I think Caravan and Cartographer are very good enablers for your Baron and Haggler. I would bet on your opponent's strategy if I have to.
I wasn't sure about what happened in the game so I put this through the simulator. The two approaches seem pretty even but the city deck will be stronger with human decision making. Some of the optimizations might beDid you add a horse trader or two to the city engine?
Horse traders - buy a few horse traders before taking duchies, always take extra coppers
Cities - take an early smithy (or two), buy out the cities instead of contesting the dukes
I seem to get a lot more bad luck when I play at 3AM. I wonder if there's a connection?I find it gets even worse after a beer or two!
With a 4-2 win over Wingnut, I just became the lowest seed advancing to the third Round at #53!
You'd be hard-pressed to get an engine going at all, much less find the cards that you want to trash, if you skip the trashing first and let your opponent inundate you with Curses.Maybe what I wrote sounded as if I waited until turn 10 to pick up a steward. Say I start with miltia/village at turn 1/2, a wharf and another village at turn 3/4, and then a steward around turn 5 or 6. I would argue that my draw from wharves will more than make up for the delay in trashing.
http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201211/08/game-20121108-054859-ce770fd1.htmlI am not sure what is best, but I am sure that Wharf+BM does better than 37 points in 17 turns.
So this seems like a pretty obvious Village-Wharf board, and I pick up a Trader in order to get Silver quickly... I end up taking 7 of the Wharves and 4 WV which really ought to be enough, but I still get beaten out. Is Envoy really that good here? He can presumably draw a lot given the Envoys and a bunch of Villages, but it seems like he played Wharf in preference to Envoy when given the chance...
Just make sure you live in a house made of bricks, not straw or sticks or anything like that.I would have appreciated if the power lines hadn't been built of straws and sticks. I used to live in CT until recently. We had two days without power - i think that put us in the 80% percentile in our town, i.e. we were among the lucky and privileged.
Oh I agree this example was obvious. But at some point he constantly wrote entire posts on some late-game decisions (field goal or go for it? etc.) where the percentages were much closer, and he never once acknowledged this limit of his model, instead taking it as gospel. As accurate gospel, in fact.Burke is interesting to read. But I don't think he is sufficiently aware of the limits of his statistical approaches. Simple example: his win probability calculator ignores timeouts, since that's too tricky to get right. That might be true (I haven't thought about it), but then you should probably be a little bit careful about this before writing an entire column about a 4th-down decision that his WP calculator "proves" wrong.I think you're right, but that particular example (I assume you're talking about CAR's decision to punt) is egregious. When you have Cam Newton, 4th-and-1, where a conversion is a win, a failed conversion is decent ATL field position, and a punt is slightly worse ATL field position, it makes zero sense at all to punt.
He also has many posts on pass-versus-run decisions that I had my doubts about.