Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[2.71828.....]

I just played an IRL 2 player game with a family member using a recommended set from DA that uses DA+Alchemy.  Here is the set.

Code: [Select]

Transmute, Vineyard, Scrying Pool, Market Square, Armory, Feodum, Rats, Wandering Minstrel, Apprentice, Cultist
We discussed strategy before the game started, and I focused on how great this board is for vineyards.  Armory, WM, Rats, MS, and scrying pool can really work well together for vineyards.  In fact, I was so engrossed in discussing that strategy that I failed to notice Apprentice/market square.  I only noticed apprentice/market square after my "unfortunate" 5/2 opening.  I ended up winning with all 8 provinces, but the vineyards player did not play optimally.

My question: Which strategy actually wins more?  Apprentice is obviously a fast, easy strategy, but I am not convinced the vineyard player wouldn't be able to get 7-8 point vineyards and have 6-7 of them before the apprentice combo really takes off.

[Warfreak2]

The presence of cultist means all those spare +buys can be soaked up on ruins. Maybe the market square split is decisive.

[achmed_sender]

Probably opening Armory/Market Square, so the Apprentice/MS player has only few MS to get his Golds. If this works it should be easy to win with the vineyard route, since 10 ruins, about 10 rats and 5 MS are already 8 point Vineyards, and Potion can be gained and topdecked by Armory for fast points.

[dondon151]

I would argue that the Vineyards player would prefer picking up a Cultist rather than buy his own Ruins.

[pingpongsam]

I would argue that the Vineyards player would prefer picking up a Cultist rather than buy his own Ruins.

Huh? If I'm wanting to collect actions why would I want a card that gives them away?

[Awaclus]

I would argue that the Vineyards player would prefer picking up a Cultist rather than buy his own Ruins.

Huh? If I'm wanting to collect actions why would I want a card that gives them away?

Because it completely screws up your opponent's deck.

[SCSN]

Not really, Rats will take care of the Ruins and your Apprentices will be very happy to see a bunch of Rats.

Probably opening Armory/Market Square, so the Apprentice/MS player has only few MS to get his Golds. If this works it should be easy to win with the vineyard route, since 10 ruins, about 10 rats and 5 MS are already 8 point Vineyards, and Potion can be gained and topdecked by Armory for fast points.

For Apprentice-Market Square you don't really need more than 3 MS, so denying them beyond the point where they are also the best choice for yourself seems pointless.

[manthos88]

Not really, Rats will take care of the Ruins and your Apprentices will be very happy to see a bunch of Rats.

Probably opening Armory/Market Square, so the Apprentice/MS player has only few MS to get his Golds. If this works it should be easy to win with the vineyard route, since 10 ruins, about 10 rats and 5 MS are already 8 point Vineyards, and Potion can be gained and topdecked by Armory for fast points.

For Apprentice-Market Square you don't really need more than 3 MS, so denying them beyond the point where they are also the best choice for yourself seems pointless.

Only 3 Market Squares? I can buy as many Market Squares as i can and mega-turn out with Apprentice-Market Square if i'm left uncontested.

The Rats are also of critical use for the Apprentice deck here. I would probably open Rats/MS on this board.

On the other hand, i wonder how the Vineyard player would do against the Apprentice. There is great potency for both decks here. The Vineyard player could also pick up a few Transmutes in order to turn some Rats/Ruins into Duchies for some extra VPs.

[SCSN]

Not really, Rats will take care of the Ruins and your Apprentices will be very happy to see a bunch of Rats.

Probably opening Armory/Market Square, so the Apprentice/MS player has only few MS to get his Golds. If this works it should be easy to win with the vineyard route, since 10 ruins, about 10 rats and 5 MS are already 8 point Vineyards, and Potion can be gained and topdecked by Armory for fast points.

For Apprentice-Market Square you don't really need more than 3 MS, so denying them beyond the point where they are also the best choice for yourself seems pointless.

Only 3 Market Squares? I can buy as many Market Squares as i can and mega-turn out with Apprentice-Market Square if i'm left uncontested.

In a non-mirror, Apprentice-Market Square has very little use for more than 3 Market Squares. The idea behind the strategy is to get lots of Apprentices, draw your deck, then trash a Gold, discard 3 Market Squares and redraw from the trashed Gold your 3 Market Squares + the 3 new Golds. Rinse and repeat as often as you can.

Since you won't be able to gain enough Golds in one turn to pile out the Provinces with a single mega-turn, you'll need at least 2 turns if you need to get all 8. 2 x 4 buys, i.e. 3 Market Squares, is all you need for that. This doesn't mean that you shouldn't be buying additional Market Squares with spare 3s and 4s (though here I'd probably get Wandering Minstrels for $4 past the early game), but it does mean that denying them is pointless for your opponent, as you'll be able to get 3 regardless of what he does, and 3 is all you really need.

Apprentice, on the other hand, is a card your opponent would love to deny, but the only way to deny lots of Apprentices on this board is to go for Apprentice-Market Square yourself.

[manthos88]

Not really, Rats will take care of the Ruins and your Apprentices will be very happy to see a bunch of Rats.

Probably opening Armory/Market Square, so the Apprentice/MS player has only few MS to get his Golds. If this works it should be easy to win with the vineyard route, since 10 ruins, about 10 rats and 5 MS are already 8 point Vineyards, and Potion can be gained and topdecked by Armory for fast points.

For Apprentice-Market Square you don't really need more than 3 MS, so denying them beyond the point where they are also the best choice for yourself seems pointless.

Only 3 Market Squares? I can buy as many Market Squares as i can and mega-turn out with Apprentice-Market Square if i'm left uncontested.

