Dominion Strategy Forum
Dominion => Dominion General Discussion => Topic started by: Commodore Chuckles on June 26, 2018, 03:14:26 pm
-
Seriously, is there any reason to buy it if there are no Attacks on the board? Besides, of course, diversity/Gardens stuff, where it's no better than literally any other card besides Curse.
It's occurred to me that this card seems to break with the general design principle that defense cards should provide some sort of benefit even if there are no Attacks. Moat and Lighthouse aren't great if there are no Attacks, but Moat can very occasionally be used for draw and Lighthouse can be useful with draw-to-X. A delayed Copper, though, is Ruins-level bad. If you're really desperate for an extra +1$ you can just get a regular Copper.
-
You may possibly want one in a very sloggy game to try to spike a province or something the following turn. Especially useful if you don't expect to shuffle again.
-
Yeah, the fact that you get it immediately on your next turn is super relevant.
-
Seriously, is there any reason to buy it if there are no Attacks on the board? Besides, of course, diversity/Gardens stuff, where it's no better than literally any other card besides Curse.
It's occurred to me that this card seems to break with the general design principle that defense cards should provide some sort of benefit even if there are no Attacks. Moat and Lighthouse aren't great if there are no Attacks, but Moat can very occasionally be used for draw and Lighthouse can be useful with draw-to-X. A delayed Copper, though, is Ruins-level bad. If you're really desperate for an extra +1$ you can just get a regular Copper.
Lighthouse is pretty useful even if there are no Attacks. Throne it to make a splitter out of it, draw more cards via Scrying Pool, activate those Heralds, have the buying power of a Silver for a mere 2 Coins, etc.
Guardian on the other hand is fairly useless without Attacks so the only question is whether it is situationally tactically justified to get a Copper into your deck in order to have an extra Coin next turn.
For example if you know that you make 4 next turn but want to hit 5 going for Guardian can be a decent choice, being mildly similar to Banquet. Whether that choice is good partly depends on whether you can later get rid of the Guardian/Coppers.
-
It's occurred to me that this card seems to break with the general design principle that defense cards should provide some sort of benefit even if there are no Attacks.
The next-turn bonus used to be "Recieve a Boon". It was changed very late in development because it just slowed games down too much. The replacement bonus needed to be terse, but "+1 Card" or "+1 Action" would have made it really similar to Ghost Town. So, "+$1".
You can buy it tactically to get +$1 next turn, as jonts notes. I have done that and will probably do it again.
-
I find one of guardian's most clutch abilities is being able to open with a $5 card whenever you open 3/4. If there's an elite $5 trasher or a wharf or something like that on the board, I have no problem adding a delayed copper to my deck to get it before the first shuffle.
-
It's a very bad card for your deck (worse than Copper most of the time), so its two uses are attack blocking and seeding next turn with a coin.
-
It's a very bad card for your deck (worse than Copper most of the time), so its two uses are attack blocking and seeding next turn with a coin.
Guardian is usually not as bad for your deck as copper, because the duration type means it skips shuffles more often. You want coppers to skip shuffles more often.
-
It's a very bad card for your deck (worse than Copper most of the time), so its two uses are attack blocking and seeding next turn with a coin.
Guardian is usually not as bad for your deck as copper, because the duration type means it skips shuffles more often. You want coppers to skip shuffles more often.
Plus, as we all know, a delayed Copper must be better than a regular one, since one good turn and one bad turn are better than two average turns. /s
-
I find one of guardian's most clutch abilities is being able to open with a $5 card whenever you open 3/4.
I'd be really sad if my opponent opened 2/5 on a board with Guardian and something like Border Village or Goons...
-
I find one of guardian's most clutch abilities is being able to open with a $5 card whenever you open 3/4.
I'd be really sad if my opponent opened 2/5 on a board with Guardian and something like Border Village or Goons...
Altar or Artisan might be even scarier as openings.
-
Once I opened inheritance with guardian and baker.
-
There are plenty of edge case reasons such as buying your guardian to feed your exorcist, setting up bonfire+tomb points, but it is always there to get that +1 coin next turn.
-
buying your guardian to feed your exorcist
Oh man, I forgot about this combo. Specifically I love buying a Den of Sin and immediately turning it into a Ghost.
-
buying your guardian to feed your exorcist
Oh man, I forgot about this combo. Specifically I love buying a Den of Sin and immediately turning it into a Ghost.
It's a haunted brothel!
-
Another one similar to Exorcist is to trash to a Bat.
-
I find one of guardian's most clutch abilities is being able to open with a $5 card whenever you open 3/4.
I'd be really sad if my opponent opened 2/5 on a board with Guardian and something like Border Village or Goons...
Altar or Artisan might be even scarier as openings.
^^ This...
it's a variation of the 2/6 split. Or a "0/6 split" since Guardian may not be useful beyond that, but getting to $6 before the first shuffle can be nice!
Otherwise, one plus of Guardian vs. Lighthouse is it doesn't need +Actions to play
-
Guardian is not a "delayed copper". It borrows a $ from this turn to put it into the next turn. This decreases your odds of hitting the average coin value (e.g. $4) and increases your odds of hitting the extremes (e.g. $3/$5 and even more so $2/$6). For a lot of Dominion, you want more $3/5 odds and less $4/4 odds.
