Dominion Strategy Forum
Dominion => Rules Questions => Topic started by: BBobb on November 24, 2019, 04:24:45 pm

Hi.
I don't know if this is the right place to put this, but why does Donald X. say that Throning a Throne is not doubling a doubler, but King's Court on King's Court is? Because isn't Throne Room a doubler, which would make Throning a Throne doubling a doubler?
Thanks

I don’t know the specific quote you are referring to; but there’s one big difference between Throning a Throne and King’s Courting a King’s Court which it sounds like this is about.
Throne room doesn’t create extra effects; playing Throne Room + Smithy is just like playing Smithy+Smithy; except a free +1 action. Basically Throne acts like another copy of Smithy (if these are the only 2 actions you play; you still get 2 action cards’ worth of effects from 2 cards.
King’s Court creates an extra effect; more total effects than are in your deck. KC+Smithy is only 2 cards; but gives you 3 cards’ worth of effects.
This advantage of KC is very strong when you chain them. No matter how many Throne Room’s you chain; you still end up with at most 1 card effect per card played. But if you KC a KC; now you can triple 3 other cards; which is like getting 9 card effects with only 5 cards.

And originally you could use multiple Fortunes in a turn and well doubling doublers is always trouble (Throning a Throne isn't actually doubling a doubler, person who thinks of that; however King's Court on King's Court is).
I assume this is the quote you are referring to?
I'm not entirely sure what he means here, but if I had to guess, I would assume that he is referring to the fact that ThroneThroneaction 1action 2 has (nearly) the same effect as Throneaction 1 followed by Throneaction 2. Whereas KCKC lets you triple three actions, instead of KCaction 1 followed by KCaction 2.
I agree, though, that was a weird way to phrase it. Technically Throning a Throne is doubling a doubler.

Throne room doesn’t create extra effects; playing Throne Room + Smithy is just like playing Smithy+Smithy; except a free +1 action. Basically Throne acts like another copy of Smithy (if these are the only 2 actions you play; you still get 2 action cards’ worth of effects from 2 cards.
King’s Court creates an extra effect; more total effects than are in your deck. KC+Smithy is only 2 cards; but gives you 3 cards’ worth of effects.
Yes, that's what I was talking about. You can think of it as, Throne Room copies a card. Instead of Throne Room you have the card (and +1 Action). That's not what doubling is though.
In games where you can have an ability to double an effect, sometimes nothing prevents you from doubling the doubler and getting 4 times the effect, or doubling that and getting 8 times. Throne Room doesn't do anything like that; Throning Throne means you play two cards twice, overall you played four cards and got four effects. It never explodes.

King’s Court creates an extra effect; more total effects than are in your deck. KC+Smithy is only 2 cards; but gives you 3 cards’ worth of effects.
This advantage of KC is very strong when you chain them. No matter how many Throne Room’s you chain; you still end up with at most 1 card effect per card played. But if you KC a KC; now you can triple 3 other cards; which is like getting 9 card effects with only 5 cards.
That's not quite doubling either. As you say, KC+card is 3 card effects for 2 cards, so 50% more. With two KCs and three cards you get 9 for 5, so 80% more. With three KCs and five cards you get 15 for 8, so 87.5% more. It will never be double.

King’s Court creates an extra effect; more total effects than are in your deck. KC+Smithy is only 2 cards; but gives you 3 cards’ worth of effects.
This advantage of KC is very strong when you chain them. No matter how many Throne Room’s you chain; you still end up with at most 1 card effect per card played. But if you KC a KC; now you can triple 3 other cards; which is like getting 9 card effects with only 5 cards.
That's not quite doubling either. As you say, KC+card is 3 card effects for 2 cards, so 50% more. With two KCs and three cards you get 9 for 5, so 80% more. With three KCs and five cards you get 15 for 8, so 87.5% more. It will never be double.
Well if you KC a card and then KC another card, you tripled two cards. If you KC a KC, you tripled three cards, as if you got Citadel to double your first KC. In that sense you can think of one one the KCs as having been doubled vs. the two KCs having tripled separate cards.

I think comparing Fortune with TR and KC doesn't fundamentally work. After all, Fortune is also a card taking up a slot. Fortune doubles all the $ you have produced at the expense of one slot. Maybe something TRlike but equivalent would have to repeat all your played Action cards.

I think comparing Fortune with TR and KC doesn't fundamentally work. After all, Fortune is also a card taking up a slot. Fortune doubles all the $ you have produced at the expense of one slot. Maybe something TRlike but equivalent would have to repeat all your played Action cards.
I think the point was exponential growth. Allowing Fortune to work more than once would have allowed exponential growth; in a way similar to how KC is exponential. It's just more direct with Fortune, you can literally see 2^n in the calculation for how much money you get when you play n Fortunes (if it weren't limited to once per turn). With KC, the formula is more complicated.

I think the point was exponential growth. Allowing Fortune to work more than once would have allowed exponential growth; in a way similar to how KC is exponential. It's just more direct with Fortune, you can literally see 2^n in the calculation for how much money you get when you play n Fortunes (if it weren't limited to once per turn). With KC, the formula is more complicated.
That's not quite doubling either. As you say, KC+card is 3 card effects for 2 cards, so 50% more. With two KCs and three cards you get 9 for 5, so 80% more. With three KCs and five cards you get 15 for 8, so 87.5% more. It will never be double.
KC isn't exponential either, as Jeebus points out. It doesn't even grow without bound, as a linear, or even logarithmic would. The ratio of cards played to cardeffects received (which is (3+6x)/(1+3x) after the first KC in the chain) will never reach 2.
A better analogy which is already in the game is City Quarter, which exponentially grows your handsize (until your deck runs out, of course).

