There are all kinds of circumstances you can cook up that make it look better, but at the end of the day it does less for you than any other card at the $4 range, and there is so much competition at that range that Scout is almost always the worst option for you. I mean, you can make a Curse or Ruined Library a good card for you in extreme circumstances. That doesn't mean they are good cards.
There are all kinds of circumstances you can cook up that make it look better, but at the end of the day it does less for you than any other card at the $4 range, and there is so much competition at that range that Scout is almost always the worst option for you. I mean, you can make a Curse or Ruined Library a good card for you in extreme circumstances. That doesn't mean they are good cards.
I agree that you can make any card look good, but without dominant 4s (JOAT, Sea Hag, Caravan, etc.) Scout could be worth it in the long run.
There are all kinds of circumstances you can cook up that make it look better, but at the end of the day it does less for you than any other card at the $4 range, and there is so much competition at that range that Scout is almost always the worst option for you. I mean, you can make a Curse or Ruined Library a good card for you in extreme circumstances. That doesn't mean they are good cards.
I agree that you can make any card look good, but without dominant 4s (JOAT, Sea Hag, Caravan, etc.) Scout could be worth it in the long run.
Even if there were no dominant <$4 cards (or even mediocre ones), Scout still always has to compete with silver and most often loses there too. You could probably invent some sort of contrived board where you want to buy a scout, but in a random set up, the odds of ever wanting scout quickly approach 0%.
Wishing Well/Scout is a nombo. You're using one card to guarantee drawing one card that you could have drawn anyway. That's not very good. At best, you can use it to guarantee drawing two cards that you could have drawn anyway, that's still not very good.
Try buying Scout a lot against good players and see what it does for you; that's always a good test.
Try buying Scout a lot against good players and see what it does for you; that's always a good test.
On a certain board, you might not regret it! I bet you've barely given Scout a chance! I agree, it's not fantastic. However, if there were 100 $4 cards (I know there aren't) I might put scout somewhere around #70. When it shines, I think it shines pretty big. When it doesn't think of it as a cantrip that drew a Victory card.
Try buying Scout a lot against good players and see what it does for you; that's always a good test.
On a certain board, you might not regret it! I bet you've barely given Scout a chance! I agree, it's not fantastic. However, if there were 100 $4 cards (I know there aren't) I might put scout somewhere around #70. When it shines, I think it shines pretty big. When it doesn't think of it as a cantrip that drew a Victory card.
Oh, I have given Scout plenty of chances. They usually don't work out. There are some cases where I will take it, but they're incredibly rare and there has to be an absence of better options.
[/q
I believe I have listed those cases, and with the amount of cards listed, there has to be at least a 10% chance that you'll buy Scout on any given board. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but Scout and it's 'listed cards' are there, 8 other cards may not be enough to beat Scout.
Try buying Scout a lot against good players and see what it does for you; that's always a good test.
On a certain board, you might not regret it! I bet you've barely given Scout a chance! I agree, it's not fantastic. However, if there were 100 $4 cards (I know there aren't) I might put scout somewhere around #70. When it shines, I think it shines pretty big. When it doesn't think of it as a cantrip that drew a Victory card.
Oh, I have given Scout plenty of chances. They usually don't work out. There are some cases where I will take it, but they're incredibly rare and there has to be an absence of better options.
I believe I have listed those cases, and with the amount of cards listed, there has to be at least a 10% chance that you'll buy Scout on any given board. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but Scout and it's 'listed cards' are there, 8 other cards may not be enough to beat Scout.
Try buying Scout a lot against good players and see what it does for you; that's always a good test.
On a certain board, you might not regret it! I bet you've barely given Scout a chance! I agree, it's not fantastic. However, if there were 100 $4 cards (I know there aren't) I might put scout somewhere around #70. When it shines, I think it shines pretty big. When it doesn't think of it as a cantrip that drew a Victory card.
Oh, I have given Scout plenty of chances. They usually don't work out. There are some cases where I will take it, but they're incredibly rare and there has to be an absence of better options.
I believe I have listed those cases, and with the amount of cards listed, there has to be at least a 10% chance that you'll buy Scout on any given board. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but Scout and it's 'listed cards' are there, 8 other cards may not be enough to beat Scout.
Hey look, I can make lists without proof too!
Apple
Peach
Ants
Plum
Pear
Banana
Coconut
Grapefruit
All of these combo with peanut butter.
Scout combos usually sound neat on paper, but if you look at history they don't win games a whole lot.
I've played over 10.000 games of Dominion and in only two of those was Scout better than Pearl Diver (a terrible $2-cost). There's absolutely no way you want to buy it on 10% of the boards that contain it.
And listing reasons has nothing to do with anything. I can write a 1000-page book about how Hitler was awesome, but that doesn't make it true.
I've played over 10.000 games of Dominion and in only two of those was Scout better than Pearl Diver (a terrible $2-cost). There's absolutely no way you want to buy it on 10% of the boards that contain it.
And listing reasons has nothing to do with anything. I can write a 1000-page book about how Hitler was awesome, but that doesn't make it true.
I've played over 10.000 games of Dominion and in only two of those was Scout better than Pearl Diver (a terrible $2-cost). There's absolutely no way you want to buy it on 10% of the boards that contain it.
And listing reasons has nothing to do with anything. I can write a 1000-page book about how Hitler was awesome, but that doesn't make it true.
I HAVE PLAYED TEN, AND EXACTLY TEN
Ha ha. He must be from Europe, where 10 would be 10,000 and 10000 would be 10.000.
NO MORE, NO LESS
However, if you were to say "there's no engine here, I have to play Wharf BM," my Scout engine could win. Scout can be very weak if you just pick one up, but if you build your deck with Scout, it can be quite helpful.
However, if you were to say "there's no engine here, I have to play Wharf BM," my Scout engine could win. Scout can be very weak if you just pick one up, but if you build your deck with Scout, it can be quite helpful.
You do have a point there.
Wishing Well/Scout is a nombo. You're using one card to guarantee drawing one card that you could have drawn anyway. That's not very good. At best, you can use it to guarantee drawing two cards that you could have drawn anyway, that's still not very good.
I do sort of agree that Wishing Well/Scout isn't the best, but with weak draw, it might be necessary. However, I've seen you around the forums a lot and you tend to disagree with a lot of things, so if Wishing Well is the only thing you disagree with, I'm happy.
There are currently 78 $4 Kingdom Cards, plus Potion, and two $4 Events. You mean to tell me, you think there are 24 Kingdom Cards in the $4 range that are worse than Scout? I'd putTry buying Scout a lot against good players and see what it does for you; that's always a good test.
