Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 17 [All]

Author Topic: Strictly better than....  (Read 37989 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Strictly better than....
« on: June 11, 2014, 05:16:14 pm »
+1

Okay guys, the challenge is simple: name a pair of kingdom cards of which, all edge cases considered, one is always preferable to have in hand. Prices and Possession are ignored.

Example:

Warehouse>Cellar
Noble Brigand>Thief
« Last Edit: June 11, 2014, 05:25:07 pm by Flip5ide »
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #1 on: June 11, 2014, 05:19:58 pm »
+11

but... neither of those is true
Logged

2.71828.....

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1153
  • Shuffle iT Username: irrationalE
  • Respect: +1184
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #2 on: June 11, 2014, 05:21:13 pm »
0

but... neither of those is true

I prefer a thief on a platinum board.  (not that I would buy the thief)
Logged
Man. I had four strips of bacon yesterday. Was one automatically undercooked, one automatically overcooked? No, let's put a stop to that right here, all four strips were excellent.

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #3 on: June 11, 2014, 05:21:30 pm »
+1

So Expand > Remodel is all I can think of.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #4 on: June 11, 2014, 05:21:54 pm »
0

Okay guys, the challenge is simple: name a pair of kingdom cards of which, all edge cases considered, one is always preferable to have in hand. Prices are ignored.

Example:

Warehouse>Cellar
Noble Brigand>Thief

These are bad examples.  Cellar is better if you have a bigger hand.  Thief is better when dealing with Platinum and alt Treasure.

In fact, there is no pair of cards where one is always better.  Even something like Platinum vs. Copper is subject to the edge case where you are Possessed.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #5 on: June 11, 2014, 05:22:20 pm »
0

Guilds (Taxman) edge-cases Platinum > Gold > Silver > Copper.
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #6 on: June 11, 2014, 05:22:49 pm »
0

I knew they didn't work, just illustrating what I meant. Originally I wrote "Possible candidates that don't actually work:"
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

2.71828.....

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1153
  • Shuffle iT Username: irrationalE
  • Respect: +1184
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #7 on: June 11, 2014, 05:23:46 pm »
+1

hunting grounds > smithy
workers village > village
Logged
Man. I had four strips of bacon yesterday. Was one automatically undercooked, one automatically overcooked? No, let's put a stop to that right here, all four strips were excellent.

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #8 on: June 11, 2014, 05:24:31 pm »
+1

hunting grounds > smithy
workers village > village

Oh, yeah, Bazaar > Village as well
Logged

2.71828.....

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1153
  • Shuffle iT Username: irrationalE
  • Respect: +1184
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #9 on: June 11, 2014, 05:24:46 pm »
0

hunting grounds > smithy
workers village > village

except i can come up with an edge case for hunting grounds where i have 3 cards left in my deck and i dont want to trigger a reshuffle
Logged
Man. I had four strips of bacon yesterday. Was one automatically undercooked, one automatically overcooked? No, let's put a stop to that right here, all four strips were excellent.

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #10 on: June 11, 2014, 05:25:06 pm »
0

And Walled Village > Village
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #11 on: June 11, 2014, 05:25:50 pm »
0

hunting grounds > smithy
workers village > village

Edge cases include Possession for both.  For Smithy, there is reshuffle consideration.  Also cases where you have to trash the card but don't want to get Duchy or 3 Estates.  For Village, there is Forge with certain hands (applies for Village vs. all $4+ villages as well).
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #12 on: June 11, 2014, 05:26:45 pm »
+2

hunting grounds > smithy
workers village > village

Edge cases include Possession for both.  For Smithy, there is reshuffle consideration.  For Village, there is Forge with certain hands (applies for Village vs. all $4+ villages as well).

We need not consider Possession for Edge Cases.  Otherwise all discussion is moot.

Forge doesn't count because it was postulated that price does not matter.
Logged

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #13 on: June 11, 2014, 05:27:15 pm »
+1

variety cards work for everything too.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #14 on: June 11, 2014, 05:28:31 pm »
0

Squire > Necropolis.  And, uh,.. lots of things are better than Ruins. 
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #15 on: June 11, 2014, 05:30:26 pm »
0

Wait... what about Goons>Militia?  :o
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #16 on: June 11, 2014, 05:32:19 pm »
0

Wait... what about Goons>Militia?  :o

Nah, the extra +1 coin could get you from $7 to $8 to buy a game-winning Province.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #17 on: June 11, 2014, 05:34:11 pm »
+1

hunting grounds > smithy
workers village > village

Edge cases include Possession for both.  For Smithy, there is reshuffle consideration.  For Village, there is Forge with certain hands (applies for Village vs. all $4+ villages as well).

We need not consider Possession for Edge Cases.  Otherwise all discussion is moot.

Forge doesn't count because it was postulated that price does not matter.

Pretty sure those stipulations weren't in the OP when I first read it. :P

lio is right that variety cards still edge case everything, but if you ignore those too, it makes the challenge pretty easy.  It's not hard to find strictly better effects. 

Pretty much every village+ > Village
Count > Mandarin (on-gain doesn't matter because this is about the card in hand)
Scrying Pool > Spy
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #18 on: June 11, 2014, 05:36:07 pm »
+1

Wait... what about Goons>Militia?  :o

Nah, the extra +1 coin could get you from $7 to $8 to buy a game-winning Province.

Goons and Militia both give +$2.  You may be conflating it with Merchant Guild.


Oh, one more universal edge case -- you prefer not to have the "better" card vs. Masquerade, if your hand is that card + 4 even more important cards (e.g. Colonies).
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #19 on: June 11, 2014, 05:36:42 pm »
0

Wait... what about Goons>Militia?  :o

Nah, the extra +1 coin could get you from $7 to $8 to buy a game-winning Province.

Goons and Militia both give +$2.  You may be conflating it with Merchant Guild.


Oh, one more universal edge case -- you prefer not to have the "better" card vs. Masquerade, if your hand is that card + 4 even more important cards (e.g. Colonies).

Oh.  In my head Goons was giving +$1.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #20 on: June 11, 2014, 05:42:54 pm »
+2

On-gain effect matters, because you could trash it and gain it from the trash with Graverobber in the same turn.
Logged

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #21 on: June 11, 2014, 05:43:18 pm »
+1

Oh, one more universal edge case -- you prefer not to have the "better" card vs. Masquerade, if your hand is that card + 4 even more important cards (e.g. Colonies).
Works with ambassador too. So, list of cards we are ignoring:

Possession
Masquerade
Ambassador
Horn of Plenty
Fairgrounds
Menagerie
Hunting Party
Forge
Remake
Upgrade
Procession
Governor

And I'm probably forgetting some. Some of the above don't null all of them, but they null a lot of them.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2014, 06:35:18 pm by liopoil »
Logged

Jorbles

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1455
  • Respect: +514
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #22 on: June 11, 2014, 05:45:08 pm »
+1

So I guess we're ignoring Remake/Upgrade (any other exact value upgraders I'm forgetting)? Because unless two cards have the same price there's almost always going to be a hypothetical situation where the different price points will matter.

(For example: Maybe I'd rather have a Militia in my hand than a Goons if I can Upgrade it into a Duchy.)

Edit: There goes liopoil, saying it more thoroughly and faster than me.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2014, 05:47:42 pm by Jorbles »
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #23 on: June 11, 2014, 05:50:32 pm »
0

Yeah, assume all prices are equal. And just ignore Possession.

Also: Chancellor is definitely worse than Scavenger as far as I can surmise.
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #24 on: June 11, 2014, 05:54:56 pm »
0

Edit: There goes liopoil, saying it more thoroughly and faster than me.
...I edited in Upgrade, procession, and remake off of your comment.
Logged

KingZog3

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3158
  • Respect: +1355
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #25 on: June 11, 2014, 05:55:09 pm »
+1

Yeah, assume all prices are equal. And just ignore Possession.

Also: Chancellor is definitely worse than Scavenger as far as I can surmise.

Edge case where you don't want to discard you r deck and your entire discard is bad cards and you're forced to put one on top.
Logged

Jorbles

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1455
  • Respect: +514
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #26 on: June 11, 2014, 06:12:12 pm »
0

Edit: There goes liopoil, saying it more thoroughly and faster than me.
...I edited in Upgrade, procession, and remake off of your comment.

haha, okay, no worries I just thought it was funny that we'd had the same thought.
Logged

Jorbles

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1455
  • Respect: +514
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #27 on: June 11, 2014, 06:13:31 pm »
0

Yeah, assume all prices are equal. And just ignore Possession.

Also: Chancellor is definitely worse than Scavenger as far as I can surmise.

Edge case where you don't want to discard you r deck and your entire discard is bad cards and you're forced to put one on top.

Scavenger says "you may" so you can just take the +$2 in that edge case.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9103
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +8890
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #28 on: June 11, 2014, 06:30:54 pm »
+3

Yeah, assume all prices are equal. And just ignore Possession.

Also: Chancellor is definitely worse than Scavenger as far as I can surmise.

Edge case where you don't want to discard you r deck and your entire discard is bad cards and you're forced to put one on top.

Scavenger says "you may" so you can just take the +$2 in that edge case.
You may put your deck into your discard pile. You have to topdeck a card.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #29 on: June 11, 2014, 06:32:15 pm »
0

On-gain effect matters, because you could trash it and gain it from the trash with Graverobber in the same turn.

Good point.

And I'm probably forgetting some. Some of the above don't null all of them, but they null a lot of them.

Governor is another exact upgrader.

Also: Chancellor is definitely worse than Scavenger as far as I can surmise.

You can have a scenario where you've drawn your deck and the only stuff in your discard is junk, in which case you'd rather not top-deck anything.

A card that forces you to do something can't be strictly better than a card that doesn't make you do something (sort of edge case: extra coin is never bad, outside of already-omitted cases like Possession).

Hmm... thinking further on this, I guess Scrying Pool > Spy isn't always true, because SP could potentially trigger an unwanted reshuffle.  Mehhh.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3784
  • ♦ Twilight ♦
  • Respect: +1648
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #30 on: June 11, 2014, 06:36:19 pm »
+1

Yeah, assume all prices are equal. And just ignore Possession.