What is bad about Guardian is that it competes with Silver for basic cash generation. This means it can be worth it for just $2 as a gimped silver, but you rarely will want to buy Guardian for cash.
Gaining to hand makes it better than Silver for this shuffle so tactical buys abound.
Gaining to hand has the many uses already listed, another truly clutch one can be to be stack your cards-in-play for next turn count. Lamp and Leprechaun both can get some huge gains by seeding another card into the next turn if you have tracked your deck well enough to know what is (likely) coming. Changing a Hex to a Wish or flipping Lamp to three Wishes massively outweigh adding a dead card (at worst).
Another nice combo is with Courtier, gaining two bonuses can enable Courtier even if you never play the Guardian (e.g. Lib/Courtier with strong trashing).
-
Guardian is not a "delayed copper". It borrows a $ from this turn to put it into the next turn.
These two things are not mutually exclusive.
For a lot of Dominion, you want more $3/5 odds and less $4/4 odds.
I still find this argument utterly unconvincing. Sure you usually prefer 3/5 to 4/4. But do you prefer 4/6 to 5/5? Do you prefer 7/9 to 8/8?
"A good hand and a bad hand are better than two average hands" is only true when your average hand is bad. And I think that in most cases, your average hand isn't bad enough to make this axiom valid.
EDIT: Put another way, I would rather have two good turns than a great turn and a mediocre turn. Mediocre turns can kill.
-
Guardian is not a "delayed copper". It borrows a $ from this turn to put it into the next turn.
When you talk about the hand-gained Night cards you have to differentiate between what they do when you gain then and what they do when you play them after the first time.
In Kingdoms without attacks Guardian is an on-play delayed Copper and an on-gain extra Coin next turn. The former is pretty bad (and even 'prefer extremes to averages' arguments can rarely rationalize the existence of a delayed Copper in your deck; with a delayed Peddler like Caravan Guard that's a different ballgame) whereas the latter is pretty good.
-
Guardian is not a "delayed copper". It borrows a $ from this turn to put it into the next turn. This decreases your odds of hitting the average coin value (e.g. $4) and increases your odds of hitting the extremes (e.g. $3/$5 and even more so $2/$6). For a lot of Dominion, you want more $3/5 odds and less $4/4 odds.
I'm not entirely sure it does. Can't it move your value towards the average just as well as it can move your value to the extremes?
For example, I draw four Copper, and a Guardian, and on my next turn, I draw three Coppers and two Estates. In this case the Guardian actually helps moving towards the average.
On the other hand, I could draw three Coppers, a Guardian, and an estate, and on my next turn, I draw four Coppers and an estate. This is the case you describe.
I'm too lazy to do precise calculations or simulations but I would like to see someone check this out. The same thing could be said about Haven.
-
Guardian is not a "delayed copper". It borrows a $ from this turn to put it into the next turn.
When you talk about the hand-gained Night cards you have to differentiate between what they do when you gain then and what they do when you play them after the first time.
In Kingdoms without attacks Guardian is an on-play delayed Copper and an on-gain extra Coin next turn. The former is pretty bad (and even 'prefer extremes to averages' arguments can rarely rationalize the existence of a delayed Copper in your deck; with a delayed Peddler like Caravan Guard that's a different ballgame) whereas the latter is pretty good.
A "delayed" copper, like any other delayed card would have that affect again and again. This is how we talk about Caravan being a delayed Lab or Wharf being a Moat now and a delayed Smithy.
On-buy you get a bonus coin. End of story. It has no interactions of the copper type (e.g. Gm) or even treasure types (e.g. Poorhouse). It does not enter your hand taking up space like a copper (e.g. Lib) or get played at the same time as a copper (e.g. Gm).
Quite literally Guardian takes up draw slot in your hand that all but always reduces your current buying power by at least $1 for much of the game. That makes it worse in many senses than a delayed copper or even a delayed coin (e.g. Caravan guard)
Guardian is not a "delayed copper". It borrows a $ from this turn to put it into the next turn.
These two things are not mutually exclusive.
For a lot of Dominion, you want more $3/5 odds and less $4/4 odds.
I still find this argument utterly unconvincing. Sure you usually prefer 3/5 to 4/4. But do you prefer 4/6 to 5/5? Do you prefer 7/9 to 8/8?
"A good hand and a bad hand are better than two average hands" is only true when your average hand is bad. And I think that in most cases, your average hand isn't bad enough to make this axiom valid.
EDIT: Put another way, I would rather have two good turns than a great turn and a mediocre turn. Mediocre turns can kill.
Funny it is almost as though I said, "for a lot of Dominion" swinging towards the extremes is better. I.e. basically every first shuffle in the game. Sure we can all come up with plenty of scenarios were we would prefer the constancy of regular cash and they would not even be edge cases ... but then you just buy a second Guardian or a copper and forget about it. When it matters most, on average you prefer the $3/5 over the $4/4. By the time your average hand is $5, you typically are drawing deck or have compensated regardless.