On a certain board, you might not regret it! I bet you've barely given Scout a chance! I agree, it's not fantastic. However, if there were 100 $4 cards (I know there aren't) I might put scout somewhere around #70. When it shines, I think it shines pretty big. When it doesn't think of it as a cantrip that drew a Victory card.
If we were to play, me with my Scout army and you with some engine, you'd probably win, that is true. However, I would have a lot of fun playing my Scout deck, because we need to remember that Dominion is a game and having fun is very important.
I believe I have listed those cases, and with the amount of cards listed, there has to be at least a 10% chance that you'll buy Scout on any given board. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but Scout and it's 'listed cards' are there, 8 other cards may not be enough to beat Scout.Lots of people on this forum, including myself, have tried designing kingdoms where Scout is good. The fact is, Scout doesn't work with only 1 combo; you need multiple. And even with multiple combos, it's not that good. At it's best, its draw is about as good as Advisor.
Here is aggregate data from the tool on the top 20 players on Iso: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13mQ1humtQbPLY9nbKscR65dV7hbGPdI3AQkNjMHZpeM/pubhtml?gid=495443102&single=true
(1) No, it's terrible.
(2) Why is this in "Articles"?
Scout is gained by top players in 8.5% of pro (full random) games, and much of that is presumably accounted for by Vineyards, Fairgrounds and Swindler (or something like Ironworks-Forge where it is useful just as a $4 cost action) . Either top players are all wrong, or (much more likely) Scout is horrible.Here is aggregate data from the tool on the top 20 players on Iso: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13mQ1humtQbPLY9nbKscR65dV7hbGPdI3AQkNjMHZpeM/pubhtml?gid=495443102&single=true
I don't know how to put it anywhere else besides Articles.
Sure, if you have that golden hand of Scout and four Mystics, you're glad you bought the Scout, as it's essentially a Lab. But even without the Scout, you're still buying a Province that turn anyway.But with only 2 or 3 Mystics in your hand, then you're very happy you bought Scout!
I don't know how to put it anywhere else besides Articles.
On the forum home page, click on (for example) "Dominion General Discussion", and then on "New Topic".
The Articles section is for in-depth essays on strategic topics.
I'm just going to come out and say it: I like Scout. It combos with a lot of things, and I personally do not think it's horrible.
1. It combos with Crossroads for a deck that can use Victory cards as draw.
2. It has a weak combo with Wishing Well.
3. Can defend against deck inspector attacks if they leave Victory Cards on top of your deck.
4. Can let you draw more cards with draw-to-x, and can control what those cards are.
5. Harem, Nobles, Great Hall, etc.
6. Can combo with discard cards like Oasis and Inn (you draw Victory cards then discard them).
7. Mystic, Mystic, Mystic!
That's my opinion, but I think a lot of these reasons make Scout a card that you could buy every once and a while, and benefit from it!
Scout can hurt most of these as much as it can help.
1. If Scout and Crossroads aren't in the same hand, Scout can take VP cards away from Crossroads.
2. If you didn't have Scout, you would already have an extra good card in hand even without guessing correctly on Wishing Well.
3. Usually not worth having the extra junk card in your deck.
4. It doesn't really. Like 2, if you didn't have Scout you would have drawn that extra card anyway. Worse, Scout can actually draw VP cards into your hand, weakening the draw-to-X. Scout just forces the draw-to-X card to draw Victory cards first, then offer some minimal choice in the order which might not matter anyway if you draw it all. Drawing the Victory cards first is usually not a good thing though, which makes this a huge nombo.
5. That's the dream, but it usually doesn't work out.
6. Same problem as 1.
7. Same problem as 2.
We had a pretty good conversation about Scout above, that might help you be a little more open-minded.
We had a pretty good conversation about Scout above, that might help you be a little more open-minded.
Wow, you're right! Five years of discussion of the merits of various Dominion cards, alone and in combination with others, have continuously shown that Scout is far below average even when accounting for amazing combos, but this thread changes everything! My mind hasn't been this open since my brain surgery!
(I want to make it clear that this was sarcasm. Sometimes trolls can't tell, or are intentionally obtuse.)
In the considered opinion of the community, Scout is in the bottom 10 percent of cards. I think labeling it "horrible" is fair. That's OK, though; Chancellor and Secret Chamber have their times to shine too.
----
The great news is, trolls can be reformed! Take some time to read various articles and forum discussions. You'll learn, and if you follow the same path as one former troll, you'll be better at Dominion than I am (which is, granted, not saying a lot any more).
I mostly agree with you, eHalcyon, but not so much on the last three points.
5. Scout with multiple hybrid Victory cards can be worth it, but you need to have really trashed down.
6. Scout with Oasis and Inn (and Secret Chamber and Artificer etc.) is not anything like Scout with Crossroads. Crossroads actually becomes awful in a hand with no Victory cards, but these other cards are still doing fine work for you. Hand sifters and discard-for-benefit cards are definitely a combo with Scout.
7. Mystic/Scout it a legit combo. And by that I mean Mystic by itself should make you want Scout. If you haven't tried it yet, please do it before arguing this point.
7. Mystic/Scout it a legit combo. And by that I mean Mystic by itself should make you want Scout. If you haven't tried it yet, please do it before arguing this point.7. I'm not really convinced. I can believe that it's passable. But consider:
7a) Scout and Mystic don't collide. Then Scout is just a bad card in your deck.
7b) Scout and Mystic collide. Scout enables Mystic to draw the next card... except if Scout weren't in your deck, that card would have been in your hand to begin with, and you'd have a chance with Mystic to draw something else. It's still a net loss.
7c) Scout and 2 Mystics collide. If Scout enables both Mystics to draw, you're up 1 card. Except if you didn't have Scout, you'd have the next card in hand at the start and the Mystics together guarantee that you draw another card as well, maybe even two if you guess correctly both times. You're up 1 card, which means that 2 Mystics alone are just as good even without the Scout support.
It's not until your single Scout is enabling 3 Mystics that there's actually an advantage there, and that's asking for a lot. The rest of the benefit is just in Scout's own ability to pull green cards. In a sense, Scout+Mystic kind of makes Scout more like a cantrip with the Scout effect on top, which is certainly better... but it's not much better than Vagrant.
Should we have a Scout-Off tournament? Say, about 10,000 mirror matches (or simulations) should really show where Scout compares to any other card.
First up: Scout $4 vs Silver $3
Next: Scout $4 vs Pearl Diver $2
I don't think it's fair to have Scout challenge any actual $4 cards.
I've tried it! It just has never really seemed that amazing to me.No, no. I'm not saying Scout is amazing, I'm not even saying it's good. I'm just saying it doesn't deserve it's reputation for being in the bottom 5 worst $4 cards, you can make Scout good.