Also: Chancellor is definitely worse than Scavenger as far as I can surmise.

not at all, scavenger forces you to put a card from your discard pile on top of your deck, which can totally be a bad thing

yed

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 613
  • Shuffle iT Username: yed
  • Respect: +563
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #31 on: June 11, 2014, 07:13:41 pm »
0

Also: Chancellor is definitely worse than Scavenger as far as I can surmise.
Not if your deck and discard has only junk cards in it.
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #32 on: June 11, 2014, 07:26:22 pm »
+1

Lab>Caravan (I'm sure there's some sort of edge case here)
However Baker>Peddler is pretty solid I'm sure
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9103
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +8890
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #33 on: June 11, 2014, 07:29:05 pm »
+1

Lab>Caravan (I'm sure there's some sort of edge case here)
However Baker>Peddler is pretty solid I'm sure
1) You want to draw the extra card on your next turn, not now.
2) Black Market.


There are times when you might want to trash the weaker card with Chapel but keep the stronger card in your deck for any two cards, so I guess no card is always preferable to have in hand.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2014, 07:35:13 pm by Awaclus »
Logged

DG

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3784
  • Respect: +2257
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #34 on: June 11, 2014, 07:52:07 pm »
0

Mints, counterfeit,  foragers, farmland, and fairgrounds can also create situations where you want worse seeming cards in hand (for trashing). Islands can put unwanted cards onto the island mat. By discarding cards from hand or putting them on top of your deck you can create situations where a poorer card gives a better result from saboteur type attacks, thief type attacks, swindlers, sages, rogues, lookouts, ironmongers, tributes, loans, doctors, jesters, trade routes, and so on.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #35 on: June 11, 2014, 07:56:52 pm »
+2

Lab>Caravan (I'm sure there's some sort of edge case here)
However Baker>Peddler is pretty solid I'm sure
1) You want to draw the extra card on your next turn, not now.
2) Black Market.

Easiest scenario for 1 is when you've already drawn your deck.  Lab doesn't help you at all then, but Caravan still benefits your next turn.
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #36 on: June 11, 2014, 09:13:12 pm »
0

Some ideas that I bet have edge cases are
Black Market>Woodcutter
Nomad Camp>Woodcutter
Lab>Wishing Well
KC/TR

However I'm certain GM>Market.
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #37 on: June 11, 2014, 09:14:09 pm »
0

Um, the Black Market one is obvious.  You want an extra buy for the supply, not what's in the Black Market deck.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #38 on: June 11, 2014, 09:15:21 pm »
0

Lab > Wishing Well fails if you only have one card in deck and don't want to reshuffle.

KC > TR fails for the same reason (or others).  You want to play a card twice (say, Lab to draw 4 card) but not three times.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #39 on: June 11, 2014, 09:31:12 pm »
+1

Lab > Wishing Well fails if you only have one card in deck and don't want to reshuffle.

KC > TR fails for the same reason (or others).  You want to play a card twice (say, Lab to draw 4 card) but not three times.

The first case doesn't work.  Wishing Well will still cause you to reshuffle because you MUST name a card and you MUST check to see if the top card matches, even if you name the Ace of Spades.  You can fix this edge case by putting a second Lab in your hand with 3 cards in the deck.  If you don't want to reshuffle, you can play WW first and then the second Lab.  Two Labs would force you to reshuffle.

For the second case, the easiest example is forced trashing.  You have two junk cards to Upgrade but you don't want the third play of it.

Nomad Camp>Woodcutter

Nomad Camp > Woodcutter doesn't work.  They are equivalent once in your hand.  If you want to take the on-gain into account via the possibility of trashing the card and then using Rogue, then there can be scenarios where you'd rather not top-deck the card.  Also note that it has to be Rogue specifically, because Graverobber would top-deck the gained card either way.

Also, to head off another possible thought, Goons > Woodcutter doesn't work because there are some scenarios where you don't want your opponent to discard (e.g. Menagerie).
Logged

scott_pilgrim

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 959
  • Respect: +1858
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #40 on: June 11, 2014, 09:32:56 pm »
0

Lab > Wishing Well fails if you only have one card in deck and don't want to reshuffle.

Wishing Well will trigger the re-shuffle anyway; you need something like Madman or Crossroads and just the wrong number of cards left in your deck.

PPE: eHalcyon's trick works too.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #41 on: June 11, 2014, 09:50:14 pm »
0

Oh, one more universal edge case -- you prefer not to have the "better" card vs. Masquerade, if your hand is that card + 4 even more important cards (e.g. Colonies).
Works with ambassador too. So, list of cards we are ignoring:

Possession
Masquerade
Ambassador
Horn of Plenty
Fairgrounds
Menagerie
Hunting Party
Forge
Remake
Upgrade
Procession
Governor

And I'm probably forgetting some. Some of the above don't null all of them, but they null a lot of them.

I have another universal edge case, along the same lines as Masquerade/Ambassador.  In a situation where you would want to trash the card, you would prefer not to have the "better" card trashed if your opponent has Graverobber or Rogue.
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #42 on: June 11, 2014, 10:18:15 pm »
0

Bridge>Woodcutter then.

And also Advisor>Lab. Edge case me.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2014, 10:28:15 pm by Flip5ide »
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

silverspawn

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3784
  • ♦ Twilight ♦
  • Respect: +1648
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #43 on: June 11, 2014, 10:27:34 pm »
+2

Bridge>Woodcutter then.
that's quite good. there are times though when you don't want costs to be reduced, f.e. with sage, TfB, or because it protects your opponent from knights and such.

scott_pilgrim

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 959
  • Respect: +1858
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #44 on: June 11, 2014, 10:34:32 pm »
+1

And also Advisor>Lab. Edge case me.

I assume you mean Lab>Advisor.  But I think Advisor can be better because even a perfectly rational opponent can give you a card you like because of incomplete information.  Or alternatively, Advisor can clear a bad card off the top of your deck.  (Say there's three Coppers on top of your deck; Lab would just draw two of them, whereas Advisor would draw two of them and discard the third.)
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #45 on: June 11, 2014, 10:36:06 pm »
0

A few more:

Journeyman/Catacombs>Smithy always.
GM>Mystic
Lab>Vagrant
Alchemist>Lab
Treasury>Peddler
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

amalloy

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 453
  • Respect: +612
    • View Profile
    • Twitch stream
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #46 on: June 11, 2014, 10:48:59 pm »
+2

Bridge>Woodcutter then.

And also Advisor>Lab. Edge case me.

I think you mean Lab>Advisor. And an edge case is easy: the last two cards in your deck are Curses, and you want them to miss the shuffle.

As for Bridge>Woodcutter, there's another fun edge-case that doesn't involve TfB: you want to overpay for Stonemason to gain multiples of something that currently costs $1. The Bridge makes that impossible.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #47 on: June 11, 2014, 10:51:44 pm »
0

Bridge>Woodcutter then.

And also Advisor>Lab. Edge case me.

I think you mean Lab>Advisor. And an edge case is easy: the last two cards in your deck are Curses, and you want them to miss the shuffle.

As for Bridge>Woodcutter, there's another fun edge-case that doesn't involve TfB: you want to overpay for Stonemason to gain multiples of something that currently costs $1. The Bridge makes that impossible.

Unlocked Achievement: Obscure Edgecase.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #48 on: June 11, 2014, 10:52:58 pm »
0

Lab > Wishing Well fails if you only have one card in deck and don't want to reshuffle.

KC > TR fails for the same reason (or others).  You want to play a card twice (say, Lab to draw 4 card) but not three times.

The first case doesn't work.  Wishing Well will still cause you to reshuffle because you MUST name a card and you MUST check to see if the top card matches, even if you name the Ace of Spades.  You can fix this edge case by putting a second Lab in your hand with 3 cards in the deck.  If you don't want to reshuffle, you can play WW first and then the second Lab.  Two Labs would force you to reshuffle.

For the second case, the easiest example is forced trashing.  You have two junk cards to Upgrade but you don't want the third play of it.

Nomad Camp>Woodcutter

Nomad Camp > Woodcutter doesn't work.  They are equivalent once in your hand.  If you want to take the on-gain into account via the possibility of trashing the card and then using Rogue, then there can be scenarios where you'd rather not top-deck the card.  Also note that it has to be Rogue specifically, because Graverobber would top-deck the gained card either way.

Also, to head off another possible thought, Goons > Woodcutter doesn't work because there are some scenarios where you don't want your opponent to discard (e.g. Menagerie).

Good point on Wishing Well, thanks.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #49 on: June 11, 2014, 11:05:45 pm »
+1

A few more:

Journeyman/Catacombs>Smithy always.
GM>Mystic
Lab>Vagrant
Alchemist>Lab
Treasury>Peddler

Journeyman should work because you can choose to name a card not in you deck to be equivalent to Smithy.

Smithy > Catacombs when you would trash the card and you would not want to gain a card costing less than Catacombs.

Vagrant > Lab in situations similar to when Wishing Well > Lab, already discussed.

Treasury should work because you can choose not to put it back on top.  But man, Peddler is such a stupid answer because it's whole schtick is its price, which we have to ignore for this puzzle.

Bazaar > Peddler
Market > Peddler
Grand Market > Peddler
« Last Edit: June 11, 2014, 11:06:52 pm by eHalcyon »
Logged

KingZog3

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3158
  • Respect: +1355
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #50 on: June 12, 2014, 12:08:58 am »
0

Counterfeit > Copper
Tunnel > Estate
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #51 on: June 12, 2014, 12:39:53 am »
+1

Counterfeit > Copper
Tunnel > Estate

As was pointed out earlier, no one treasure is always better than another treasure due toTaxman.

Copper > Counterfeit with Coppersmith
Estate > Tunnel with Baron
« Last Edit: June 12, 2014, 12:41:04 am by eHalcyon »
Logged

KingZog3

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3158
  • Respect: +1355
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #52 on: June 12, 2014, 01:19:22 am »
0

Counterfeit > Copper
Tunnel > Estate

As was pointed out earlier, no one treasure is always better than another treasure due toTaxman.

Copper > Counterfeit with Coppersmith
Estate > Tunnel with Baron

Ah yes. True.
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #53 on: June 12, 2014, 02:47:47 am »
0

And of course JoaT trumps every sub-5 action.

Except reactions. And a KC-KC bridge/highway sort of thing.

But is nobles better than smithy 100% of the time?
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

scott_pilgrim

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 959
  • Respect: +1858
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #54 on: June 12, 2014, 03:23:22 am »
0

But is nobles better than smithy 100% of the time?

You have a crossroads you want to play first, and drawing the extra card because of Nobles will trigger an unwanted re-shuffle (you have exactly three cards left in your deck before playing the Crossroads and Nobles/Smithy).
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #55 on: June 12, 2014, 03:35:27 am »
0

And of course JoaT trumps every sub-5 action.

Except reactions. And a KC-KC bridge/highway sort of thing.

But is nobles better than smithy 100% of the time?