This is not to say that Guardian is good, only that its one-off bonus next turn and its push away from the mean are typically helpful enough to make it better than nothing (or another copper) if you open $5/2 or have $7/2 buys early enough in the game.
People here always seem to get caught up in "is this card good" rather than looking at the marginal utility of a card. Would you generally take it for free with a good card (e.g. mandatory Haggler gain), would you take it for "free" (e.g. $2 with nothing else to buy at $2), would you take it over silver, would you take it over a bog standard card at $4 (e.g. Smithy or Cutpurse), would you take it over the average $5 (e.g. Chapel type power)? Each of those is a worthy question that requires some thought.
Me I place Guardian-without-attacks somewhere between I would take it off a Silver/Haggler (a board that is really bad for it) and I would take it over Silver on an exceedingly rare number of boards (e.g. ones particularly bad for silvers, like Bandit camp) and that covers ~95% of boards.
Just knowing that a card is weak means little. Knowing why it is weak and what makes it stronger, that helps you actually analyze boards optimally.
-
Gbird: Not really.
You play it and your hand has 4 x [expected ultimate value of a card] as its average buying power.
Your next turn is 5 x [expected ultimate value of a card] + 1.
You average hand is simply 5x [expected ultimate value of a card].
This means that in the early game playing a Guardian roughly corresponds to decreasing your expected value of the first hand by ~$0.7 and increasing your next turn by 1. Over half the time your first turn will be average or below (thus moving you lower on your new average). Over half the time your second turn will be average or above (thus moving you towards a higher new average). This is generally good, but only marginally so.
-
Gbird: Not really.
You play it and your hand has 4 x [expected ultimate value of a card] as its average buying power.
Your next turn is 5 x [expected ultimate value of a card] + 1.
You average hand is simply 5x [expected ultimate value of a card].
This means that in the early game playing a Guardian roughly corresponds to decreasing your expected value of the first hand by ~$0.7 and increasing your next turn by 1. Over half the time your first turn will be average or below (thus moving you lower on your new average). Over half the time your second turn will be average or above (thus moving you towards a higher new average). This is generally good, but only marginally so.
But what if you get more than one Guardian?
-
Funny it is almost as though I said, "for a lot of Dominion" swinging towards the extremes is better.
Yes, and I disagree. I think it's less than half of Dominion where that is true.
This is not to say that Guardian is good, only that its one-off bonus next turn and its push away from the mean are typically helpful enough to make it better than nothing (or another copper) if you open $5/2 or have $7/2 buys early enough in the game.
Me I place Guardian-without-attacks somewhere between I would take it off a Silver/Haggler (a board that is really bad for it) and I would take it over Silver on an exceedingly rare number of boards (e.g. ones particularly bad for silvers, like Bandit camp) and that covers ~95% of boards.
I think you're severely overvaluing Guardian-without-Attacks. I'll gain it, but mostly only when spiking something is terribly important, or when I'm hoping to never draw the Guardian again. I certainly do not consider it anything approaching a Silver replacement.
-
That makes it worse in many senses than a delayed copper
Given that Guardian is an on-play delayed Copper with a cherry on top when you gain it, this statement is false.
-
That makes it worse in many senses than a delayed copper
Given that Guardian is an on-play delayed Copper with a cherry on top when you gain it, this statement is false.
Sorry, but no. A delayed copper is Caravan Guard. It literally gives you a copper next turn at no cost to this turn.
Haven dumps a copper back to next turn as well, and like Guardian it reduces your current hand by one. Save can do likewise; nobody ever calls those delayed copper because they do not play like delayed copper.
We have plenty of actual "delayed copper" and Guardian is not it. Guardian anti-smooths your early buying power, taking from the play turn and moving to your duration turn.
LFN:
You have a Haggler in play with a copper - in general would would you: buy the silver/gain Guardian, buy silver/gain copper, buy nothing on no attack boards?
You open $5/2, no attacks, do you buy: the Guardian or nothing?
You are playing a Bandit camp/Alms/Moneylender/+buy game after how many silvers would you buy Guardian (0, 1, 2, 8)?
In general I will take silver/Guardian over silver/copper pretty much all the time and most of the time I will take that over nothing if I will take silver alone. Somewhere around 1/3 to 1/2 the time I will open Guardian on a 5/2, higher with weaker $5s.
The last is the hardest one, but generally I would say Guardian can be a reasonable move from 2/3 silvers in deck to 1/2 on maybe a quarter of boards.
By far and away, the most common reason to get a Guardian is spiking something next turn. Making a $3/4 into a curse/$5 would be worth a huge amount of the time so I routinely buy Guardian there.
Once I have Guardian in my deck, how do I play it? Not like it is delayed copper like Caravan guard nor like Haven/copper; instead I play like it anti-smooths my deck; this means that deck smoothing may be approached differently - Save an estate if Guardian is in the last hand of the shuffle to have much better odds of spiking a $6 or $7, alternate it with a Haven moving copper to smooth out when I am getting close to regular $5s. When you play Guardian it removes buying power from that turn and raw adds it to the next turn without penalty ... that just plays different than things which delay a copper.