7. Mystic/Scout it a legit combo. And by that I mean Mystic by itself should make you want Scout. If you haven't tried it yet, please do it before arguing this point.7. I'm not really convinced. I can believe that it's passable. But consider:
7a) Scout and Mystic don't collide. Then Scout is just a bad card in your deck.
7b) Scout and Mystic collide. Scout enables Mystic to draw the next card... except if Scout weren't in your deck, that card would have been in your hand to begin with, and you'd have a chance with Mystic to draw something else. It's still a net loss.
7c) Scout and 2 Mystics collide. If Scout enables both Mystics to draw, you're up 1 card. Except if you didn't have Scout, you'd have the next card in hand at the start and the Mystics together guarantee that you draw another card as well, maybe even two if you guess correctly both times. You're up 1 card, which means that 2 Mystics alone are just as good even without the Scout support.
It's not until your single Scout is enabling 3 Mystics that there's actually an advantage there, and that's asking for a lot. The rest of the benefit is just in Scout's own ability to pull green cards. In a sense, Scout+Mystic kind of makes Scout more like a cantrip with the Scout effect on top, which is certainly better... but it's not much better than Vagrant.
It's much better. The ability to decide which card Mystic is going to draw is often very significant, both for your current turn and your next turn. No joke.
Enabling 3 Mystics with one Scout is common. You don't have to collide all 3 Mystics in the same hand as your Scout; any Mystics you reveal with Scout can be drawn by a Mystic in your hand, and then you still know what the top card of your deck is for that Mystic. Rinse and repeat.
If you're still not convinced that it's a combo, I refer you to the bolded part of my post above. Yes, I'm being a bit of a jerk, but COME ON, man. Don't sit here arguing theory with me when I've used this combo a bunch and you apparently never have. Try it out and decide for yourself!
EDIT: Vagrant/Mystic is also a great combo, don't get me wrong. Obviously you usually don't have all three cards on the board, so it doesn't matter much for the purposes of this discussion.
I've tried it! It just has never really seemed that amazing to me.No, no. I'm not saying Scout is amazing, I'm not even saying it's good. I'm just saying it doesn't deserve it's reputation for being in the bottom 5 worst $4 cards, you can make Scout good.
I can't find anything on this list that seems to be always worse than Scout. I can hardly find anything that is sometimes worse than Scout.I've tried it! It just has never really seemed that amazing to me.No, no. I'm not saying Scout is amazing, I'm not even saying it's good. I'm just saying it doesn't deserve it's reputation for being in the bottom 5 worst $4 cards, you can make Scout good.
But every card has times when it shines, and most of the situations you list in the OP aren't even valid. Which $4 cards would you say are worse than Scout?
Bureaucrat
Feast
Gardens
Militia
Moneylender
Remodel
Smithy
Spy
Thief
Throne Room
Baron
Bridge
Conspirator
Coppersmith
Ironworks
Mining Village
Scout
Caravan
Cutpurse
Island
Navigator
Pirate Ship
Salvager
Sea Hag
Treasure Map
Potion
Bishop
Monument
Quarry
Talisman
Worker's Village
Farming Village
Horse Traders
Remake
Tournament
Young Witch
Jack of all Trades
Noble Brigand
Nomad Camp
Silk Road
Spice Merchant
Trader
Armory
Death Cart
Feodum
Fortress
Ironmonger
Marauder
Procession
Rats
Scavenger
Sir Martin
Wandering Minstrel
Advisor
Herald
Plaza
Taxman
Duplicate
Magpie
Messenger
Miser
Port
Ranger
Transmogrify
Fugitive
Mission
Pilgrimage
Warrior
Envoy
Walled VillageNo, Thief is worse. Taxman and Coppersmith are pretty bad. Nomad Camp is iffy. Talisman? Come on! Scout keeps your engine running and enables a lot of cards on this list. Scout also helps all the ones that draw on this list by controlling what they draw.I can't find anything on this list that seems to be always worse than Scout. I can hardly find anything that is sometimes worse than Scout.I've tried it! It just has never really seemed that amazing to me.No, no. I'm not saying Scout is amazing, I'm not even saying it's good. I'm just saying it doesn't deserve it's reputation for being in the bottom 5 worst $4 cards, you can make Scout good.
But every card has times when it shines, and most of the situations you list in the OP aren't even valid. Which $4 cards would you say are worse than Scout?Code: [Select]Bureaucrat
Feast
Gardens
Militia
Moneylender
Remodel
Smithy
Spy
Thief
Throne Room
Baron
Bridge
Conspirator
Coppersmith
Ironworks
Mining Village
Scout
Caravan
Cutpurse
Island
Navigator
Pirate Ship
Salvager
Sea Hag
Treasure Map
Potion
Bishop
Monument
Quarry
Talisman
Worker's Village
Farming Village
Horse Traders
Remake
Tournament
Young Witch
Jack of all Trades
Noble Brigand
Nomad Camp
Silk Road
Spice Merchant
Trader
Armory
Death Cart
Feodum
Fortress
Ironmonger
Marauder
Procession
Rats
Scavenger
Sir Martin
Wandering Minstrel
Advisor
Herald
Plaza
Taxman
Duplicate
Magpie
Messenger
Miser
Port
Ranger
Transmogrify
Fugitive
Mission
Pilgrimage
Warrior
Envoy
Walled Village
Keeping in mind that at the very least, there need to be ONE $4 card at the bottom of the list.
No, Thief is worse. Taxman and Coppersmith are pretty bad. Nomad Camp is iffy. Talisman? Come on! Scout keeps your engine running and enables a lot of cards on this list. Scout also helps all the ones that draw on this list by controlling what they draw.I can't find anything on this list that seems to be always worse than Scout. I can hardly find anything that is sometimes worse than Scout.I've tried it! It just has never really seemed that amazing to me.No, no. I'm not saying Scout is amazing, I'm not even saying it's good. I'm just saying it doesn't deserve it's reputation for being in the bottom 5 worst $4 cards, you can make Scout good.