The JoaT one is a joke, right?

scott gives an example for Nobles.  Another one is when the opponent has Tribute.  If you only want to count cards in hand and not in your deck, you can do the same thing with opponent playing Ghost Ship first.
Logged

amalloy

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 453
  • Respect: +612
    • View Profile
    • Twitch stream
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #56 on: June 12, 2014, 03:46:11 am »
+3

Journeyman should work because you can choose to name a card not in you deck to be equivalent to Smithy.

Except that Journeyman shows your opponent what you're drawing. Maybe he needs to know whether you've got a Village, so that he knows how to respond to your first Torturer, or whatever.
Logged

luser

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 403
  • Respect: +287
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #57 on: June 12, 2014, 06:25:39 am »
0

And of course JoaT trumps every sub-5 action.

Except reactions. And a KC-KC bridge/highway sort of thing.

But is nobles better than smithy 100% of the time?

The JoaT one is a joke, right?

scott gives an example for Nobles.  Another one is when the opponent has Tribute.  If you only want to count cards in hand and not in your deck, you can do the same thing with opponent playing Ghost Ship first.
Also jester, giving curse is better than gaining extra smithy.
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #58 on: June 12, 2014, 08:49:59 am »
0

Gah, meant to say Band of Misfits, not JoaT.
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #59 on: June 12, 2014, 09:17:47 am »
0

BoM doesn't work because the supply pile of the card you want to play it as could be empty. Another universal edge case: In your deck you have three cards, a, a, and b. a is supposedly strictly better than b. You play wishing well and draw a, and now you you can't guarrantee getting your wish right. You would prefer b in your hand because then you can get your wish right.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #60 on: June 12, 2014, 09:29:34 am »
0

Counterfeit > Copper
Tunnel > Estate

Moneylender, Baron.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #61 on: June 12, 2014, 09:30:11 am »
0

And of course JoaT trumps every sub-5 action.

Except reactions. And a KC-KC bridge/highway sort of thing.

But is nobles better than smithy 100% of the time?

Nope, Bureaucrat.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9103
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +8890
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #62 on: June 12, 2014, 09:37:18 am »
+4

universal edge case
Okay, now I've seen everything.

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #63 on: June 12, 2014, 09:38:43 am »
+2

universal edge case
Okay, now I've seen everything.

All cases were created edgy, but some are more edgy than others.
Logged

KingZog3

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3158
  • Respect: +1355
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #64 on: June 12, 2014, 09:51:54 am »
0

Gah, meant to say Band of Misfits, not JoaT.

If the piles run out then it's not as good as the actual card.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9103
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +8890
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #65 on: June 12, 2014, 10:02:00 am »
0

Gah, meant to say Band of Misfits, not JoaT.

If the piles run out then it's not as good as the actual card.
Or if there are five Highways in play.

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #66 on: June 12, 2014, 11:10:11 am »
0

Witch>Young Witch
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #67 on: June 12, 2014, 11:14:35 am »
0

Witch>Young Witch

Tunnel, Menagerie.
Logged

Marcory

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 601
  • Respect: +919
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #68 on: June 12, 2014, 11:18:11 am »
0

You guys are forgetting Fairgrounds. When you have 6 fairgrounds, Curse>Colony if Curse is your 10th, 15th, 20th, etc. card
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #69 on: June 12, 2014, 11:19:50 am »
0

You guys are forgetting Fairgrounds. When you have 6 fairgrounds, Curse>Colony if Curse is your 10th, 15th, 20th, etc. card

It was explicitly excluded, because it can be made to be an edge case for wanting an arbitrary card X over another arbitrary card Y always.
Logged

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #70 on: June 12, 2014, 11:42:08 am »
0

The challenge also states that it only cares about having one in hand
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #71 on: June 12, 2014, 12:12:47 pm »
0

Grand Market>Conspirator
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #72 on: June 12, 2014, 12:14:34 pm »
0

Grand Market>Conspirator

Don't want to draw a card.
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #73 on: June 12, 2014, 03:06:31 pm »
0

Diadem>Masterpiece
Peddler>Oasis?
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3120
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2285
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #74 on: June 12, 2014, 03:07:07 pm »
0

Logged
If you're wondering what my avatar is, watch this.

Check out my logic puzzle blog!

   Quote from: sudgy on June 31, 2011, 11:47:46 pm

amalloy

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 453
  • Respect: +612
    • View Profile
    • Twitch stream
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #75 on: June 12, 2014, 03:22:08 pm »
+1

Diadem>Masterpiece
Peddler>Oasis?

Definitely not Peddler>Oasis. Being allowed to discard can be good for you, and not just because of Tunnel. Menagerie, for example.

Diadem>Masterpiece is really good, but I don't think it 100% holds up. Maybe it's an Ambassador game where junking is a high priority (How/why did I get a Diadem in such a game? Who knows). I can Ambassador my opponent the Masterpiece, but I'm stuck with my Diadem.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #76 on: June 12, 2014, 04:30:25 pm »
+2

Diadem>Masterpiece

As already discussed, Taxman.  For this specific case, there's also Mint (can't mint a Diadem).




In order for A > B to be true (barring the universal edge cases), we need these to be true:

1. A and B share the same card types, which matters for Tribute and Jester.
2. A and B are not Treasure cards, which matters for Taxman.
3. A can do everything that B does, or else you will sometimes prefer B to do its special thing.
4. A does not force you to do anything that B doesn't also.

3 prevents a coin token card from being better than a standard virtual coin card, because you may prefer the virtual coin when using Black Market.  Same goes for a card B that has you discard when card A doesn't, due to Tunnel.

4 covers a lot of stuff you might not expect.  If it forces you to draw or even reveal an extra card, that can be undesirable for reshuffle considerations.  If it forces you to attack, that can be bad because your opponents may have reactions that benefit them.  If it forces you to play an extra card or to topdeck something, well there are situations where you don't want those things either.

4 doesn't cover extra coins (virtual or token), because having more money to spend never hurts you.  It doesn't cover extra buys or actions for the same reason.
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #77 on: June 12, 2014, 04:54:43 pm »
0

Can someone explain the Taxman caveat to me?
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9103
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +8890
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #78 on: June 12, 2014, 04:55:13 pm »
+1

Can someone explain the Taxman caveat to me?
Yes.

You want to trash a specific card to make your opponent discard it.

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3120
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2285
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #79 on: June 12, 2014, 04:56:45 pm »
0

Can someone explain the Taxman caveat to me?

Silver isn't better than copper in your hand because your opponent could have a hand with coppers and no silver and you want them to discard it.
Logged
If you're wondering what my avatar is, watch this.

Check out my logic puzzle blog!

   Quote from: sudgy on June 31, 2011, 11:47:46 pm

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1733
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #80 on: June 12, 2014, 04:59:00 pm »
0

Can someone explain the Taxman caveat to me?

Having any Treasure in hand in place of anything else changes how a Taxman attack affects you. If you have Plat or Copper and oponent attacks by trashing Plat, having a Plat effectively gives you $0 (because you have to discard it) and having a Copper effectively gives you $1.
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #81 on: June 12, 2014, 07:19:28 pm »
0

That's a major stretch. Besides, you can't lose Diadem to Taxman.
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #82 on: June 12, 2014, 07:21:28 pm »
0

That's a major stretch. Besides, you can't lose Diadem to Taxman.

It works both ways.  If you have a Taxman, you can play it with a Copper to force opponents to discard Copper.  This is preferable to playing Taxman-Diadem which doesn't hurt opponents other than making them reveal their hands.

Doesn't matter if it's a stretch.  Edge cases are stretches by definition.

Diadem>Masterpiece
Peddler>Oasis?

Definitely not Peddler>Oasis. Being allowed to discard can be good for you, and not just because of Tunnel. Menagerie, for example.

Diadem>Masterpiece is really good, but I don't think it 100% holds up. Maybe it's an Ambassador game where junking is a high priority (How/why did I get a Diadem in such a game? Who knows). I can Ambassador my opponent the Masterpiece, but I'm stuck with my Diadem.

We already identified Ambassador as a "universal edge case" that can always make a "better" card worse.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2014, 07:23:15 pm by eHalcyon »
Logged

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #83 on: June 12, 2014, 07:38:28 pm »
+1

Revised list of cards we have to ignore for there to be any cards strictly better than another:

Possession
Masquerade
Ambassador
Horn of Plenty
Menagerie
Hunting Party
Forge
Remake
Upgrade
Governor
Procession (only for actions)
Taxman (only for treasures)
Rogue (only for cards costing 3+)
Graverobber (only for cards costing 3+)
« Last Edit: June 12, 2014, 09:35:05 pm by liopoil »
Logged

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1733
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #84 on: June 12, 2014, 07:40:41 pm »
0

Procession should say "(only for Actions)"
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #85 on: June 12, 2014, 07:47:36 pm »
0

Should also add Remodel, Expand, Bishop, Salvager, etc.  Anything that cares about card cost in its text.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #86 on: June 12, 2014, 07:52:44 pm »
0

Revised list of cards we have to ignore for there to be any cards strictly better than another:

Possession
Masquerade
Ambassador
Horn of Plenty
Menagerie
Hunting Party
Forge
Remake
Upgrade
Governor
Wishing Well
Mystic
Procession (only for actions)
Taxman (only for treasures)
Rogue (only for cards costing 3-6)
Grave Robber (only for cards costing 3-6)

Graverobber is only one word.  The cost restriction doesn't apply because of cost reduction.  Well, I guess you can say "for cards costing $3+" because it'll never be able to bring back cards costing less.

Why are we ignoring Mystic and Wishing Well?

Should also add Remodel, Expand, Bishop, Salvager, etc.  Anything that cares about card cost in its text.

Ignoring the cost of a card is primarily to remove cards that care about fixed costs, like Forge, Remake, Upgrade.  These cards can sometimes make a cheaper card more useful than a more expensive card.  With all these TfB, higher cost is always better.  Trashing a $5 card with Expand is always better than trashing a $4 card, in terms of what you can gain from Expand.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2014, 07:57:21 pm by eHalcyon »
Logged

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #87 on: June 12, 2014, 08:21:31 pm »
0

Graverobber is only one word.  The cost restriction doesn't apply because of cost reduction.  Well, I guess you can say "for cards costing $3+" because it'll never be able to bring back cards costing less.