-
That makes it worse in many senses than a delayed copper
Given that Guardian is an on-play delayed Copper with a cherry on top when you gain it, this statement is false.
Sorry, but no. A delayed copper is Caravan Guard. It literally gives you a copper next turn at no cost to this turn.
It's pretty obvious that that is not what delayed Copper means in this context. Copper comes at a cost. If Caravan Guard is a delayed Copper, then that would mean that Peddler is a regular Copper.
-
Gbird: Not really.
You play it and your hand has 4 x [expected ultimate value of a card] as its average buying power.
Your next turn is 5 x [expected ultimate value of a card] + 1.
You average hand is simply 5x [expected ultimate value of a card].
This means that in the early game playing a Guardian roughly corresponds to decreasing your expected value of the first hand by ~$0.7 and increasing your next turn by 1. Over half the time your first turn will be average or below (thus moving you lower on your new average). Over half the time your second turn will be average or above (thus moving you towards a higher new average). This is generally good, but only marginally so.
But what if you get more than one Guardian?
If you play the same turn they much more dramatically move you away from the old average hand value (3x vs 5x +2).
If you continuously offset them you end up with 4x + 1. If your average buying power card is <1 then they move your average up. This is generally true only for the first shuffle or if you playing around with short term dead cards (e.g. Pot cards, Lurker). If x > 1 then you just decrease your average overall.
Note the above analysis holds only if you have exactly two hands in a shuffle. If you have a larger deck, then you will still be anti-smoothing, just with a different frequency.
What Guardian emphatically does not do is generally increase your average buying power hand like a delayed copper. After the on-buy bonus, Guardian requires sacrificing buying power one turn to gain it back the next turn. You have one or two shuffles where this helps you and after that it hurts.
Those shuffles tend to be some of the most important in the game and spiking >= $5 is so often important enough that Guardian beats nothing on a lot of $5/2 openings (the exact utility gets wonky as some $5s are so important to play ASAP, like Count, going from 1/11 chance of whiffing to ~1/6 is not worth the better odds of hitting a $5). Gaining more Guardians after the first is highly problematic because within 2 shuffles his anti-smoothing is going to be offset by a stronger deck due to whatever you are building out (e.g. Trashing estates, buying high value coin). AS LFN correctly points out, once you deck is generally good (i.e. hits your desired price point every turn on average), Guardian is not going to be that helpful and will lose against the option of gaining nothing.
Guardian can always be useful to spike a coin next turn ... but his on-play utility only becomes helpful when your deck's average buying power dips below $1/card again and your clutch price point is $5 (or below $0.8/card and your price point is $4). That is slog territory and you should be thinking hard about both Estates and Coppers as competing buys (also late slogs may be pure next-turn-spiking if you are not likely to shuffle through again).
Without attacks Guardian is weak. It is useful for spiking one more $ on buy and if you deck track that will cover well over 80% of when you should buy a Guardian on such a board. $5/2 "better than nothing" covers another 10%. Times when you buy two Guardians not for spiking are going to be getting well into edge case land (e.g. Silver gets Embargoed with Bandit camp).
-
That makes it worse in many senses than a delayed copper
Given that Guardian is an on-play delayed Copper with a cherry on top when you gain it, this statement is false.
Sorry, but no. A delayed copper is Caravan Guard. It literally gives you a copper next turn at no cost to this turn.
It's pretty obvious that that is not what delayed Copper means in this context. Copper comes at a cost. If Caravan Guard is a delayed Copper, then that would mean that Peddler is a regular Copper.
So you believe that Caravan is not a delayed Lab?
-
That makes it worse in many senses than a delayed copper
Given that Guardian is an on-play delayed Copper with a cherry on top when you gain it, this statement is false.
Sorry, but no. A delayed copper is Caravan Guard. It literally gives you a copper next turn at no cost to this turn.
It's pretty obvious that that is not what delayed Copper means in this context. Copper comes at a cost. If Caravan Guard is a delayed Copper, then that would mean that Peddler is a regular Copper.
So you believe that Caravan is not a delayed Lab?
It is a Lab that has parts of its effect delayed. Den of Sin is a version where more is delayed.
-
That makes it worse in many senses than a delayed copper
Given that Guardian is an on-play delayed Copper with a cherry on top when you gain it, this statement is false.
Sorry, but no. A delayed copper is Caravan Guard. It literally gives you a copper next turn at no cost to this turn.
It's pretty obvious that that is not what delayed Copper means in this context. Copper comes at a cost. If Caravan Guard is a delayed Copper, then that would mean that Peddler is a regular Copper.
So you believe that Caravan is not a delayed Lab?
Caravan and Caravan Guard are both cantrips on the turn you play them. Guardian is not. It doesn't draw, so it takes up space in your hand. So yes, playing it does have a cost this turn.
-
I think Caravan Guard is what one would call a "delayed Peddler".
-
Sorry, but no. A delayed copper is Caravan Guard. It literally gives you a copper next turn at no cost to this turn.