But every card has times when it shines, and most of the situations you list in the OP aren't even valid. Which $4 cards would you say are worse than Scout?Code: [Select]Bureaucrat
Feast
Gardens
Militia
Moneylender
Remodel
Smithy
Spy
Thief
Throne Room
Baron
Bridge
Conspirator
Coppersmith
Ironworks
Mining Village
Scout
Caravan
Cutpurse
Island
Navigator
Pirate Ship
Salvager
Sea Hag
Treasure Map
Potion
Bishop
Monument
Quarry
Talisman
Worker's Village
Farming Village
Horse Traders
Remake
Tournament
Young Witch
Jack of all Trades
Noble Brigand
Nomad Camp
Silk Road
Spice Merchant
Trader
Armory
Death Cart
Feodum
Fortress
Ironmonger
Marauder
Procession
Rats
Scavenger
Sir Martin
Wandering Minstrel
Advisor
Herald
Plaza
Taxman
Duplicate
Magpie
Messenger
Miser
Port
Ranger
Transmogrify
Fugitive
Mission
Pilgrimage
Warrior
Envoy
Walled Village
Keeping in mind that at the very least, there need to be ONE $4 card at the bottom of the list.
You're just making this stuff up. Thief over Scout? You'd do that probably less than 20% of the time. Talisman? I doubt you want that. The main reason that you would take Silver over Scout is because Silver is a solid card and Scout is a mediocre one. Does that mean Scout is weak? Of course not! You'd get Silver over Chapel after the first 5 turns, but that doesn't mean Chapel is weak.No, Thief is worse. Taxman and Coppersmith are pretty bad. Nomad Camp is iffy. Talisman? Come on! Scout keeps your engine running and enables a lot of cards on this list. Scout also helps all the ones that draw on this list by controlling what they draw.I can't find anything on this list that seems to be always worse than Scout. I can hardly find anything that is sometimes worse than Scout.I've tried it! It just has never really seemed that amazing to me.No, no. I'm not saying Scout is amazing, I'm not even saying it's good. I'm just saying it doesn't deserve it's reputation for being in the bottom 5 worst $4 cards, you can make Scout good.
But every card has times when it shines, and most of the situations you list in the OP aren't even valid. Which $4 cards would you say are worse than Scout?Code: [Select]Bureaucrat
Feast
Gardens
Militia
Moneylender
Remodel
Smithy
Spy
Thief
Throne Room
Baron
Bridge
Conspirator
Coppersmith
Ironworks
Mining Village
Scout
Caravan
Cutpurse
Island
Navigator
Pirate Ship
Salvager
Sea Hag
Treasure Map
Potion
Bishop
Monument
Quarry
Talisman
Worker's Village
Farming Village
Horse Traders
Remake
Tournament
Young Witch
Jack of all Trades
Noble Brigand
Nomad Camp
Silk Road
Spice Merchant
Trader
Armory
Death Cart
Feodum
Fortress
Ironmonger
Marauder
Procession
Rats
Scavenger
Sir Martin
Wandering Minstrel
Advisor
Herald
Plaza
Taxman
Duplicate
Magpie
Messenger
Miser
Port
Ranger
Transmogrify
Fugitive
Mission
Pilgrimage
Warrior
Envoy
Walled Village
Keeping in mind that at the very least, there need to be ONE $4 card at the bottom of the list.
Most of the ones you mention, while weak, have relatively common cases (~10%), where they have a strong influence on the board, where ignoring their presence is a big mistake. Scout is maybe marginally usefull in about that range.
- Thief: Completely kills BigMoney vs. engine
- Coppersmith: Can be good money payload for an engine, easily terminal +$4++
- Nomad Camp: It's a +buy after all, often you just need one. Yeah, you would take any, even a Ruined Market, but they are not on this board
- Talisman: Come on! Cheap components engines exists. And cost reducers.
Most of these are that if they magically appear in a usual deck, you would prefer Scout over them. But that doesn't happen usually (without Swindlers). But you have to gain them on purpose usually, and as there is always an alternative on what to gain, only helping marginally often is usually worse than helping a lot seldomly.
You're just making this stuff up. Thief over Scout? You'd do that probably less than 20% of the time. Talisman? I doubt you want that. The main reason that you would take Silver over Scout is because Silver is a solid card and Scout is a mediocre one. Does that mean Scout is weak? Of course not! You'd get Silver over Chapel after the first 5 turns, but that doesn't mean Chapel is weak.
Talisman? I doubt you want that.
Mystic just likes non-terminal deck-inspection, period. I would rather have a Spy than Scout in that instance. I'd certainly rather have a Cartographer. Scout is just hurt so much by not being a cantrip.
Adventurer is probably nice in Masterpiece or maybe Soothsayer games. It just needs to be able to draw something other than Coppers, and if you've gotten rid of your Coppers, you're usually drawing your entire deck anyway with other draw cards, so it's usually just redundant. And expensive. Adventurer has to be the only draw and you need a way to get rid of Coppers, or at least overwhelm them with other Treasures. Maybe Bank likes Adventurer?
Adventurer is probably nice in Masterpiece or maybe Soothsayer games. It just needs to be able to draw something other than Coppers, and if you've gotten rid of your Coppers, you're usually drawing your entire deck anyway with other draw cards, so it's usually just redundant. And expensive. Adventurer has to be the only draw and you need a way to get rid of Coppers, or at least overwhelm them with other Treasures. Maybe Bank likes Adventurer?
And then, you are already in a position where you get to $8 quite reliably, esp. in the same hand replacing adventurers with gold. So to really profit from the high coin value it produces, you would need a buy, which in the situation you describe is usually difficult to get easily
Adventurer has to be the only draw and you need a way to get rid of Coppers
I can't hardly think of boards where Thief is dominant as a strategy in 2P (maybe some crazy TR/KC board), except for when your opponent plays in such a way that Thief will be a good card. But it at least has some impact on the board. (for example when someone has a Chapel strategy with treasures as main payload and such. Does Thief-BM beat BM Ultimate usually? (I'm inclined to say no, but I don't know for sure)
Really, Adventurer should either find 3 Treasures, or only cost $5.
I don't think it's useful to discuss Thief/BM vs. BMU, it's not far from being 100% guaranteed that there's always something better than either strategy.
You're just making this stuff up. Thief over Scout? You'd do that probably less than 20% of the time.
QuoteYou're just making this stuff up. Thief over Scout? You'd do that probably less than 20% of the time.
I'm not sure what you mean by that. 20% of what times? If Thief and Scout are on the board, usually I'll buy *neither* of them. But I buy Thief when the situation calls for it (when the opponent's deck relies on treasure cards and I have extra actions). There aren't situations that call for Scout.
Scout/Mystic is fun but I think that's still just making Scout about as good as an average card, for style points.
I don't think anyone here is buying Scout four times as often as Thief.
QuoteYou're just making this stuff up. Thief over Scout? You'd do that probably less than 20% of the time.
I'm not sure what you mean by that. 20% of what times? If Thief and Scout are on the board, usually I'll buy *neither* of them. But I buy Thief when the situation calls for it (when the opponent's deck relies on treasure cards and I have extra actions). There aren't situations that call for Scout.