Why are we ignoring Mystic and Wishing Well?
Right, I knew that. Fixed

mystic and wishing well:
Another universal edge case: In your deck you have three cards, a, a, and b. a is supposedly strictly better than b. You play wishing well and draw a, and now you you can't guarrantee getting your wish right. You would prefer b in your hand because then you can get your wish right.
Logged

HiveMindEmulator

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2222
  • Respect: +2074
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #88 on: June 12, 2014, 08:33:04 pm »
+4

I love that the challenge has changed into constructing this list:

Revised list of cards we have to ignore for there to be any cards strictly better than another:

Possession
Masquerade
Ambassador
Horn of Plenty
Menagerie
Hunting Party
Forge
Remake
Upgrade
Governor
Wishing Well
Mystic
Procession (only for actions)
Taxman (only for treasures)
Rogue (only for cards costing 3+)
Graverobber (only for cards costing 3+)
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #89 on: June 12, 2014, 08:40:09 pm »
0

mystic and wishing well:
Another universal edge case: In your deck you have three cards, a, a, and b. a is supposedly strictly better than b. You play wishing well and draw a, and now you you can't guarrantee getting your wish right. You would prefer b in your hand because then you can get your wish right.

Ah, right.  I wonder if that's too broad though.  Can't a similar argument be made for any card that cares about cards in your deck?  Herald, Golem, Doctor.
Logged

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #90 on: June 12, 2014, 08:44:47 pm »
0

mystic and wishing well:
Another universal edge case: In your deck you have three cards, a, a, and b. a is supposedly strictly better than b. You play wishing well and draw a, and now you you can't guarrantee getting your wish right. You would prefer b in your hand because then you can get your wish right.

Ah, right.  I wonder if that's too broad though.  Can't a similar argument be made for any card that cares about cards in your deck?  Herald, Golem, Doctor.
I don't see it with those cards. Can you explain?

Although it is true that for any two cards a and b, if the bonus a gives over b is useless to you this turn but might not be next turn you would rather draw b.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #91 on: June 12, 2014, 09:15:41 pm »
0

mystic and wishing well:
Another universal edge case: In your deck you have three cards, a, a, and b. a is supposedly strictly better than b. You play wishing well and draw a, and now you you can't guarrantee getting your wish right. You would prefer b in your hand because then you can get your wish right.

Ah, right.  I wonder if that's too broad though.  Can't a similar argument be made for any card that cares about cards in your deck?  Herald, Golem, Doctor.
I don't see it with those cards. Can you explain?

Although it is true that for any two cards a and b, if the bonus a gives over b is useless to you this turn but might not be next turn you would rather draw b.

In my deck I have cards A, A, B and B, with A > B.  I may prefer having Bs in my hand so that my Golem can hit A instead.

In my deck I have cards A and B, with A > B.  I may prefer having B in my hand so that my Herald can play A from the deck.

For both of the above, it works best with terminals to remove the possibility of playing the cards in your hand after Golem.  Even so, it should be possible to construct edge cases where the order of play matters, or cases where you wouldn't want to play the cards left in your hand even if you have the actions for it (reshuffle considerations, for example).

For Doctor -- in my deck I have cards A, B and C, with A > B.  Both B and C are junk cards I want to trash from my deck.  I may prefer to have B in my hand so that I know to name C when I play Doctor.

I say "junk card" for the example but you could create edgy edge cases where you still want to trash a decent card.
Logged

scott_pilgrim

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 959
  • Respect: +1858
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #92 on: June 12, 2014, 09:30:59 pm »
+4

I interpreted the puzzle as: you're playing a game of Dominion, and a genie pops up and says "I can turn any card X in your hand into card Y, but it will turn back into X at the end of your turn (and you can accept this offer as many times as you like this turn)."  Which (if any) pairs of cards, X and Y, are such that you would make this deal in any situation, given that none of the cards on liopoil's list are in the kingdom or Black Market deck?

So if that's how the puzzle is interpreted, the Golem and Herald cases don't work, because the assumption is that replacing X with Y doesn't affect what is remaining in your deck.
Logged

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #93 on: June 12, 2014, 09:33:50 pm »
+1

I interpreted the puzzle as: you're playing a game of Dominion, and a genie pops up and says "I can turn any card X in your hand into card Y, but it will turn back into X at the end of your turn (and you can accept this offer as many times as you like this turn)."  Which (if any) pairs of cards, X and Y, are such that you would make this deal in any situation, given that none of the cards on liopoil's list are in the kingdom or Black Market deck?

So if that's how the puzzle is interpreted, the Golem and Herald cases don't work, because the assumption is that replacing X with Y doesn't affect what is remaining in your deck.
In this case WW and mystic don't work either. And actually, I like this definition, so I'll take them off the list.

Also, I'm not convinced that those cards work universally. Take village and worker's village for example - play order can't matter.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2014, 09:37:42 pm by liopoil »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #94 on: June 12, 2014, 09:55:42 pm »
0

I interpreted the puzzle as: you're playing a game of Dominion, and a genie pops up and says "I can turn any card X in your hand into card Y, but it will turn back into X at the end of your turn (and you can accept this offer as many times as you like this turn)."  Which (if any) pairs of cards, X and Y, are such that you would make this deal in any situation, given that none of the cards on liopoil's list are in the kingdom or Black Market deck?

So if that's how the puzzle is interpreted, the Golem and Herald cases don't work, because the assumption is that replacing X with Y doesn't affect what is remaining in your deck.
In this case WW and mystic don't work either. And actually, I like this definition, so I'll take them off the list.

Also, I'm not convinced that those cards work universally. Take village and worker's village for example - play order can't matter.

Hmm...

My hand is Village-Village-Golem-Diadem and my deck is WV, WV and 4 Copper in an unknown order.  I want to maximize my number of actions to get more value out of Diadem.  This means that I should play Golem first, because I will get fewer +actions if my Villages draw Worker's Village.  I prefer having WV in hand over Village because of the possibility that Golem sifts through 2 Copper and I would prefer to leave Villages unplayed than trigger a reshuffle (but I am willing to risk it with the initial Golem play).

I think that works. :P

Even if the examples aren't universal, they still cut out a large swath of possibilities.

scott_pilgrim is right though, and I think I may have been thinking that way subconsciously, which is why I questioned WW and Mystic on the list.

This discussion has gotten more interesting than I thought it would.  "Universal edge case" is my favourite oxymoron for the day.
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #95 on: June 13, 2014, 12:02:36 am »
0

Scavenger>Duchess
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #96 on: June 13, 2014, 12:18:46 am »
0

Scavenger>Duchess

Scavenger doesn't let you sift the next card.  It also doesn't force your opponent to look at a card, which may force them to reshuffle.
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #97 on: June 13, 2014, 12:26:45 am »
0

So I guess another way of putting it is, a pair of cards (card X and Card Y) which, if both in your hand, you would always play one over the other.
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1733
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #98 on: June 13, 2014, 08:25:56 am »
+3

So I guess another way of putting it is, a pair of cards (card X and Card Y) which, if both in your hand, you would always play one over the other.

I think only Haven makes you play a card over another (see its official FAQ).
Logged

enfynet

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1555
  • Respect: +996
    • View Profile
    • JD's Custom Clubs
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #99 on: June 13, 2014, 09:24:42 am »
0

Wouldn't this puzzle be easier if the only cards in the Kingdom were the two (or more) in question? Otherwise every answer relies on the other 8 more than the two in question.
Logged
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious."

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3247
  • Respect: +5403
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #100 on: June 13, 2014, 09:59:04 am »
+1

My first ever post on these forums was on how to construct a strictly better card.

Summary:  Take an Action-Victory card, and publish a new one with "+1 victory token" attached.  Don't change the name.
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

enfynet

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1555
  • Respect: +996
    • View Profile
    • JD's Custom Clubs
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #101 on: June 13, 2014, 10:05:18 am »
0

After Guilds being published, can we consider "Take a Coin token" under the same premise?
Logged
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious."

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3247
  • Respect: +5403
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #102 on: June 13, 2014, 10:09:11 am »
0

After Guilds being published, can we consider "Take a Coin token" under the same premise?

No.  In a Possession game you might not want your deck to be producing coin at all, let alone coin tokens.
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

enfynet

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1555
  • Respect: +996
    • View Profile
    • JD's Custom Clubs
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #103 on: June 13, 2014, 10:14:30 am »
+1

Aside from that one case, which is rare enough, I think it fits. To invalidate the Victory tokens you just need a card that can trade/spend them.
Logged
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious."

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3247
  • Respect: +5403
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #104 on: June 13, 2014, 10:27:42 am »
0

On-gain effect matters, because you could trash it and gain it from the trash with Graverobber in the same turn.

You can't gain from the trash with Graverobber given the challenge's stipulations.  Graverobber requires a cost condition be met, and we are ignoring cost.
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3043
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +1634
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #105 on: June 13, 2014, 11:32:40 am »
0

My first ever post on these forums was on how to construct a strictly better card.

Summary:  Take an Action-Victory card, and publish a new one with "+1 victory token" attached.  Don't change the name.
But is it still strictly better if the extra VP tokens influence your opponent to, say, break PPR when they normally wouldn't when you yourself can't get the last Province? Like, if the extra token gives you a 4VP lead instead of a 3VP lead, your opponent is more likely to break PPR. Maybe you don't want that.

It's a "Play Adventurer before Poor House" kind of edge case tough.

While on the subject, Princess > Bridge without Throne Room and variants.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #106 on: June 13, 2014, 11:42:57 am »
+1

On-gain effect matters, because you could trash it and gain it from the trash with Graverobber in the same turn.

You can't gain from the trash with Graverobber given the challenge's stipulations.  Graverobber requires a cost condition be met, and we are ignoring cost.

Hmm... while you are technically correct (the best kind of correct), the point of ignoring costs was so to remove a universal edge case of, say, Upgrade.  The edge case with Border Village > Worker's Village comes because you can trash Border Village, gain Border Village, and gain a Wharf or something, so it's better to have in your hand, even though Worker's Village's effect is better.  Costs are involved there, but they aren't the source of the edge case. 
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #107 on: June 14, 2014, 01:54:15 am »
0

Vault>Secret Chamber
Noble Steed>Laboratory
Torturer>Smithy
Prince>Scheme? This new card is technical as heck.
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

amalloy

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 453
  • Respect: +612
    • View Profile
    • Twitch stream
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #108 on: June 14, 2014, 01:58:11 am »
0

Vault>Secret Chamber I'd rather not trigger that reshuffle
Noble Steed>Laboratory This seems right
Torturer>Smithy My opponent has Trader, or Menagerie
Prince>Scheme? I'd rather play my other action this turn and next, rather than next turn and every later turn

Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #109 on: June 14, 2014, 02:37:44 am »
0

Vault>Secret Chamber
Noble Steed>Laboratory
Torturer>Smithy
Prince>Scheme? This new card is technical as heck.