I think comparing Fortune with TR and KC doesn't fundamentally work. After all, Fortune is also a card taking up a slot. Fortune doubles all the $ you have produced at the expense of one slot. Maybe something TRlike but equivalent would have to repeat all your played Action cards.
I think the point was exponential growth. Allowing Fortune to work more than once would have allowed exponential growth; in a way similar to how KC is exponential. It's just more direct with Fortune, you can literally see 2^n in the calculation for how much money you get when you play n Fortunes (if it weren't limited to once per turn). With KC, the formula is more complicated.
Also, if it weren't for that restriction, crowns could make Fortune even more insane  crown a fortune for 4x! Two crowns + two fortunes = 2^4 = 16x. And the ultimate absurdity  five crowns + five fortunes = 2^10 = 1,024x!

I think comparing Fortune with TR and KC doesn't fundamentally work. After all, Fortune is also a card taking up a slot. Fortune doubles all the $ you have produced at the expense of one slot. Maybe something TRlike but equivalent would have to repeat all your played Action cards.
I think the point was exponential growth. Allowing Fortune to work more than once would have allowed exponential growth; in a way similar to how KC is exponential. It's just more direct with Fortune, you can literally see 2^n in the calculation for how much money you get when you play n Fortunes (if it weren't limited to once per turn). With KC, the formula is more complicated.
Also, if it weren't for that restriction, crowns could make Fortune even more insane  crown a fortune for 4x! Two crowns + two fortunes = 2^4 = 16x. And the ultimate absurdity  five crowns + five fortunes = 2^10 = 1,024x!
and unfortunately those were all the treasures you had in hand, leaving you with ten buys and no money

I think the point was exponential growth. Allowing Fortune to work more than once would have allowed exponential growth; in a way similar to how KC is exponential. It's just more direct with Fortune, you can literally see 2^n in the calculation for how much money you get when you play n Fortunes (if it weren't limited to once per turn). With KC, the formula is more complicated.
That's not quite doubling either. As you say, KC+card is 3 card effects for 2 cards, so 50% more. With two KCs and three cards you get 9 for 5, so 80% more. With three KCs and five cards you get 15 for 8, so 87.5% more. It will never be double.
KC isn't exponential either, as Jeebus points out. It doesn't even grow without bound, as a linear, or even logarithmic would. The ratio of cards played to cardeffects received (which is (3+6x)/(1+3x) after the first KC in the chain) will never reach 2.
A better analogy which is already in the game is City Quarter, which exponentially grows your handsize (until your deck runs out, of course).
I think the number of nonKC actions you triple with n KCs is 2n  1, which is linear growth. Comparatively, the number of nonTRs you double with n Throne Rooms is just n. So KC chains grow twice as fast as Throne Room chains.

I think the point was exponential growth. Allowing Fortune to work more than once would have allowed exponential growth; in a way similar to how KC is exponential. It's just more direct with Fortune, you can literally see 2^n in the calculation for how much money you get when you play n Fortunes (if it weren't limited to once per turn). With KC, the formula is more complicated.
That's not quite doubling either. As you say, KC+card is 3 card effects for 2 cards, so 50% more. With two KCs and three cards you get 9 for 5, so 80% more. With three KCs and five cards you get 15 for 8, so 87.5% more. It will never be double.
KC isn't exponential either, as Jeebus points out. It doesn't even grow without bound, as a linear, or even logarithmic would. The ratio of cards played to cardeffects received (which is (3+6x)/(1+3x) after the first KC in the chain) will never reach 2.
A better analogy which is already in the game is City Quarter, which exponentially grows your handsize (until your deck runs out, of course).
I think the number of nonKC actions you triple with n KCs is 2n  1, which is linear growth. Comparatively, the number of nonTRs you double with n Throne Rooms is just n. So KC chains grow twice as fast as Throne Room chains.
True. But neither are exponential.

I think the point was exponential growth. Allowing Fortune to work more than once would have allowed exponential growth; in a way similar to how KC is exponential. It's just more direct with Fortune, you can literally see 2^n in the calculation for how much money you get when you play n Fortunes (if it weren't limited to once per turn). With KC, the formula is more complicated.
That's not quite doubling either. As you say, KC+card is 3 card effects for 2 cards, so 50% more. With two KCs and three cards you get 9 for 5, so 80% more. With three KCs and five cards you get 15 for 8, so 87.5% more. It will never be double.
KC isn't exponential either, as Jeebus points out. It doesn't even grow without bound, as a linear, or even logarithmic would. The ratio of cards played to cardeffects received (which is (3+6x)/(1+3x) after the first KC in the chain) will never reach 2.
A better analogy which is already in the game is City Quarter, which exponentially grows your handsize (until your deck runs out, of course).
I think the number of nonKC actions you triple with n KCs is 2n  1, which is linear growth. Comparatively, the number of nonTRs you double with n Throne Rooms is just n. So KC chains grow twice as fast as Throne Room chains.
True. But neither are exponential.
Yes. Even the total money generated by Banks grows faster than the number of effects yielded by King's Court.