Scout/Mystic is fun but I think that's still just making Scout about as good as an average card, for style points.
I don't think anyone here is buying Scout four times as often as Thief.
Scout as an average card is what I'm looking for! I'm not saying it's fantastic, I'm just saying it's not horrible.
And I think one person here is buying Scout four times as often as Thief.
QuoteYou're just making this stuff up. Thief over Scout? You'd do that probably less than 20% of the time.
I'm not sure what you mean by that. 20% of what times? If Thief and Scout are on the board, usually I'll buy *neither* of them. But I buy Thief when the situation calls for it (when the opponent's deck relies on treasure cards and I have extra actions). There aren't situations that call for Scout.
Scout/Mystic is fun but I think that's still just making Scout about as good as an average card, for style points.
I don't think anyone here is buying Scout four times as often as Thief.
Scout as an average card is what I'm looking for! I'm not saying it's fantastic, I'm just saying it's not horrible.
And I think one person here is buying Scout four times as often as Thief.
So Scout is average in its best case, which is a rate and exceptional circumstance. But it's still horrible in general. Thief is similar, except that it is actually good, even dominant in its best case scenarios.
Besides Mystic, my favorite cards for making Scout useful are Inheritance and my Illusionist card (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=12947.msg481157#msg481157). It's one of the reasons I love Inheritance.Inheritance is a great idea, you're right! Also, Illusonist could make Scout better than a Lab!
One Scout can do the work of several Spies. I'm pretty sure if all three (Scout, Spy, Mystic) were on the board, I'd buy Scout over Spy every time.
4 Mystics alone = +2 Cards
4 Mystics + Scout = +4 Cards
4 Mystics + Spy = +4 Cards and a mild attack
If a Mystic whiffs, the next Mystic is assured a draw.
Scout makes sure none of the Mystics whiff, but draws nothing itself.
Spy draws its own card, and makes sure one of the Mystics doesn't whiff.
Thief: Gets pretty big in games with many players.
Coppersmith: Besides draw-your-deck strategies, this enables you to gamble for very early very expensive cards like Prince
Nomad Camp: A buy, and when you need it. Also interesting for openings (again, with a little gambling)
Talisman: Strategies that want a big deck or lots of Silvers. Strategies about cheap cards. Cost reduction.
Spy: Also very useless, but at least it's a cantrip. That and the card reveal make it better than Scout allready, attack is just a useless bonus.
Scout can't compete. I'm not sure it's the worst card in Dominion, because Adventurer is a terrible piece of junk too, but i find it very hard to make up any card as bad, especially a card that costs $4. And i'm out of this discussion now, because i don't think statements are given the proper thought here.
Native Village, Doctor, Forager, Masquerade, Warehouse, Ironmonger, Spy, Thief, Border Village, PrinceThief: Gets pretty big in games with many players.
Coppersmith: Besides draw-your-deck strategies, this enables you to gamble for very early very expensive cards like Prince
Nomad Camp: A buy, and when you need it. Also interesting for openings (again, with a little gambling)
Talisman: Strategies that want a big deck or lots of Silvers. Strategies about cheap cards. Cost reduction.
Spy: Also very useless, but at least it's a cantrip. That and the card reveal make it better than Scout allready, attack is just a useless bonus.
Scout can't compete. I'm not sure it's the worst card in Dominion, because Adventurer is a terrible piece of junk too, but i find it very hard to make up any card as bad, especially a card that costs $4. And i'm out of this discussion now, because i don't think statements are given the proper thought here.
(Is this still on topic?)
Game in which Spy+Thief were paramount:(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/9/93/Ironmonger.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Ironmonger) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/c/cb/Spy.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Spy) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/f/f5/Thief.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Thief) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/d/dd/Border_Village.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Border Village) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/e/ea/Prince.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Prince)
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/6/67/Native_Village.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Native Village) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/b/b2/Doctor.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Doctor) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/e/e6/Forager.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Forager) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/0/0e/Masquerade.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Masquerade) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/6/6d/Warehouse.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Warehouse)Code: [Select]Native Village, Doctor, Forager, Masquerade, Warehouse, Ironmonger, Spy, Thief, Border Village, Prince
http://www.gokosalvager.com/static/logprettifier.html?20150530/log.516d4577e4b082c74d7b716e.1432990015835.txt
My point: Scout, Spy, Thief, etc. almost always suck. They sometimes win you the game.
Thief: Gets pretty big in games with many players.
Coppersmith: Besides draw-your-deck strategies, this enables you to gamble for very early very expensive cards like Prince
Nomad Camp: A buy, and when you need it. Also interesting for openings (again, with a little gambling)
Talisman: Strategies that want a big deck or lots of Silvers. Strategies about cheap cards. Cost reduction.
Spy: Also very useless, but at least it's a cantrip. That and the card reveal make it better than Scout allready, attack is just a useless bonus.
Scout can't compete. I'm not sure it's the worst card in Dominion, because Adventurer is a terrible piece of junk too, but i find it very hard to make up any card as bad, especially a card that costs $4. And i'm out of this discussion now, because i don't think statements are given the proper thought here.
(Is this still on topic?)
Game in which Spy+Thief were paramount:(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/9/93/Ironmonger.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Ironmonger) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/c/cb/Spy.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Spy) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/f/f5/Thief.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Thief) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/d/dd/Border_Village.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Border Village) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/e/ea/Prince.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Prince)
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/6/67/Native_Village.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Native Village) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/b/b2/Doctor.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Doctor) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/e/e6/Forager.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Forager) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/0/0e/Masquerade.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Masquerade) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/6/6d/Warehouse.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Warehouse)Code: [Select]Native Village, Doctor, Forager, Masquerade, Warehouse, Ironmonger, Spy, Thief, Border Village, Prince
http://www.gokosalvager.com/static/logprettifier.html?20150530/log.516d4577e4b082c74d7b716e.1432990015835.txt
My point: Scout, Spy, Thief, etc. almost always suck. They sometimes win you the game.
I see how Thief is good, but why is Spy so essential? I suppose it helps with NVs, but I'm pretty confident you could win on this board without a single Spy. Am I missing something?
Eventually, we each had Princed a Thief
Thief: Gets pretty big in games with many players.
Coppersmith: Besides draw-your-deck strategies, this enables you to gamble for very early very expensive cards like Prince
Nomad Camp: A buy, and when you need it. Also interesting for openings (again, with a little gambling)
Talisman: Strategies that want a big deck or lots of Silvers. Strategies about cheap cards. Cost reduction.
Spy: Also very useless, but at least it's a cantrip. That and the card reveal make it better than Scout allready, attack is just a useless bonus.
