Print

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

[philosophyguy]

Earlier today I played a game with both Stables and Mountebank, and no trashing, and afterwards I was wondering if Stables could be a potential soft counter to MB. Stables is obviously not strong enough to avoid MB, but it can mitigate the damage insofar as you will have a number of spare Coppers to discard. The problem is that MB also fills your deck with Curses, so even drawing 3 cards may not be that great compared to what a different $5 card might offer.

Tl;dr: is Stables "discard coin for cards" ability worth $5 in a MB game, where you are likely to have lots of junk in your deck?

[HiveMindEmulator]

I think stables is definitely good in this situation, but it doesn't have that much to do with the extra coppers. It cycles your deck to play Mountebank more, and is generally better than lab in an untrimmed deck. There aren't a whole lot of $5 cards that can do anything more useful, besides maybe upgrade or tactician.

[Geronimoo]

You're getting an awful lot of junk in your deck so you discard a semi-useful card (Copper) to draw 3 cards of which 2 are probably junk. The simulator sure doesn't like the Stables in the Mountebank deck. It even suggests it's worse than Silver! Laboratory on the other hand it likes (compare these hands : "Stables, Stables, Curse, Estate, Mountebank" and "Lab, Lab, Curse, Estate, Mountebank")

[HiveMindEmulator]

^That's an interesting result. I guess it can be said that stables is generally worse than silver when copper is an above-average card in your deck (silver+copper=$3, stables+copper=3 cards) and when your copper density is low (silver+no copper = $2, stables+no copper = nothing). I think in the case of mountebank, your copper density should not be that low, since you get copper from the mountebank, but it could well be the case that copper is an above-average card.