So you believe that Caravan is not a delayed Lab?
Looks like you might want to to work on your consistency. If Caravan is a delayed Laboratory then Caravan Guard is a delayed Peddler. Copper takes up a card space, Peddler doesn't. Doesn't get more elementary.
A delayed Copper is literally a Treasure that says "At the start of your next turn: +1 Coin". This is more or less what Guardian does on-play which is why it sucks in Kingdoms without attacks beyond the first play. Few decks want Coppers or stuff that is similar.
-
Guardian is not. It doesn't draw, so it takes up space in your hand.
Even if it did draw on play, it would take up space in hand. Bat/Exorcist edge cases left aside.
-
I believe we've gotten a teensy bit side-tracked.
-
Simple question for all then:
What does Delayed X mean?
I have ALWAYS used it mean something that happens next turn without a penalty and does the same thing as the card in question.
Caravan is a delayed Lab. The net effect of Caravan is gaining a lab effect with one turn of delay.
Wharf is a Moat/+buy now and a delayed pair of Labs (non-terminal Smithy, whatever)/+buy.
Merchant ship is a terminal silver now and delayed non-terminal Silver (I prefer to just say a delayed $2).
Bridge troll is gimped Bridge now and a gimped non-terminal bridge later.
Caravan guard, to me, is not a delayed Peddler because Peddler draws and that makes differences with things like -1 card tokens, Conspirators, and the like. It is delayed $1 and that seems to be the most sensible candidate for a strict "delayed copper" if we are going to mean that a delayed copper is anything that gives +1$ next turn. Delayed coin ... sure gimped delayed coin - that sounds more like how the card is actually played.
More importantly when playing Guardian you are not playing something that simply adds $1 to the next turn. Its reward comes directly out of the present hand. Hence why LFN thinks it is terrible on attack-less boards. It is useful on 5/2 openings sometimes precisely because it plays closer to Haven than it does to something like Amulet-for-cash. If you were ever going to Haven copper every turn, that is exceedingly close to how Guardian plays: take from this turn, give to next turn.
I have no idea what "delayed copper" is getting beyond a copper next turn. Unlike with virtually all the other durations it is pure penalty this turn. Guardian does absolutely nothing this turn without attacks. You can make some edge case parallels with Enchantress or Haunted woods - but the attacks are very non-trivial parts of their power.
-
That makes it worse in many senses than a delayed copper
Given that Guardian is an on-play delayed Copper with a cherry on top when you gain it, this statement is false.
Sorry, but no. A delayed copper is Caravan Guard. It literally gives you a copper next turn at no cost to this turn.
It's pretty obvious that that is not what delayed Copper means in this context. Copper comes at a cost. If Caravan Guard is a delayed Copper, then that would mean that Peddler is a regular Copper.
So you believe that Caravan is not a delayed Lab?
It is a Lab that has parts of its effect delayed. Den of Sin is a version where more is delayed.
What on earth is "more delayed"? Caravan gives you a net gain of cards next turn. DeS gives you net cards next turn. Caravan is nothing this turn and DeS gives you twice the bonus next turn.
-
What does Delayed X mean?
I mean, this is how I think about it:
Card | Cost to Play This Turn Next Turn | Net
---------------+------------------------------------------------------------+------------------
Copper | -1 Card +1 Coin | -1 Card +1 Coin
Guardian | -1 Card +1 Coin | -1 Card +1 Coin
---------------+------------------------------------------------------------+------------------
Peddler | -1 Action -1 Card +1 Action +1 Card +1 Coin | +1 Coin
Caravan Guard | -1 Action -1 Card +1 Action +1 Card +1 Coin | +1 Coin
---------------+------------------------------------------------------------+------------------
Laboratory | -1 Action -1 Card +1 Action +2 Cards | +1 Card
Caravan | -1 Action -1 Card +1 Action +1 Card +1 Card | +1 Card
Den of Sin | -1 Card +2 Cards | +1 Card
Cards with the same net effect (over this turn and the next) are listed together in a group.
Guardian has the same net effect as Copper, but the coin part is shifted over into next turn, so Guardian is like a delayed Copper. Same logic for Caravan Guard being like a delayed Peddler.
Caravan is like a Lab that has +1 Card of the net effect shifted into next turn. Den of Sin is like a Lab that has +2 Cards of the net effect shifted into next turn (leaving -1 Card for this turn). Den of Sin is not "more delayed," but it has more of its effect delayed.
-
Is Guardian useless without attacks? No, it can be a nice spiker. Is it pretty bad? Absolutely.
-
Just chiming in to note one interesting moment I had with Guardian and no attacks. I had the $2/$7 opening with Cursed Gold, and could use a Guardian buy Turn 1 to Donate Turn 2 and pay off all debt right away, leaving 5 coppers, allowing me to Windfall Turn 3.
-
Just chiming in to note one interesting moment I had with Guardian and no attacks. I had the $2/$7 opening with Cursed Gold, and could use a Guardian buy Turn 1 to Donate Turn 2 and pay off all debt right away, leaving 5 coppers, allowing me to Windfall Turn 3.