Scout can't compete. I'm not sure it's the worst card in Dominion, because Adventurer is a terrible piece of junk too, but i find it very hard to make up any card as bad, especially a card that costs $4. And i'm out of this discussion now, because i don't think statements are given the proper thought here.
(Is this still on topic?)
Game in which Spy+Thief were paramount:(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/9/93/Ironmonger.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Ironmonger) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/c/cb/Spy.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Spy) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/f/f5/Thief.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Thief) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/d/dd/Border_Village.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Border Village) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/e/ea/Prince.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Prince)
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/6/67/Native_Village.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Native Village) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/b/b2/Doctor.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Doctor) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/e/e6/Forager.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Forager) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/0/0e/Masquerade.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Masquerade) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/6/6d/Warehouse.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Warehouse)Code: [Select]Native Village, Doctor, Forager, Masquerade, Warehouse, Ironmonger, Spy, Thief, Border Village, Prince
http://www.gokosalvager.com/static/logprettifier.html?20150530/log.516d4577e4b082c74d7b716e.1432990015835.txt
My point: Scout, Spy, Thief, etc. almost always suck. They sometimes win you the game.
I see how Thief is good, but why is Spy so essential? I suppose it helps with NVs, but I'm pretty confident you could win on this board without a single Spy. Am I missing something?
My opponent had bought 2 Golds throughout the course of the game. I didn't buy any. We each bought a Silver or 2 at some point. Those were basically the only economy once the game matured because everything else was thinned out with either Forager, Doctor, or Mask. We each had 2 Thieves. Eventually, we each had Princed a Thief (we had a total of 5 Princes in play, wow!). I had Spies; he did not (I eventually had 2 Spies Princed in addition to 1 Thief). Basically, my Spies enabled me to hit the Golds and Silvers that were in our decks more often than he could the other way around (he was relying on luck to hit treasures in my deck).
Long story short, the Spies helped me put the only treasures on top of my opponent's deck so I could Thief them, and they were pretty much the only economy in either of our decks.
My point: Scout, Spy, Thief, etc. almost always suck. They sometimes win you the game.And the counter is that while Spy, Thief sometimes win you games, Scout never has that shining case. The best we've been able to determine is Scout/Mystic, in which it becomes, at best a lab. Now that's good ($5 value for a $4 card), but even there it's only that way if you have a high enough mystic density to draw 4 mystics in the same hand (plus 4 cards) as Scout. That's not winning the game.
My point: Scout, Spy, Thief, etc. almost always suck. They sometimes win you the game.And the counter is that while Spy, Thief sometimes win you games, Scout never has that shining case. The best we've been able to determine is Scout/Mystic, in which it becomes, at best a lab. Now that's good ($5 value for a $4 card), but even there it's only that way if you have a high enough mystic density to draw 4 mystics in the same hand (plus 4 cards) as Scout. That's not winning the game.
Say, no one in this thread has mentioned Scrying Pool—am I mistaken that Scout makes decent support for that?
My point: Scout, Spy, Thief, etc. almost always suck. They sometimes win you the game.And the counter is that while Spy, Thief sometimes win you games, Scout never has that shining case. The best we've been able to determine is Scout/Mystic, in which it becomes, at best a lab. Now that's good ($5 value for a $4 card), but even there it's only that way if you have a high enough mystic density to draw 4 mystics in the same hand (plus 4 cards) as Scout. That's not winning the game.
Scout activating Herald makes it essentially a Lost City.
My point: Scout, Spy, Thief, etc. almost always suck. They sometimes win you the game.And the counter is that while Spy, Thief sometimes win you games, Scout never has that shining case. [...]
Although I agree that Scout is terrible, I remember long ago playing a game where I believed I was right to open Scout. Do you agree?
Kingdom: Develop, Great Hall, Harem, Highway, Masquerade, Nomad Camp, Peddler, Scout, Silk Road, and Village
http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20120313-074928-6f49bdd8.html
For what it's worth, I have replaced the Scouts in my physical set with a version that gives +$1 and is otherwise identical. So far it's been seeming very reasonable.I was considering adding +1 Card to the bottom of Scout. That may actually make it as strong as Cartographer though.
For what it's worth, I have replaced the Scouts in my physical set with a version that gives +$1 and is otherwise identical. So far it's been seeming very reasonable.I was considering adding +1 Card to the bottom of Scout. That may actually make it as strong as Cartographer though.
Actually, you only need one Mystic in your hand and at least one in the top 4 cards of your deck. Play Scout, put Mystic on top, play Mystic, draw Mystic, play Mystic, draw other card.My point: Scout, Spy, Thief, etc. almost always suck. They sometimes win you the game.And the counter is that while Spy, Thief sometimes win you games, Scout never has that shining case. The best we've been able to determine is Scout/Mystic, in which it becomes, at best a lab. Now that's good ($5 value for a $4 card), but even there it's only that way if you have a high enough mystic density to draw 4 mystics in the same hand (plus 4 cards) as Scout. That's not winning the game.
But the biggest problem with scout is always the opportunity cost. Yes, you can imagine decks where having a Scout will help somewhat. But the thing is, you never just have a Scout magically appear in your deck (barring things like Swindler). You have to actively choose to gain Scout instead of some other card that you could be buying/workshopping/etc. at the same time. And that card will almost always help you more than Scout will. Dominion is not a long game; why are you wasting time getting a less useful card when you could be getting one that will help you more? And that's not even getting into the issue of having a Scout in your hand instead of some other card.
Scout does something useful that is often worth -1 card ... just not often worth it when you could buy a tiebreaker estate, silver, or an engine component instead.
Princed Scout isn't terrible, if you really want to do that.
Princed Scout isn't terrible, if you really want to do that.
Well, it isn't terrible if you really want to do that. You probably don't, because it's usually terrible.
For what it's worth, I have replaced the Scouts in my physical set with a version that gives +$1 and is otherwise identical. So far it's been seeming very reasonable.
Princed Scout isn't terrible, if you really want to do that.
Well, it isn't terrible if you really want to do that. You probably don't, because it's usually terrible.
Depending on the game state, Prince of Scout is better than Prince of nothing. Obviously if you get a Scout just to prince it, you are skipping the chance to get Prince of something-better-than-Scout.
Depending on the game state, Prince of Scout is better than Prince of nothing. Obviously if you get a Scout just to prince it, you are skipping the chance to get Prince of something-better-than-Scout.
Depending on the game state, Prince of Scout is better than Prince of nothing. Obviously if you get a Scout just to prince it, you are skipping the chance to get Prince of something-better-than-Scout.
Prince of nothing is an $8 one-shot Confusion. It's not very difficult to be better than that.