Are you checking the rules I already mentioned?

Vault also fails because it gives opponents a benefit. Also, SC has a reaction.
Logged

Grujah

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2237
  • Respect: +1162
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #110 on: June 14, 2014, 07:47:33 am »
+1

Butcher > Remodel ?
Logged

silvern

  • Salvager
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 62
  • Respect: +81
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #111 on: June 14, 2014, 10:20:06 am »
0

Easy puzzle: What is a case, besides all those possession/fairground type cases (as well as king's court, throne room, procession, prince, etc.) where highway is better than peddler on a board with no plus buy or cost-dependents?

Logged

silverspawn

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3784
  • ♦ Twilight ♦
  • Respect: +1648
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #112 on: June 14, 2014, 10:22:43 am »
0

Easy puzzle: What is a case, besides all those possession/fairground type cases (as well as king's court, throne room, procession, prince, etc.) where highway is better than peddler on a board with no plus buy or cost-dependents?
any gain?

silvern

  • Salvager
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 62
  • Respect: +81
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #113 on: June 14, 2014, 10:25:44 am »
0

Gain is always cost dependent, yes?
Logged

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1733
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #114 on: June 14, 2014, 10:26:34 am »
+1

Easy puzzle: What is a case, besides all those possession/fairground type cases (as well as king's court, throne room, procession, prince, etc.) where highway is better than peddler on a board with no plus buy or cost-dependents?

Highway does not come knocking the door during a nap.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9103
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +8890
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #115 on: June 14, 2014, 10:26:51 am »
+1

Easy puzzle: What is a case, besides all those possession/fairground type cases (as well as king's court, throne room, procession, prince, etc.) where highway is better than peddler on a board with no plus buy or cost-dependents?
Poor House
Swindler, when you're going for Duchy/Duke (or does this count as a cost-dependent?)

silvern

  • Salvager
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 62
  • Respect: +81
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #116 on: June 14, 2014, 10:29:15 am »
0

Poor House is what I was going for. I don't really see how Swindler is affected, can you explain?

EDIT: Oh, I see, yeah, I meant assuming that both cost the same.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2014, 10:32:13 am by silvern »
Logged

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #117 on: June 14, 2014, 10:32:17 am »
0

Poor house I guess is when you accidentally herald into it with 5 treasures in hand?
Logged

silvern

  • Salvager
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 62
  • Respect: +81
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #118 on: June 14, 2014, 10:35:21 am »
0

Yep. And just in general; you can play highway and have the extra coin, whereas you can't do the same thing with peddler, since it will just get lost with poor house
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #119 on: June 14, 2014, 03:03:44 pm »
0

How do Poor House and Highway work together?
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9103
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +8890
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #120 on: June 14, 2014, 03:21:18 pm »
0

How do Poor House and Highway work together?
Not at all. Peddler and Poor House, on the other hand, have a negative interaction sometimes.

silverspawn

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3784
  • ♦ Twilight ♦
  • Respect: +1648
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #121 on: June 14, 2014, 03:23:59 pm »
0

in my free time, i always produce money and destroy it with poor house. it's super fun
« Last Edit: June 14, 2014, 03:32:51 pm by silverspawn »
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #122 on: June 14, 2014, 09:37:41 pm »
0

How do Poor House and Highway work together?
Not at all. Peddler and Poor House, on the other hand, have a negative interaction sometimes.

Actually, that's what I meant by that
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #123 on: June 14, 2014, 09:59:36 pm »
0

So I'm not seeing how Highway can be anti-synergistic at all with Poor House..?
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #124 on: June 14, 2014, 10:08:17 pm »
+1

So I'm not seeing how Highway can be anti-synergistic at all with Poor House..?

There isn't a way.  The question was how Highway could be better than Peddler (with a bunch of restrictions to rule out some easy answers).  The answer is that Peddler has a negative interaction with Poor House while Highway does not.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3784
  • ♦ Twilight ♦
  • Respect: +1648
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #125 on: June 14, 2014, 10:24:05 pm »
+1

So I'm not seeing how Highway can be anti-synergistic at all with Poor House..?

There isn't a way.  The question was how Highway could be better than Peddler (with a bunch of restrictions to rule out some easy answers).  The answer is that Peddler has a negative interaction with Poor House while Highway does not.
also, it's way cooler to play 8 highways and buy a province for 0$ then to play 8 peddlers and pay 8$ for it

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #126 on: June 15, 2014, 08:41:41 pm »
0

Butcher > Remodel ?

Looks solid to me. But I bet someone will come up with an edge case.
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

navical

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 122
  • Respect: +136
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #127 on: June 15, 2014, 08:57:56 pm »
0

I'm pretty certain that IRL you would never prefer to have a Duchy in hand than a Province, but might sometimes prefer the opposite due to Tournament (i.e. Province > Duchy).

On Goko, however, your opponent plays a Tournament, with a Bureaucrat and some other terminal in hand. If you have a Province, then Goko will ask you whether you want to reveal it, thus informing your opponent that you have a Victory card in hand, and so causing them to play the Bureaucrat instead of the other terminal. (And for whatever reason you consider this worse than them getting +Card +1$ (or it's a 3+ player game and someone else has already revealed)).

A similar situation arises with Young Witch to give a situation where you would prefer Duchy to Tunnel.

On the other hand, I can't find an edge case to counter Estate > Duchy in hand, though maybe someone else can.

(you can replace Duchy with any other pure Victory card with no interactions with other cards)
« Last Edit: June 15, 2014, 09:24:33 pm by navical »
Logged

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #128 on: June 15, 2014, 09:01:34 pm »
0

On the other hand, I can't find an edge case to Estate > Duchy, though maybe someone else can.
baron
Logged

navical

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 122
  • Respect: +136
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #129 on: June 15, 2014, 09:24:39 pm »
0

On the other hand, I can't find an edge case to Estate > Duchy, though maybe someone else can.
baron
That was the whole reason of why Estate > Duchy rather than Estate = Duchy. Edited for clarity.
Logged

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #130 on: June 15, 2014, 09:27:27 pm »
0

On the other hand, I can't find an edge case to Estate > Duchy, though maybe someone else can.
baron
That was the whole reason of why Estate > Duchy rather than Estate = Duchy. Edited for clarity.
ahh, okay. Rebuild would make you prefer to have a duchy in hand if it is a mirror and you are trying to win the duchy split. However, you also have a province and so having your only duchy in hand lets you safely name province to insure you hit an estate.
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #131 on: June 16, 2014, 10:38:11 pm »
0

So I guess estate could always trump Duchy, Province, and Colony because of Baron and Duchy could do likewise because of Duke. And Province too because of Tournament?
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

silverspawn

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3784
  • ♦ Twilight ♦
  • Respect: +1648
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #132 on: June 17, 2014, 12:00:03 am »
0

So I guess estate could always trump Duchy, Province, and Colony because of Baron and Duchy could do likewise because of Duke. And Province too because of Tournament?
very much so indeed yes thats correct

navical

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 122
  • Respect: +136
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #133 on: June 17, 2014, 06:44:54 am »
+1

On the other hand, I can't find an edge case to Estate > Duchy, though maybe someone else can.
baron
That was the whole reason of why Estate > Duchy rather than Estate = Duchy. Edited for clarity.
ahh, okay. Rebuild would make you prefer to have a duchy in hand if it is a mirror and you are trying to win the duchy split. However, you also have a province and so having your only duchy in hand lets you safely name province to insure you hit an estate.

This doesn't work with scott pilgrim's "genie" interpretation of the question, which is the one I would use. Also, it's to do with TfB, and thus cost (if Estates cost 5 you wouldn't have this problem).
Logged

jomini

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 914
  • Respect: +641
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #134 on: June 17, 2014, 11:51:50 am »
0

I think a compelling case can be made with the Ruins:
1. Chancellor is strictly better than Abandoned mine. It has "you may" so we can always just play one as $2 while the other is $1. Throne rooms, golems, etc. should not matter.
2. Necropolis is strictly better than Ruined village. +2 actions vs +1.
3. Festival is strictly better than Ruined market.
4. Great hall is strictly better than Ruined library.

There are plenty of other things that give the exact same benefit and give you more flexibility or additional rewards.

In like fashion, Farmland, ignoring price, is strictly worse than Province in hand. Province may activate other cards (Explorer, Tournament), but Farmland does not. Without price concerns, Farmland cannot become anything Province cannot. The only way to trigger an on buy effect is to Ambassador over two, which doesn't happen when you have only one in hand. Province is, of course, worth more VP.

Alchemist should be strictly superior to Laboratory aside from price concerns. It has the same effect, but might also be able to be top decked if the player desires it after having drawn and played a potion. Likewise Trusty Steed is strictly better than Laboratory outside of cost - you can always get Lab effect, but with a bonus action (+1 action) and more flexibility (you can choose to not get the +action and just do +2 cards/+$2).

Festival is strictly better than Necropolis as is University.

Outside of price, I believe Treasury is strictly better than Peddler - the Treasury does everything the Peddler does in hand, but you may choose to top deck it later (or not). Market would also be strictly better outside of universal edge cases.

Grand market should be strictly better than Market ignoring price.
Logged

Gveoniz

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 141
  • Respect: +261
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #135 on: June 17, 2014, 11:56:11 am »
0

Festival is strictly better than Necropolis as is University.
University is not strictly better because of the card gain.

2.71828.....

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1153
  • Shuffle iT Username: irrationalE
  • Respect: +1184
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #136 on: June 17, 2014, 12:00:03 pm »
+1

Festival is strictly better than Necropolis as is University.
University is not strictly better because of the card gain.

Its an optional card gain, so University would be strictly better
Logged
Man. I had four strips of bacon yesterday. Was one automatically undercooked, one automatically overcooked? No, let's put a stop to that right here, all four strips were excellent.

Gveoniz

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 141
  • Respect: +261
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #137 on: June 17, 2014, 12:03:56 pm »
0

Festival is strictly better than Necropolis as is University.
University is not strictly better because of the card gain.

Its an optional card gain, so University would be strictly better
My mistake, I have actually never noticed it.

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #138 on: June 17, 2014, 01:58:27 pm »
0

The only way to trigger an on buy effect is to Ambassador over two, which doesn't happen when you have only one in hand. Province is, of course, worth more VP.