I started to call that out as an edge case but I think that's the point we're getting across here. Is guardian useless without attacks? Pretty much, but there are edge cases.
-
Just chiming in to note one interesting moment I had with Guardian and no attacks. I had the $2/$7 opening with Cursed Gold, and could use a Guardian buy Turn 1 to Donate Turn 2 and pay off all debt right away, leaving 5 coppers, allowing me to Windfall Turn 3.
I started to call that out as an edge case but I think that's the point we're getting across here. Is guardian useless without attacks? Pretty much, but there are edge cases.
I have never quite understood the board's obsession with calling out "edge case". We are well past the point where just seeing a given card is relatively rare. Seeing a given pair of cards is "edge case" for most definitions of the term in general.
The important thing is not knowing how rare something is, but knowing why the "edge case" makes the card good. Spiking cash for an early Donate/Windfall? Not terribly dissimilar from spiking $7 with a $2/5 for Baker/Inheritance or Cursed gold/Forge. Frankly, it is the same analysis that leads to much more common uses like $3/4 openings letting you open a power trashing $5 (e.g. Junk dealer, Count). It is more obvious in the "edge case", but still true regardless.
Knowing why is much more satisfying that just memorizing block heuristics. It also is much more helpful for learning the tempo of the gain and the opportunity cost portion of strategy.
There is precious little about Dominion that is not made clearer by consider edge cases that make interactions, opportunity costs, and the like clearer.
-
I have no idea what "block heuristics" are. Doesn't seem to be related to boardgaming.
But at least I know the difference between Peddler and Copper.
-
Just chiming in to note one interesting moment I had with Guardian and no attacks. I had the $2/$7 opening with Cursed Gold, and could use a Guardian buy Turn 1 to Donate Turn 2 and pay off all debt right away, leaving 5 coppers, allowing me to Windfall Turn 3.
I started to call that out as an edge case but I think that's the point we're getting across here. Is guardian useless without attacks? Pretty much, but there are edge cases.
I have never quite understood the board's obsession with calling out "edge case". We are well past the point where just seeing a given card is relatively rare. Seeing a given pair of cards is "edge case" for most definitions of the term in general.
The important thing is not knowing how rare something is, but knowing why the "edge case" makes the card good. Spiking cash for an early Donate/Windfall? Not terribly dissimilar from spiking $7 with a $2/5 for Baker/Inheritance or Cursed gold/Forge. Frankly, it is the same analysis that leads to much more common uses like $3/4 openings letting you open a power trashing $5 (e.g. Junk dealer, Count). It is more obvious in the "edge case", but still true regardless.
Knowing why is much more satisfying that just memorizing block heuristics. It also is much more helpful for learning the tempo of the gain and the opportunity cost portion of strategy.
There is precious little about Dominion that is not made clearer by consider edge cases that make interactions, opportunity costs, and the like clearer.
I'd agree with most of what you just said, particularly with the importance of understanding the Whys behinds the Whats.
The reason I think edge cases can be addressed but not emphasized comes down to that, actually, and has more to do with talking and learning about Dominion than playing any one game. As you say, there are infinite possibilities at this point, so if we allow for edge cases to dictate general points on the game, everything is true and you can't glean any insights.
For example, I say it's bad to be hit by Militia. Someone comes back with " but what if you get to discard Tunnels?"
While that is relevant context to that game, and understanding why can lead us to insights, it's probably not super helpful to include it in a general discussion on what Militia does.
-
Personally, I'd prefer if people said "It's usually bad to be hit by Militia." Even if you think it's obvious you don't mean your statement to be taken as an absolute despite being worded that way, that's not necessarily obvious to everyone else. Some people might think you're not aware of the exceptions; others might accidentally take your statement at face value.
Also, it leaves scope to express that Ghost Ship hurts a greater proportion of the time. (Doesn't trigger Tunnel, and also risks gumming up engines once you've started to green.)
-
I have no idea what "block heuristics" are. Doesn't seem to be related to boardgaming.
But at least I know the difference between Peddler and Copper.
Block Heuristics are a type of mathematical formalism that relates to how to efficiently span a space with like or dissimilar elements.
In this case it refers to recognizing where into various taxonomies cards fall (e.g. Good, Bad; Good-with-attacks, Bad-with-no-trashing) and how to pick out when to buy them. It is a fast way to tell if something fits.
However, the sheer number of possibilities make it increasingly likely that some set of cards in a given game will be "edge cased" that particular game (i.e. the same sort of logic of why it is an odds on bet that with 23 people there will be a shared birthday among them).
We have reached a point where knowing why something sucks is much more important than knowing it does.
Regardless, do you wish to actually have a constructive discussion or do you wish to simply snark and vituperate? If the former, please do so. If the latter, please let me know so I can figure out how the forum's ignore function works.
-
Just chiming in to note one interesting moment I had with Guardian and no attacks. I had the $2/$7 opening with Cursed Gold, and could use a Guardian buy Turn 1 to Donate Turn 2 and pay off all debt right away, leaving 5 coppers, allowing me to Windfall Turn 3.