In a non-mirror, Apprentice-Market Square has very little use for more than 3 Market Squares. The idea behind the strategy is to get lots of Apprentices, draw your deck, then trash a Gold, discard 3 Market Squares and redraw from the trashed Gold your 3 Market Squares + the 3 new Golds. Rinse and repeat as often as you can.

Since you won't be able to gain enough Golds in one turn to pile out the Provinces with a single mega-turn, you'll need at least 2 turns if you need to get all 8. 2 x 4 buys, i.e. 3 Market Squares, is all you need for that. This doesn't mean that you shouldn't be buying additional Market Squares with spare 3s and 4s (though here I'd probably get Wandering Minstrels for $4 past the early game), but it does mean that denying them is pointless for your opponent, as you'll be able to get 3 regardless of what he does, and 3 is all you really need.

Apprentice, on the other hand, is a card your opponent would love to deny, but the only way to deny lots of Apprentices on this board is to go for Apprentice-Market Square yourself.

Check this out please:

http://dom.retrobox.eu/?/20131205/log.516d51a9e4b082c74d7b9d33.1386289286128.txt

This is a real example of what Apprentice-MS can really do, if left uncontested.
In this case, my opponent had bought 2 Provinces and i had bought 1, before my megaturn broke out, so i only had to buy 5 Provinces. But do you really think it would have been a problem for me to empty a full pile of Provinces? I would 've simply bought some more Provinces before my megaturn. And in the last turn i could even use the Provinces as fuel for the Apprentices...

Note that i didn't quite execute the strategy in the most optimal way. I found myself "wasting" Golds as fuel, just because i could get tons of them. In the end, i could have gained like 6-7 more Golds during my megaturn, but they were piled out. I'm definitely gonna be more careful next time.

This is one of my favourite strategies, i'd like to say, and it really feels like it's a pitty that the cards will not be enough in case of a mirror match...

[SCSN]

Check this out please:

http://dom.retrobox.eu/?/20131205/log.516d51a9e4b082c74d7b9d33.1386289286128.txt

This is a real example of what Apprentice-MS can really do, if left uncontested.
In this case, my opponent had bought 2 Provinces and i had bought 1, before my megaturn broke out, so i only had to buy 5 Provinces. But do you really think it would have been a problem for me to empty a full pile of Provinces? I would 've simply bought some more Provinces before my megaturn. And in the last turn i could even use the Provinces as fuel for the Apprentices...

I understand the strategy and I have no idea in what way you think this game contradicts anything I said. The key here was your early trashing and you having 8 Apprentices, not the 7 Market Squares. The latter are nice and buying them was certainly the right play, but with only 3 of them you'd have won just as easily: buy 2 Provinces on T12 and 4 on T13. So like the game in the OP, just denying you some Market Squares here would have been completely pointless. The proper response is, of course, to play the mirror.

[manthos88]

Not really, Rats will take care of the Ruins and your Apprentices will be very happy to see a bunch of Rats.

Probably opening Armory/Market Square, so the Apprentice/MS player has only few MS to get his Golds. If this works it should be easy to win with the vineyard route, since 10 ruins, about 10 rats and 5 MS are already 8 point Vineyards, and Potion can be gained and topdecked by Armory for fast points.

For Apprentice-Market Square you don't really need more than 3 MS, so denying them beyond the point where they are also the best choice for yourself seems pointless.

Only 3 Market Squares? I can buy as many Market Squares as i can and mega-turn out with Apprentice-Market Square if i'm left uncontested.

In a non-mirror, Apprentice-Market Square has very little use for more than 3 Market Squares. The idea behind the strategy is to get lots of Apprentices, draw your deck, then trash a Gold, discard 3 Market Squares and redraw from the trashed Gold your 3 Market Squares + the 3 new Golds. Rinse and repeat as often as you can.

Since you won't be able to gain enough Golds in one turn to pile out the Provinces with a single mega-turn, you'll need at least 2 turns if you need to get all 8. 2 x 4 buys, i.e. 3 Market Squares, is all you need for that. This doesn't mean that you shouldn't be buying additional Market Squares with spare 3s and 4s (though here I'd probably get Wandering Minstrels for $4 past the early game), but it does mean that denying them is pointless for your opponent, as you'll be able to get 3 regardless of what he does, and 3 is all you really need.

Apprentice, on the other hand, is a card your opponent would love to deny, but the only way to deny lots of Apprentices on this board is to go for Apprentice-Market Square yourself.

Check this out please:

http://dom.retrobox.eu/?/20131205/log.516d51a9e4b082c74d7b9d33.1386289286128.txt

This is a real example of what Apprentice-MS can really do, if left uncontested.
In this case, my opponent had bought 2 Provinces and i had bought 1, before my megaturn broke out, so i only had to buy 5 Provinces. But do you really think it would have been a problem for me to empty a full pile of Provinces? I would 've simply bought some more Provinces before my megaturn. And in the last turn i could even use the Provinces as fuel for the Apprentices...

I understand the strategy and I have no idea in what way you think this game contradicts anything I said. The key here was your early trashing and you having 8 Apprentices, not the 7 Market Squares. The latter are nice and buying them was certainly the right play, but with only 3 of them you'd have won just as easily: buy 2 Provinces on T12 and 4 on T13. So like the game in the OP, just denying you some Market Squares here would have been completely pointless. The proper response is, of course, to play the mirror.

Oh... In the way you said that, i thought you actually meant i should gain as many golds as i can in one turn, then go for something like big money for the rest of the game... And taking into account the way i played this, i thought it was kinda weird to do that...