I don't think any on buy effects take place with Ambassador. I could be wrong.
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #139 on: June 17, 2014, 02:12:56 pm »
0

In like fashion, Farmland, ignoring price, is strictly worse than Province in hand. Province may activate other cards (Explorer, Tournament), but Farmland does not. Without price concerns, Farmland cannot become anything Province cannot. The only way to trigger an on buy effect is to Ambassador over two, which doesn't happen when you have only one in hand. Province is, of course, worth more VP.

Well, edge case:  Your hand is Province, Ironmonger, Copper, Copper, Copper and it's a tournament game.  Your opponent plays a Bureaucrat, you put the Province on top of your deck.  He then plays a spy and makes you discard it.  On your turn, you play Ironmonger, drawing the top card of your deck, an Estate and revealing a Laboratory for +1 Action.

Now, if you had a Farmland, and your opponent may not discard it with Spy, so now when you play Ironmonger, you draw the Farmland, reveal the Estate, discard it, and draw the Lab.  You can then play the Lab, drawing your next two cards, Province and Tournament.  (Or whatever.)
Logged

Polk5440

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1590
  • Respect: +1534
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #140 on: June 17, 2014, 02:16:36 pm »
0

I think a compelling case can be made with the Ruins:
1. Chancellor is strictly better than Abandoned mine. It has "you may" so we can always just play one as $2 while the other is $1. Throne rooms, golems, etc. should not matter.
2. Necropolis is strictly better than Ruined village. +2 actions vs +1.
3. Festival is strictly better than Ruined market.
4. Great hall is strictly better than Ruined library.

Best effort so far. However:

2. Necro often has to be remade/upgraded into Estate. Usually, you would rather trash it outright.

And, they all fall to Masquerade edge cases. For example, 4. Hand of all victory points. Opponent Masquerades. You must pass him a point (great hall) which gives him the win. Ruined library in hand would be better.

If the OP didn't require the cards to be in hand, Sab and Rogue would be possible edge case creators, as well.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #141 on: June 17, 2014, 02:19:23 pm »
0

I think a compelling case can be made with the Ruins:
1. Chancellor is strictly better than Abandoned mine. It has "you may" so we can always just play one as $2 while the other is $1. Throne rooms, golems, etc. should not matter.
2. Necropolis is strictly better than Ruined village. +2 actions vs +1.
3. Festival is strictly better than Ruined market.
4. Great hall is strictly better than Ruined library.

Best effort so far. However:

2. Necro often has to be remade/upgraded into Estate. Usually, you would rather trash it outright.

And, they all fall to Masquerade edge cases. For example, 4. Hand of all victory points. Opponent Masquerades. You must pass him a point (great hall) which gives him the win. Ruined library in hand would be better.

If the OP didn't require the cards to be in hand, Sab and Rogue would be possible edge case creators, as well.

I think both those edge cases are excluded by the premise of the puzzle.  The first depends on their costs, and the second holds true for any set of superior cards.
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3487
  • Respect: +5468
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #142 on: June 17, 2014, 02:23:49 pm »
+1

Any reasonable definition of "strictly better" has to exclude Possession/Masquerade/Ambassador, as well as the card's cost.  I would argue that "Opponents are more likely to discard it with Spy" also should be excluded.
Logged

Polk5440

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1590
  • Respect: +1534
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #143 on: June 17, 2014, 02:41:05 pm »
0

I think a compelling case can be made with the Ruins:
1. Chancellor is strictly better than Abandoned mine. It has "you may" so we can always just play one as $2 while the other is $1. Throne rooms, golems, etc. should not matter.
2. Necropolis is strictly better than Ruined village. +2 actions vs +1.
3. Festival is strictly better than Ruined market.
4. Great hall is strictly better than Ruined library.

Best effort so far. However:

2. Necro often has to be remade/upgraded into Estate. Usually, you would rather trash it outright.

And, they all fall to Masquerade edge cases. For example, 4. Hand of all victory points. Opponent Masquerades. You must pass him a point (great hall) which gives him the win. Ruined library in hand would be better.

If the OP didn't require the cards to be in hand, Sab and Rogue would be possible edge case creators, as well.

I think both those edge cases are excluded by the premise of the puzzle.  The first depends on their costs, and the second holds true for any set of superior cards.

I don't see why Masq is excluded. The OP talks explicitly about cards in hand. That clearly allows for Masq edge cases. Maybe you would prefer a Death Cart edge case? I would rather have the bad action on hand to trash with Death Cart and the good action in deck to play later.

Any reasonable definition of "strictly better" has to exclude Possession/Masquerade/Ambassador, as well as the card's cost.  I would argue that "Opponents are more likely to discard it with Spy" also should be excluded.

I disagree strongly about the cost being excluded. Cost matters a lot.  See for example, rats. I think strictly better is only useful as a term when discussing fan card pitfalls.  Agree about possession, Masq, amb, though.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #144 on: June 17, 2014, 02:42:21 pm »
0

Any reasonable definition of "strictly better" has to exclude Possession/Masquerade/Ambassador, as well as the card's cost.  I would argue that "Opponents are more likely to discard it with Spy" also should be excluded.

Well, but only because of Tournament.  Otherwise they'd keep the Province on top as well.  And since Tournament was the reason you wanted it in hand in the first place, I think it's okay here.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #145 on: June 17, 2014, 04:24:22 pm »
0

The only way to trigger an on buy effect is to Ambassador over two, which doesn't happen when you have only one in hand. Province is, of course, worth more VP.

I don't think any on buy effects take place with Ambassador. I could be wrong.

Suppose that all ten copies of a card with an on-buy effect have been purchased.  You want to trigger this on-buy effect anyway.  The only way you can do it is if you have Ambassador and two copies of that card in your hand in a 2p game.  You Ambassador both copies.  One goes to your opponent but the other one remains in the supply, allowing you to buy it that turn to trigger the effect.

Any reasonable definition of "strictly better" has to exclude Possession/Masquerade/Ambassador, as well as the card's cost.  I would argue that "Opponents are more likely to discard it with Spy" also should be excluded.

I disagree that cost should be excluded.  "Strictly better" should include price, and if we want to ignore the cost to purchase (or gain) the card then we should use the term "strictly better effect".  These separate terms are useful when discussing fan cards.  Strictly superior and strictly inferior cards simply shouldn't exist, other than cards that are meant to be junk (e.g. Ruins, Curse).  Cards with strictly inferior/superior effects can be used to estimate an appropriate cost for fan cards (e.g. village+ cards are often strictly superior to Village and so should cost more than $3).

Moreover, the cost of a card does have other impacts that should be considered, even though we have to exclude it for the purpose of this challenge.  Ignoring the cost of Farmland really hurts evaluation of it, for example, because Farmland->Province is a key part of Farmland's use.
Logged

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1733
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #146 on: June 17, 2014, 07:05:41 pm »
+1

The only way to trigger an on buy effect is to Ambassador over two, which doesn't happen when you have only one in hand. Province is, of course, worth more VP.

I don't think any on buy effects take place with Ambassador. I could be wrong.

Suppose that all ten copies of a card with an on-buy effect have been purchased.  You want to trigger this on-buy effect anyway.  The only way you can do it is if you have Ambassador and two copies of that card in your hand in a 2p game.  You Ambassador both copies.  One goes to your opponent but the other one remains in the supply, allowing you to buy it that turn to trigger the effect.

Just having one is enough, as every opponent may have Lighthouse in play.
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3487
  • Respect: +5468
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #147 on: June 17, 2014, 07:21:52 pm »
0

I guess what I mean by cost is, you can't say that Province for $7 isn't strictly superior to Province for $8, because $8 Province gives you more if you Salvage it. Similarly Estate for $3 is strictly worse even though you might be forced to Remake it and have better targets.
Logged

jomini

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 914
  • Respect: +641
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #148 on: June 18, 2014, 12:22:31 pm »
0

I disagree that cost should be excluded.  "Strictly better" should include price, and if we want to ignore the cost to purchase (or gain) the card then we should use the term "strictly better effect".  These separate terms are useful when discussing fan cards.  Strictly superior and strictly inferior cards simply shouldn't exist, other than cards that are meant to be junk (e.g. Ruins, Curse).  Cards with strictly inferior/superior effects can be used to estimate an appropriate cost for fan cards (e.g. village+ cards are often strictly superior to Village and so should cost more than $3).

Moreover, the cost of a card does have other impacts that should be considered, even though we have to exclude it for the purpose of this challenge.  Ignoring the cost of Farmland really hurts evaluation of it, for example, because Farmland->Province is a key part of Farmland's use.

The problem with including price is that it creates universal edge cases about three piling that don't care at all about the card mechanics.

You hold Butcher/X, but two piles are empty, you are tied but lose on tie breaker, and your opponent will win next turn if it happens. We some tinkering we can make just about any card X strictly better based solely on Price. $2 - $6, all allow you to Butcher a card into a VP card, end the game and win. For VP cards we set things up so a different card at the same prince point has more points (e.g. Butchering Garden -> Silk Road or Silk Road -> Garden is better). For $7 cards we just give you two coin tokens and say you need to hit $11 to win. With $8 we give you one. With $9 we give you zero. With few exceptions, you can set it up so that a card at any given price point is better than any other card - pretty much regardless of the text on the card.

For $0 cards, we just set it up so you need to Remake it and a curse (for the 1 VP swing) into the last two Poor houses with your three card hand.

Now sure you might be able to Butcher a Catacomb into $4 and come out the same, but we can also set things up like Forge/X/Y where you need a specific price point to get the game winning card (e.g. if Y is 4 and you can win by grabbing the last province only a $4 will do, likewise if Y is 3P then only a $1 will let you gain the last Golem for the win).

By taking cost into account I can make A is strictly better than B in some situation, B is strictly better than C in some situation, and C is strictly better than A in yet one more - and do that all based just on price.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #149 on: June 18, 2014, 04:08:45 pm »
+1

The problem with including price is that it creates universal edge cases about three piling that don't care at all about the card mechanics.

This is why I made a distinction between "strictly better" and "strictly better effect".

You hold Butcher/X, but two piles are empty, you are tied but lose on tie breaker, and your opponent will win next turn if it happens. We some tinkering we can make just about any card X strictly better based solely on Price. $2 - $6, all allow you to Butcher a card into a VP card, end the game and win. For VP cards we set things up so a different card at the same prince point has more points (e.g. Butchering Garden -> Silk Road or Silk Road -> Garden is better). For $7 cards we just give you two coin tokens and say you need to hit $11 to win. With $8 we give you one. With $9 we give you zero. With few exceptions, you can set it up so that a card at any given price point is better than any other card - pretty much regardless of the text on the card.