I started to call that out as an edge case but I think that's the point we're getting across here. Is guardian useless without attacks? Pretty much, but there are edge cases.
I have never quite understood the board's obsession with calling out "edge case". We are well past the point where just seeing a given card is relatively rare. Seeing a given pair of cards is "edge case" for most definitions of the term in general.
The important thing is not knowing how rare something is, but knowing why the "edge case" makes the card good. Spiking cash for an early Donate/Windfall? Not terribly dissimilar from spiking $7 with a $2/5 for Baker/Inheritance or Cursed gold/Forge. Frankly, it is the same analysis that leads to much more common uses like $3/4 openings letting you open a power trashing $5 (e.g. Junk dealer, Count). It is more obvious in the "edge case", but still true regardless.
Knowing why is much more satisfying that just memorizing block heuristics. It also is much more helpful for learning the tempo of the gain and the opportunity cost portion of strategy.
There is precious little about Dominion that is not made clearer by consider edge cases that make interactions, opportunity costs, and the like clearer.
I'd agree with most of what you just said, particularly with the importance of understanding the Whys behinds the Whats.
The reason I think edge cases can be addressed but not emphasized comes down to that, actually, and has more to do with talking and learning about Dominion than playing any one game. As you say, there are infinite possibilities at this point, so if we allow for edge cases to dictate general points on the game, everything is true and you can't glean any insights.
For example, I say it's bad to be hit by Militia. Someone comes back with " but what if you get to discard Tunnels?"
While that is relevant context to that game, and understanding why can lead us to insights, it's probably not super helpful to include it in a general discussion on what Militia does.
Everything is true in Dominion, but it is not true all the time. This is the value of finding an edge case - where something is unquestioningly true - and then walking back to the point where it becomes marginal. $2/$7 openings cross a threshold that is unambiguous. $3/4 becoming $2/5 is still pretty robust. $5/2 giving you much better odds of hitting $5/2/5 is less a sure thing but is perfectly doable (e.g. Upgrade/Grand market). We can see the pattern, say when we start getting queasy, and then move on from there.
Rather than saying "that's an edge case" the next task after someone posts an edge case should always be "so how much of an edge case do we actually need?"
Knowing when something will be true is a very useful skill.
-
I have no idea what "block heuristics" are. Doesn't seem to be related to boardgaming.
But at least I know the difference between Peddler and Copper.
Block Heuristics are a type of mathematical formalism that relates to how to efficiently span a space with like or dissimilar elements.
As I expected, totally unrelated to Guardian. 8)
Seriously dude, if you really could analyze boardgames with some mathematical tools I'd be all for it. But in order to do you'd first have to get your basics right. Like the difference between Copper and Peddler.
Kinda hard to program a decent chess engine if you don't get the difference between how the bishop and the rook move.
Regardless, do you wish to actually have a constructive discussion or do you wish to simply snark and vituperate? If the former, please do so. If the latter, please let me know so I can figure out how the forum's ignore function works.
If I constantly claimed that this entire forum is doing this bad thing and thinking that horrible thought I'd think twice about pretending that I were interested in a constructive discussion.
-
Holunder9:
Thanks, I am setting you to ignore. Please react as you see fit.
-
Holunder9:
Thanks, I am setting you to ignore. Please react as you see fit.
I guess you meant that you set me to Mute.
I hope that you learn the difference between Peddler and Copper one day though. Might be a useful block heuristic. 8)
-
If we're talking about problems with this forum, how many accounts is this for you now?
It's getting hard to count the banned ones.
-
I have no idea what "block heuristics" are. Doesn't seem to be related to boardgaming.
But at least I know the difference between Peddler and Copper.
Block Heuristics are a type of mathematical formalism that relates to how to efficiently span a space with like or dissimilar elements.
As I expected, totally unrelated to Guardian. 8)
A heuristic is basically a rule of thumb: the idea "don't buy a $3 unless it's better for your deck than Silver" is a heuristic. What jomini was saying was that it's better to understand the broader strategy of Dominion, rather than focusing on specific card combos or card-specific adages. So actually it had quite a lot to do with Guardian.
-
I have no idea what "block heuristics" are. Doesn't seem to be related to boardgaming.
But at least I know the difference between Peddler and Copper.
Block Heuristics are a type of mathematical formalism that relates to how to efficiently span a space with like or dissimilar elements.
As I expected, totally unrelated to Guardian. 8)
A heuristic is basically a rule of thumb: the idea "don't buy a $3 unless it's better for your deck than Silver" is a heuristic. What jomini was saying was that it's better to understand the broader strategy of Dominion, rather than focusing on specific card combos or card-specific adages. So actually it had quite a lot to do with Guardian.
That's the opposite of what he was saying. He argued for the importance of analyzing edge cases while not understanding general stuff like the difference between a Peddler and a Copper whereas I argued for the latter, getting fundamental stuff right before delving into the rare cases in which a bad card is actually good.
If you don't get the basic stuff about Guardian right, i.e. that it is on-play a delayed Copper and that it is only good due to the on-gain effect in Kingdoms without attacks, all the babbling about block heuristics boils down to using fancy language that is void of content.
