early Modern period. I can't think of an example from Shakespeare that uses mine before a consonant (unless you count h), though I could be wrong. He certainly seems to keep to that style for the most part. But just a bit earlier we can find examples like:
I do send you at this present mine faithful Chaplain. — John Strype, 1558.
At that daye shall ye axe in myne name. — William Tyndale, 1526.
He shall be myn mortal enemy. — William Caxton, 1484.
Any earlier and we find plenty of mine before consonants, but we're coming up to the boundary with Middle English.
So if you need to suggest that you are definitely well into the second half of the 16th century or later, mine victory might be a bit anachronistic or at least unfashionably old-fashioned (especially around London), but any earlier within the Early Modern period, mine victory would be perfectly sensible.
Victory mine however is not appropriate, as you are not addressing it to the victory. (Though if you could rephrase so that you actually do address the victory poetically, then victory mine would be the perfect turn of phrase, but that idea seems rather difficult to pull off).
So we end up with:
It seems like it is mine victory in this game as well.
Perhaps:
It seems it is mine victory again.
Which cuts some chaff.
For all that, unless from context it would be reasonable for you to use a phrasing from the earlier stretch of the Early Modern English period, it might be better just to use my. Does it matter that you can demonstrate you've used a term consistently with a given period of the language if to most readers it just looks wrong?
Edit:
In a comment you note that the original has an "over you" aspect to it. If that "you" is a single person then we can use the second-person singular to our benefit:
It seems it is mine victory over thee again.
Since the thee is also not used much in contemporary English in most regions this helps the mine be read as correct Early Modern English rather than incorrect Contemporary Modern English. (Thee might be a bit rude to use, depending on the relative ranks of the people in question and how familiar they are with each other, but that make it all the more appropriate in the context).