Depending on the game state, Prince of Scout is better than Prince of nothing. Obviously if you get a Scout just to prince it, you are skipping the chance to get Prince of something-better-than-Scout.
Prince of nothing is an $8 one-shot Confusion. It's not very difficult to be better than that.
Depending on the game state, Prince of Scout is better than Prince of nothing. Obviously if you get a Scout just to prince it, you are skipping the chance to get Prince of something-better-than-Scout.
Prince of nothing is an $8 one-shot Confusion. It's not very difficult to be better than that.
Um, yeah, sorry. What i meant was "not Princing anything", but of course that's not what i actually said. I think having Prince missing a better card and waiting for another shuffle is a real problem, though. Again, not that you'd want a Scout just so you have one more card you could possibly Prince, there's practically always a better option.
The best plausible reason I can think of for using Prince of Scouts is a solid Goons engine where it is the only Village. Even that might not be good enough if there is anything else decent going on. Outside of that I have to believe that getting a Prince at all would be a horrible mistake if Scout is its best target.
You don't have to count on it, but this is just another case where Scout is good.The best plausible reason I can think of for using Prince of Scouts is a solid Goons engine where it is the only Village. Even that might not be good enough if there is anything else decent going on. Outside of that I have to believe that getting a Prince at all would be a horrible mistake if Scout is its best target.
To play devil's advocate, I've Princed many a Vagrant, Candlestick Maker, Pearl Diver, etc. in my day solely for the villageness. It is rare but, like anything in Dominion, has its place. I would actually think that in the situation you described -- a Goons game -- Provinces are generally worse than they normally are because of the alt VP that Goons can get you, and so Princes are a bit more tempting to buy over a Province. Especially if there are no villages.
But now we're getting into the realm of 3-card-synergies (Prince+Cantrip+Goons), with the additional constraint that there be no other villages. So you're gonna see this in like 1 out of a thousand games. I wouldn't count on it.
Scout sucks.
I'm quit curious how this board looks like, where you want to go goons engine via princes scouts without villages, cantrips (you want to Prince them over scout) and kc/tr (don't need no villages)
Princing your Scout is a great move. It's gets the Scout out of your deck.No, I think it's slightly better than that. It's as if you play a Village every turn, and the deck inspection/green clearing is a good benefit.
Prince of Scouts is a decent effect. It's just an effect that pales by comparison with Prince of Smithies, or Prince of Monuments, or Prince of Militias, or Prince of Worker's Villages, or... (you get the idea).Princing your Scout is a great move. It's gets the Scout out of your deck.No, I think it's slightly better than that. It's as if you play a Village every turn, and the deck inspection/green clearing is a good benefit.
Prince of Scouts is a decent effect. It's just an effect that pales by comparison with Prince of Smithies, or Prince of Monuments, or Prince of Militias, or Prince of Worker's Villages, or... (you get the idea).Princing your Scout is a great move. It's gets the Scout out of your deck.No, I think it's slightly better than that. It's as if you play a Village every turn, and the deck inspection/green clearing is a good benefit.
Mystic just likes non-terminal deck-inspection, period. I would rather have a Spy than Scout in that instance. I'd certainly rather have a Cartographer. Scout is just hurt so much by not being a cantrip.
Usually a Cartographer you gain could have been a Mystic; Scout is meaningfully cheaper.
One Scout can do the work of several Spies. I'm pretty sure if all three (Scout, Spy, Mystic) were on the board, I'd buy Scout over Spy every time.
University, Remake, Scout, Spy, Journeyman, Mystic, Saboteur, Fairgrounds, Grand Market, Hunting GroundsMystic just likes non-terminal deck-inspection, period. I would rather have a Spy than Scout in that instance. I'd certainly rather have a Cartographer. Scout is just hurt so much by not being a cantrip.
Usually a Cartographer you gain could have been a Mystic; Scout is meaningfully cheaper.
One Scout can do the work of several Spies. I'm pretty sure if all three (Scout, Spy, Mystic) were on the board, I'd buy Scout over Spy every time.
Okay; so this is the apparently the perfect time to reveal The Worst Game of Dominion EvAR!!
Honestly, I am sure I must have been drunk, or maybe my cat played this game for me. That said, it is the amazing Scout/Spy/Mystic board that is being discussed, and so I can at least share that:(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/3/37/Mystic.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Mystic) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/6/60/Saboteur.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Saboteur) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/7/7e/Fairgrounds.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Fairgrounds) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/8/81/Grand_Market.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Grand Market) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/6/6a/Hunting_Grounds.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Hunting Grounds)
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/9/9b/University.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/University) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/2/2b/Remake.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Remake) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/4/46/Scout.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Scout) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/c/cb/Spy.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Spy) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/8/82/Journeyman.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Journeyman)Code: [Select]University, Remake, Scout, Spy, Journeyman, Mystic, Saboteur, Fairgrounds, Grand Market, Hunting Grounds
Okay, so that's a kind of funky board. But I don't feel it really explains this monstrosity:
http://www.gokosalvager.com/static/logprettifier.html?20141104/log.516df219e4b082c74d7ce4ed.1415139377507.txt
(http://www.gokosalvager.com/static/logprettifier.html?20141104/log.516df219e4b082c74d7ce4ed.1415139377507.txt)
All that said...my opponent does demonstrate that sweet Scout/Mystic move. Hell, he or she even gained Scout with University.
And now I retreat again in shame.
All that said...my opponent does demonstrate that sweet Scout/Mystic move. Hell, he or she even gained Scout with University.
And now I retreat again in shame.
All that said...my opponent does demonstrate that sweet Scout/Mystic move. Hell, he or she even gained Scout with University.
And now I retreat again in shame.
Maybe if those 3 Spies had also been Scouts...
All that said...my opponent does demonstrate that sweet Scout/Mystic move. Hell, he or she even gained Scout with University.I think if he would've read all the information here then tried to do that sweet strategy, he would've won.
And now I retreat again in shame.
Maybe if those 3 Spies had also been Scouts...
Or those five Saboteurs (at one point; I snagged one with one of my Sabs). Honestly, this game was a nightmare.
I've mentioned this before, but if you want to see scout be good, try playing the intrigue campaigns on goko. I feel like a lot of those kingdoms were designed to make scout good.Once I work through Base Cards Act 2, I think I will do those for sure!
I'm just going to come out and say it: I like Scout. It combos with a lot of things, and I personally do not think it's horrible.