-
Just chiming in to note one interesting moment I had with Guardian and no attacks. I had the $2/$7 opening with Cursed Gold, and could use a Guardian buy Turn 1 to Donate Turn 2 and pay off all debt right away, leaving 5 coppers, allowing me to Windfall Turn 3.
I started to call that out as an edge case but I think that's the point we're getting across here. Is guardian useless without attacks? Pretty much, but there are edge cases.
I have never quite understood the board's obsession with calling out "edge case". We are well past the point where just seeing a given card is relatively rare. Seeing a given pair of cards is "edge case" for most definitions of the term in general.
The important thing is not knowing how rare something is, but knowing why the "edge case" makes the card good. Spiking cash for an early Donate/Windfall? Not terribly dissimilar from spiking $7 with a $2/5 for Baker/Inheritance or Cursed gold/Forge. Frankly, it is the same analysis that leads to much more common uses like $3/4 openings letting you open a power trashing $5 (e.g. Junk dealer, Count). It is more obvious in the "edge case", but still true regardless.
Knowing why is much more satisfying that just memorizing block heuristics. It also is much more helpful for learning the tempo of the gain and the opportunity cost portion of strategy.
There is precious little about Dominion that is not made clearer by consider edge cases that make interactions, opportunity costs, and the like clearer.
I'd agree with most of what you just said, particularly with the importance of understanding the Whys behinds the Whats.
The reason I think edge cases can be addressed but not emphasized comes down to that, actually, and has more to do with talking and learning about Dominion than playing any one game. As you say, there are infinite possibilities at this point, so if we allow for edge cases to dictate general points on the game, everything is true and you can't glean any insights.
For example, I say it's bad to be hit by Militia. Someone comes back with " but what if you get to discard Tunnels?"
While that is relevant context to that game, and understanding why can lead us to insights, it's probably not super helpful to include it in a general discussion on what Militia does.
Everything is true in Dominion, but it is not true all the time. This is the value of finding an edge case - where something is unquestioningly true - and then walking back to the point where it becomes marginal. $2/$7 openings cross a threshold that is unambiguous. $3/4 becoming $2/5 is still pretty robust. $5/2 giving you much better odds of hitting $5/2/5 is less a sure thing but is perfectly doable (e.g. Upgrade/Grand market). We can see the pattern, say when we start getting queasy, and then move on from there.
Rather than saying "that's an edge case" the next task after someone posts an edge case should always be "so how much of an edge case do we actually need?"
Knowing when something will be true is a very useful skill.
Fair point
-
If we're talking about problems with this forum, how many accounts is this for you now?
It's getting hard to count the banned ones.
Oh man, this is a good trivia question. I remember Tristan, then Weety4, then I go blank. Lemme research to find the definitive list.
- Tristan
- Weety4
- Q
- yougotsomeseriousissues
I feel like there was a fifth one recently though, anybody have any ideas?
-
Was horatio83 not the same person?
-
Also josh56.
I very sincerely recommend putting people on your ignore list. It sounds like kind of a mean and hostile thing to do, but in fact it makes the world a nicer and brighter place for all. The ignore list is hard to find, so for the benefit of those who can't find it... click "profile" on the top, then "buddies/ignore list" on the sidebar, then press "edit ignore list" and type in the user's name.
-
Was horatio83 not the same person?
No. Awaclus kept pushing that, but I think theory disproved it with some IP technomagic.
-
Also josh56.
I very sincerely recommend putting people on your ignore list. It sounds like kind of a mean and hostile thing to do, but in fact it makes the world a nicer and brighter place for all. The ignore list is hard to find, so for the benefit of those who can't find it... click "profile" on the top, then "buddies/ignore list" on the sidebar, then press "edit ignore list" and type in the user's name.
"Adding members to these lists will, amongst other things, help control mail and PM traffic"
What does it do exactly?
-
Was horatio83 not the same person?
Using a proxy isn’t rocket science.
-
Was horatio83 not the same person?
Using a proxy isn’t rocket science.
I think it had more to do with the patterns the previous accounts had, and that weren’t exhibited by Horatio83. But meh.
-
It's probably for the best if people who have a shrewd idea how one might tell if two users were the same person, particularly theory, didn't divulge their techniques...
-
Just chiming in to note one interesting moment I had with Guardian and no attacks. I had the $2/$7 opening with Cursed Gold, and could use a Guardian buy Turn 1 to Donate Turn 2 and pay off all debt right away, leaving 5 coppers, allowing me to Windfall Turn 3.
I'll just note that if you had any other opening, you could have Donated Turn 1 to 5 Coppers, paid off Debt on Turn 2, and bought Windfall on Turn 3, the same turn as you were able to do so. The only thing the one-time Guardian did was save you from a super unlucky opening hand -- and it wouldn't have done so if there didn't also happen to be Pooka in the kingdom. It's clearly not nothing -- this was probably the correct play for you, but it isn't nearly as advantageous as, say, spiking an early Inheritance would be.
-
I just bought a Guardian in a no-Attack game to try to spike a final Province. It didn't work, but I did buy it.