This description is a bit convoluted.  Garden->SR or vice versa says nothing about price because they both cost $4.  Your $7+ example makes no sense because the $8 card can fill in for the $7 card just as well.  You can switch to using Upgrade though, but that's certainly something worth considering that can make you prefer a $7 card over a card at another price point.

I haven't quoted all your examples but they aren't really any different.  Again, I made a distinction between "strictly better" and "strictly better effect", and I explained why such a distinction is helpful in comparing cards (especially fan cards).

By taking cost into account I can make A is strictly better than B in some situation, B is strictly better than C in some situation, and C is strictly better than A in yet one more - and do that all based just on price.

You're abusing the term "strictly", which should mean "in every situation".  If A is only better than B in some situations, it isn't strictly better.  It's merely better in that situation.  And that's fine.  Absolutely price can make some cards better in a specific situation.  The easiest example for this is Forge; we don't need all the hyper-specific examples you gave above.
Logged

amalloy

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 453
  • Respect: +612
    • View Profile
    • Twitch stream
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #150 on: June 18, 2014, 08:28:16 pm »
+2

You're abusing the term "strictly", which should mean "in every situation".  If A is only better than B in some situations, it isn't strictly better.  It's merely better in that situation.  And that's fine.  Absolutely price can make some cards better in a specific situation.  The easiest example for this is Forge; we don't need all the hyper-specific examples you gave above.

This is actually a perfectly fine way to use "strictly": "In situation X, card A is strictly better than card B" is well defined and meaningful: in situation X, there's nothing you'd like better about B than A. This is in contrast with "In situation X, card A is better that card B", which could mean that B has some better aspects and A has some better aspects, but you like A better on the whole.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #151 on: June 18, 2014, 08:33:34 pm »
0

Eh, fair enough.
Logged

KingZog3

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3158
  • Respect: +1355
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #152 on: June 18, 2014, 08:44:28 pm »
0

Eh, fair enough.

Your picture is still wrong. Change it please. Thanks.

(Bringing this across threads!)
Logged

navical

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 122
  • Respect: +136
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #153 on: June 18, 2014, 09:32:54 pm »
0

Any reasonable definition of "strictly better" has to exclude Possession/Masquerade/Ambassador, as well as the card's cost.  I would argue that "Opponents are more likely to discard it with Spy" also should be excluded.

I disagree that cost should be excluded.  "Strictly better" should include price, and if we want to ignore the cost to purchase (or gain) the card then we should use the term "strictly better effect".  These separate terms are useful when discussing fan cards.

Yes. But we're not discussing fan cards here. theory's original statement was pretty clearly meant as 'in the context of this question, any reasonable definition of "strictly better" has to exclude... etc'.
Logged

enfynet

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1555
  • Respect: +996
    • View Profile
    • JD's Custom Clubs
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #154 on: June 18, 2014, 09:57:04 pm »
0

Dominion is strictly better than __________?
Logged
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious."

silverspawn

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3784
  • ♦ Twilight ♦
  • Respect: +1648
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #155 on: June 18, 2014, 10:15:14 pm »
0

Dominion is strictly better than __________?
Dominion', which is just like dominion except that smithy allows you to look at the top 3 cards of your deck before drawing them

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #156 on: June 19, 2014, 12:00:20 am »
0

Any reasonable definition of "strictly better" has to exclude Possession/Masquerade/Ambassador, as well as the card's cost.  I would argue that "Opponents are more likely to discard it with Spy" also should be excluded.

I disagree that cost should be excluded.  "Strictly better" should include price, and if we want to ignore the cost to purchase (or gain) the card then we should use the term "strictly better effect".  These separate terms are useful when discussing fan cards.



Yes. But we're not discussing fan cards here. theory's original statement was pretty clearly meant as 'in the context of this question, any reasonable definition of "strictly better" has to exclude... etc'.

Well we've already compiled a list for that.
« Last Edit: June 19, 2014, 12:01:42 am by eHalcyon »
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6146
  • Respect: +6638
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #157 on: June 19, 2014, 03:59:23 pm »
0

I haven't read the whole thread, but the answer to the OP is definitely "none". If we are allowing "all edge cases considered", then we have to include the cost of the card, because we might want to trash it to a Remodel or something. Thus Expand and Remodel don't work as a pair.

Also, drawing more cards isn't always better, because you might not want to reshuffle.

*Edit* I misread "prices don't matter" in the OP as "prizes don't matter". I was confused as to why he was excluding prizes.

In that case, the answer is basically "all $4 and $5 Villages".
« Last Edit: June 19, 2014, 04:01:27 pm by GendoIkari »
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #158 on: June 21, 2014, 04:41:14 pm »
0

So is there a situation where Laboratory isn't better than Vagrant or Wishing Well?
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #159 on: June 21, 2014, 04:43:39 pm »
0

So is there a situation where Laboratory isn't better than Vagrant or Wishing Well?
yes, when you don't want to draw another card because you know it is a good card and would rather it be in your next hand. Or when you want to know the top card of your deck for native village or something.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6146
  • Respect: +6638
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #160 on: June 21, 2014, 06:30:20 pm »
0

So is there a situation where Laboratory isn't better than Vagrant or Wishing Well?
yes, when you don't want to draw another card because you know it is a good card and would rather it be in your next hand. Or when you want to know the top card of your deck for native village or something.

Or you just don't want to trigger a reshuffle.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #161 on: June 21, 2014, 06:36:10 pm »
+3

So is there a situation where Laboratory isn't better than Vagrant or Wishing Well?
yes, when you don't want to draw another card because you know it is a good card and would rather it be in your next hand. Or when you want to know the top card of your deck for native village or something.

Or you just don't want to trigger a reshuffle.

Well, Vagrant and Wishing Well look at the top card, so will trigger that shuffle.  Unless you're considering playing more potential drawing cards after.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6146
  • Respect: +6638
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #162 on: June 21, 2014, 06:38:14 pm »
0

So is there a situation where Laboratory isn't better than Vagrant or Wishing Well?
yes, when you don't want to draw another card because you know it is a good card and would rather it be in your next hand. Or when you want to know the top card of your deck for native village or something.

Or you just don't want to trigger a reshuffle.

Well, Vagrant and Wishing Well look at the top card, so will trigger that shuffle.  Unless you're considering playing more potential drawing cards after.

Yeah, I just finished reading page 1 where the same thing was said and refuted, so I came here to delete my post, but too late I guess.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6146
  • Respect: +6638
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #163 on: June 21, 2014, 06:44:25 pm »
0

A few more:

Journeyman/Catacombs>Smithy always.
GM>Mystic
Lab>Vagrant
Alchemist>Lab
Treasury>Peddler

Not sure if already refuted, but.. GM Mystic and Lab Vagrant don't work for the same reason as lab Wishing Well... Sometimes you'd rather have the card next turn than this turn, and possible unwanted reshuffling when combined with something like lab.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6146
  • Respect: +6638
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #164 on: June 21, 2014, 06:54:34 pm »
0

Revised list of cards we have to ignore for there to be any cards strictly better than another:

Possession
Masquerade
Ambassador
Horn of Plenty
Menagerie
Hunting Party
Forge
Remake
Upgrade
Governor
Procession (only for actions)
Taxman (only for treasures)
Rogue (only for cards costing 3+)
Graverobber (only for cards costing 3+)

Also Apprentice. (Cheaper cards avoid triggering reshuffles.)
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #165 on: June 21, 2014, 07:09:03 pm »
0

So is there a situation where Laboratory isn't better than Vagrant or Wishing Well?
yes, when you don't want to draw another card because you know it is a good card and would rather it be in your next hand. Or when you want to know the top card of your deck for native village or something.

Or you just don't want to trigger a reshuffle.

Well, Vagrant and Wishing Well look at the top card, so will trigger that shuffle.  Unless you're considering playing more potential drawing cards after.

Yeah, I just finished reading page 1 where the same thing was said and refuted, so I came here to delete my post, but too late I guess.

Well I was the one that got refuted the first time, so I had to jump on it here :)
Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4733
  • Respect: +3301
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #166 on: June 22, 2014, 04:30:47 am »
0

A few more:

Journeyman/Catacombs>Smithy always.
GM>Mystic
Lab>Vagrant
Alchemist>Lab
Treasury>Peddler

Not sure if already refuted, but.. GM Mystic and Lab Vagrant don't work for the same reason as lab Wishing Well... Sometimes you'd rather have the card next turn than this turn, and possible unwanted reshuffling when combined with something like lab.
And I'd like to see you Remodel that Treasury into a Province without cost reducers.
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #167 on: June 22, 2014, 10:17:14 am »
0

A few more:

Journeyman/Catacombs>Smithy always.
GM>Mystic
Lab>Vagrant
Alchemist>Lab
Treasury>Peddler

Not sure if already refuted, but.. GM Mystic and Lab Vagrant don't work for the same reason as lab Wishing Well... Sometimes you'd rather have the card next turn than this turn, and possible unwanted reshuffling when combined with something like lab.
And I'd like to see you Remodel that Treasury into a Province without cost reducers.

We already ruled out using cost-specific cards because they create universal edge cases (e.g. sometimes you need a specific cost for Forge; you may prefer to Apprentice a lower cost card so as not to trigger a reshuffle).
Logged

jomini

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 914
  • Respect: +641
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #168 on: June 22, 2014, 11:58:06 pm »
0

The problem with including price is that it creates universal edge cases about three piling that don't care at all about the card mechanics.

This is why I made a distinction between "strictly better" and "strictly better effect".

Purchase price is only part of the concern with cost. With a Haggler in play and having bought a colony "price" is meaningless, but there are times I want any $4 over any possible $5; most obviously with Forge. Price has to be ignored or I can edge case any cards of differing price. Woodcutters vs Festival is literally the same effects +extra actions, but if we concern ourselves with price (even ignoring purchase price), there are times where Woodcutters beat Festival.


This description is a bit convoluted.  Garden->SR or vice versa says nothing about price because they both cost $4.  Your $7+ example makes no sense because the $8 card can fill in for the $7 card just as well.  You can switch to using Upgrade though, but that's certainly something worth considering that can make you prefer a $7 card over a card at another price point.

They are convoluted to avoid easy edge-casing. The point being cards like Remake, Forge, Upgrade, Governor, Apprentice, Graverobber, Rogue, Knights, Sab, etc. all can create edge cases where point values make things difficult.

Quote
You're abusing the term "strictly", which should mean "in every situation".  If A is only better than B in some situations, it isn't strictly better.  It's merely better in that situation.  And that's fine.  Absolutely price can make some cards better in a specific situation.  The easiest example for this is Forge; we don't need all the hyper-specific examples you gave above.