1. It combos with Crossroads for a deck that can use Victory cards as draw.
2. It has a weak combo with Wishing Well.
3. Can defend against deck inspector attacks if they leave Victory Cards on top of your deck.
4. Can let you draw more cards with draw-to-x, and can control what those cards are.
5. Harem, Nobles, Great Hall, etc.
6. Can combo with discard cards like Oasis and Inn (you draw Victory cards then discard them).
7. Mystic, Mystic, Mystic!
That's my opinion, but I think a lot of these reasons make Scout a card that you could buy every once and a while, and benefit from it!
A lot of what you said has already been stated and it made me realize that Scout may be worse than I thought, but the one thing I have a problem with is Mystic. You only need one Mystic in your hand and one in the top four cards of your deck to already draw two cards, if you have a Scout. With some trashing and a pretty good Mystic density, that is pretty likely. You're already up to at least $4, but you will control what you draw with your Mystic that was in the top 4 cards, so you're probably up to at least $5, which is enough for another Mystic. More Mystics let you buy green cards, which you can just pull out of your deck with Scout.I'm just going to come out and say it: I like Scout. It combos with a lot of things, and I personally do not think it's horrible.
1. It combos with Crossroads for a deck that can use Victory cards as draw.
2. It has a weak combo with Wishing Well.
3. Can defend against deck inspector attacks if they leave Victory Cards on top of your deck.
4. Can let you draw more cards with draw-to-x, and can control what those cards are.
5. Harem, Nobles, Great Hall, etc.
6. Can combo with discard cards like Oasis and Inn (you draw Victory cards then discard them).
7. Mystic, Mystic, Mystic!
That's my opinion, but I think a lot of these reasons make Scout a card that you could buy every once and a while, and benefit from it!
1. Crossroads+Victory cards is almost never a viable engine option. Scout doesn't change that.
2. So you play a scout, then a wishing well. Okay, most likely you end up neutral, besides knowing what the top 2 cards in your deck are. Occasionally, you will have a 2-card lab, but that is really weak for a 2-card combo, especially one that has a card that is more-or-less dead outside of the combo. And then there is the opportunity cost... which is far too high for something as bland as that.
3. That is still very weak, and scout could well miss the attack.
4. This reason is very confusing. You play a card that does nothing so that you can draw one more card? That doesn't actually help draw-to-x cards at all; if you hadn't had scout, you would have drawn that extra card anyways. Sure, it lets you reorder the things on top of your deck, but again, that marginal benefit is far too high given its opportunity cost and what happens in the event that you do not manage to couple scout with your library.
5. You need 1/4 of your deck to be these cards before scout is not a drag on your deck, which takes a lot of effort, and can stymy your engine building in other ways; you may feel the pressure not to buy other things like villages and such. The only thing listed there which could make scout even close to not being a drag on your deck is harem+scout, but that is going to be hard to set up, and by that point you probably have terminals in your deck and may not want to risk drawing scout, for example, with a smithy. And again, let us not forget; scout carries with it an opportunity cost, and merely not hurting your deck doesn't make it a worthwhile buy.
6. This is just not viable 95%+ of the time. Having upwards of 1/4 of your deck be victory cards hurts your engine too much for something like this to be viable.
7. You need to collide scout with at least 2 mystics for it not to just be an overpriced, 2-card silver. Even then, it is still just a 3-card grand market + silver, which is extremely weak, given that it can miss and has a lower effect than buying 2 cards that are actually at the same price as the mystics that you bought. In addition, the chance of colliding that much is far too low to be viable.
All in all, i would not hesitate to call scout the worst card in the game. Some people like to give the title to thief, but at least with thief there are some non-contrived situations in which it could be useful (if your opponent goes for gardens, for example).
A lot of what you said has already been stated and it made me realize that Scout may be worse than I thought, but the one thing I have a problem with is Mystic. You only need one Mystic in your hand and one in the top four cards of your deck to already draw two cards, if you have a Scout. With some trashing and a pretty good Mystic density, that is pretty likely. You're already up to at least $4, but you will control what you draw with your Mystic that was in the top 4 cards, so you're probably up to at least $5, which is enough for another Mystic. More Mystics let you buy green cards, which you can just pull out of your deck with Scout.I'm just going to come out and say it: I like Scout. It combos with a lot of things, and I personally do not think it's horrible.
1. It combos with Crossroads for a deck that can use Victory cards as draw.
2. It has a weak combo with Wishing Well.
3. Can defend against deck inspector attacks if they leave Victory Cards on top of your deck.
4. Can let you draw more cards with draw-to-x, and can control what those cards are.
5. Harem, Nobles, Great Hall, etc.
6. Can combo with discard cards like Oasis and Inn (you draw Victory cards then discard them).
7. Mystic, Mystic, Mystic!
That's my opinion, but I think a lot of these reasons make Scout a card that you could buy every once and a while, and benefit from it!
1. Crossroads+Victory cards is almost never a viable engine option. Scout doesn't change that.
2. So you play a scout, then a wishing well. Okay, most likely you end up neutral, besides knowing what the top 2 cards in your deck are. Occasionally, you will have a 2-card lab, but that is really weak for a 2-card combo, especially one that has a card that is more-or-less dead outside of the combo. And then there is the opportunity cost... which is far too high for something as bland as that.
3. That is still very weak, and scout could well miss the attack.
4. This reason is very confusing. You play a card that does nothing so that you can draw one more card? That doesn't actually help draw-to-x cards at all; if you hadn't had scout, you would have drawn that extra card anyways. Sure, it lets you reorder the things on top of your deck, but again, that marginal benefit is far too high given its opportunity cost and what happens in the event that you do not manage to couple scout with your library.
5. You need 1/4 of your deck to be these cards before scout is not a drag on your deck, which takes a lot of effort, and can stymy your engine building in other ways; you may feel the pressure not to buy other things like villages and such. The only thing listed there which could make scout even close to not being a drag on your deck is harem+scout, but that is going to be hard to set up, and by that point you probably have terminals in your deck and may not want to risk drawing scout, for example, with a smithy. And again, let us not forget; scout carries with it an opportunity cost, and merely not hurting your deck doesn't make it a worthwhile buy.
6. This is just not viable 95%+ of the time. Having upwards of 1/4 of your deck be victory cards hurts your engine too much for something like this to be viable.
7. You need to collide scout with at least 2 mystics for it not to just be an overpriced, 2-card silver. Even then, it is still just a 3-card grand market + silver, which is extremely weak, given that it can miss and has a lower effect than buying 2 cards that are actually at the same price as the mystics that you bought. In addition, the chance of colliding that much is far too low to be viable.
All in all, i would not hesitate to call scout the worst card in the game. Some people like to give the title to thief, but at least with thief there are some non-contrived situations in which it could be useful (if your opponent goes for gardens, for example).