Not at all. If A is strictly better than B, then A > B holds in all possible situations. Festival > Woodcutters is true for all non-nearly universal edge cases (e.g. Possession wants crappy cards in your deck, you want to pass something worse with Masq, $3 + Peddler = colony with Forge). VP card > Curse actually only holds true for a subset of all possible game states; first you have to ignore game states where grabbing a curse can be good of its own right (Ambassador/Fairgrounds/Mountebank, etc.). Then you need to get rid of times where 3-piling makes curse buying the right move. Then you need to get rid of cases where you care only about the fact that curse is 0 cost card (e.g. an Embargoed curse pile makes curse "buys" better for Trader). Then you need to get out into the weeds where stuff cares about the fact that curses are worth 0 (e.g. Remake, Upgrade, etc. when Poor house needs to be gained and the copper pile is empty).

Any rubric that allows us to say that Woodcutters > Festival or Curse > anything else is likely just showing us near universal edge cases.

Ignoring worth has its own problems, most notably Peddler has major issues where stuff that has some additional effect is "strictly better", but Peddler can be bought in bulk or bought cheap but trashed high, but the answer is either "nothing is strictly better than anything else" or we adopt some basic guidelines (which due to the richness of Dominion need to be pretty long) to ignore the near universal edge cases.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #169 on: June 23, 2014, 12:35:32 am »
+1

I'm not sure what your point was then.  We'd already been discussing "universal edge cases" since the start of the thread.
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #170 on: June 23, 2014, 11:32:40 am »
0

Either way, Festival>Woodcutter is a good one.
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

Joseph2302

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 817
  • Shuffle iT Username: Joseph2302
  • "Better to be lucky than good"
  • Respect: +535
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #171 on: June 23, 2014, 05:54:52 pm »
0

Walled Village > Village
Logged
Mafia Stats:
Town: 11 games, 5 wins
Scum: 3 games, 1 win

enfynet

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1555
  • Respect: +996
    • View Profile
    • JD's Custom Clubs
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #172 on: June 24, 2014, 12:54:37 am »
0

Baker > Peddler

I mean sure Baker has the setup clause, but otherwise they function similarly enough.
Logged
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious."

Gveoniz

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 141
  • Respect: +261
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #173 on: June 24, 2014, 01:02:24 am »
0

Baker > Peddler

I mean sure Baker has the setup clause, but otherwise they function similarly enough.

Black Market.

navical

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 122
  • Respect: +136
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #174 on: June 24, 2014, 05:57:25 am »
+1

Ignoring universal edge cases and on-gain effects, but not on-trash effects, I came up with the following list: (ignoring Ruins and non-Action cards). This is mostly a compilation of things already mentioned in this thread with a few I've added myself.

Bazaar, Worker's Village, Walled Village, Mining Village, Plaza > Village, Border Village
Grand Market, Market, Treasury, Bazaar > Peddler
Grand Market > Market
Festival > Woodcutter, Nomad Camp
Goons > Militia
Alchemist, Trusty Steed > Laboratory
Expand, Butcher > Remodel
Count > Mandarin
Festival, University > Necropolis

Anyone want to edge case any of these, or add to the list?

edit: removed Fortress, as discussed further down, and  Squire, which clearly has a potential on-trash penalty (e.g. hit by Swindler with Swindlers and Curses out, only other attack on the board is Sea Hag).
« Last Edit: June 24, 2014, 03:18:36 pm by navical »
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #175 on: June 24, 2014, 10:07:32 am »
+1

Ignoring universal edge cases and on-gain effects, but not on-trash effects, I came up with the following list: (ignoring Ruins and non-Action cards). This is mostly a compilation of things already mentioned in this thread with a few I've added myself.

Bazaar, Worker's Village, Walled Village, Fortress, Mining Village, Plaza > Village, Border Village
Grand Market, Market, Treasury, Bazaar > Peddler
Grand Market > Market
Festival > Woodcutter, Nomad Camp
Goons > Militia
Alchemist, Trusty Steed > Laboratory
Expand, Butcher > Remodel
Count > Mandarin
Squire, Festival, University > Necropolis

Anyone want to edge case any of these, or add to the list?

I maintain you can not ignore on-gain effects, because the card can be trashed (from your hand) and gained (from the trash) during your turn.  E.g., Border Village.
Logged

enfynet

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1555
  • Respect: +996
    • View Profile
    • JD's Custom Clubs
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #176 on: June 24, 2014, 11:24:34 am »
0

Baker > Peddler

I mean sure Baker has the setup clause, but otherwise they function similarly enough.

Black Market.
So... Apparently the rule book for Guilds says you can't spend coin tokens when you play Black Market. I did not know that...
Logged
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious."

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #177 on: June 24, 2014, 01:09:41 pm »
0

Ignoring universal edge cases and on-gain effects, but not on-trash effects, I came up with the following list: (ignoring Ruins and non-Action cards). This is mostly a compilation of things already mentioned in this thread with a few I've added myself.

Bazaar, Worker's Village, Walled Village, Fortress, Mining Village, Plaza > Village, Border Village
Grand Market, Market, Treasury, Bazaar > Peddler
Grand Market > Market
Festival > Woodcutter, Nomad Camp
Goons > Militia
Alchemist, Trusty Steed > Laboratory
Expand, Butcher > Remodel
Count > Mandarin
Squire, Festival, University > Necropolis

Anyone want to edge case any of these, or add to the list?

So tell me... is there a case where Fortress is worse than Village?
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3120
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2285
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #178 on: June 24, 2014, 01:16:29 pm »
+1

Ignoring universal edge cases and on-gain effects, but not on-trash effects, I came up with the following list: (ignoring Ruins and non-Action cards). This is mostly a compilation of things already mentioned in this thread with a few I've added myself.

Bazaar, Worker's Village, Walled Village, Fortress, Mining Village, Plaza > Village, Border Village
Grand Market, Market, Treasury, Bazaar > Peddler
Grand Market > Market
Festival > Woodcutter, Nomad Camp
Goons > Militia
Alchemist, Trusty Steed > Laboratory
Expand, Butcher > Remodel
Count > Mandarin
Squire, Festival, University > Necropolis

Anyone want to edge case any of these, or add to the list?

So tell me... is there a case where Fortress is worse than Village?

You want to procession it then play a draw to x card afterwards.
Logged
If you're wondering what my avatar is, watch this.

Check out my logic puzzle blog!

   Quote from: sudgy on June 31, 2011, 11:47:46 pm

amalloy

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 453
  • Respect: +612
    • View Profile
    • Twitch stream
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #179 on: June 24, 2014, 01:57:20 pm »
+4

Ignoring universal edge cases and on-gain effects, but not on-trash effects, I came up with the following list: (ignoring Ruins and non-Action cards). This is mostly a compilation of things already mentioned in this thread with a few I've added myself.

Bazaar, Worker's Village, Walled Village, Fortress, Mining Village, Plaza > Village, Border Village
Grand Market, Market, Treasury, Bazaar > Peddler
Grand Market > Market
Festival > Woodcutter, Nomad Camp
Goons > Militia
Alchemist, Trusty Steed > Laboratory
Expand, Butcher > Remodel
Count > Mandarin
Squire, Festival, University > Necropolis

Anyone want to edge case any of these, or add to the list?

So tell me... is there a case where Fortress is worse than Village?

You want to procession it then play a draw to x card afterwards.

That's no answer. You can easily draw to x anyway and then play Fortress to replace itself (or play the Fortress first, whatever). You'll have the same number of non-Fortress cards. But there is at least one edge case in the direction you were going: your hand is Procession, Library, Fortress/Village, and five junk cards. You'd like to upgrade via Procession, and then you desperately want to draw your Storeroom to recycle all this junk for coins. All the cards remaining in your deck are actions, so if you Procession Village and have seven cards left, you can use Library to home in on the one card you wanted; getting the Fortress back in your hand leaves you with eight cards and a dead Library.

Or, a more mundane edge case: you've built a BM/Smithy deck, and your opponent has used Ambassador (or Swindler, whatever) to give you a Fortress which is just getting in the way by drawing itself dead. Now he plays a Bishop: you'd rather your Fortress were a Village.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #180 on: June 24, 2014, 01:59:17 pm »
+1

Edge Case Level: Impressive.
Logged

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3120
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2285
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #181 on: June 24, 2014, 02:07:37 pm »
0

Ignoring universal edge cases and on-gain effects, but not on-trash effects, I came up with the following list: (ignoring Ruins and non-Action cards). This is mostly a compilation of things already mentioned in this thread with a few I've added myself.

Bazaar, Worker's Village, Walled Village, Fortress, Mining Village, Plaza > Village, Border Village
Grand Market, Market, Treasury, Bazaar > Peddler
Grand Market > Market
Festival > Woodcutter, Nomad Camp
Goons > Militia
Alchemist, Trusty Steed > Laboratory
Expand, Butcher > Remodel
Count > Mandarin
Squire, Festival, University > Necropolis

Anyone want to edge case any of these, or add to the list?

So tell me... is there a case where Fortress is worse than Village?

You want to procession it then play a draw to x card afterwards.

That's no answer. You can easily draw to x anyway and then play Fortress to replace itself (or play the Fortress first, whatever). You'll have the same number of non-Fortress cards. But there is at least one edge case in the direction you were going: your hand is Procession, Library, Fortress/Village, and five junk cards. You'd like to upgrade via Procession, and then you desperately want to draw your Storeroom to recycle all this junk for coins. All the cards remaining in your deck are actions, so if you Procession Village and have seven cards left, you can use Library to home in on the one card you wanted; getting the Fortress back in your hand leaves you with eight cards and a dead Library.

It was that type of situation I was talking about.  I thought that posting the simple answer would be enough.
Logged
If you're wondering what my avatar is, watch this.

Check out my logic puzzle blog!

   Quote from: sudgy on June 31, 2011, 11:47:46 pm

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6146
  • Respect: +6638
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #182 on: June 24, 2014, 10:59:33 pm »
0

Ignoring universal edge cases and on-gain effects, but not on-trash effects, I came up with the following list: (ignoring Ruins and non-Action cards). This is mostly a compilation of things already mentioned in this thread with a few I've added myself.

Bazaar, Worker's Village, Walled Village, Fortress, Mining Village, Plaza > Village, Border Village
Grand Market, Market, Treasury, Bazaar > Peddler
Grand Market > Market
Festival > Woodcutter, Nomad Camp
Goons > Militia
Alchemist, Trusty Steed > Laboratory
Expand, Butcher > Remodel
Count > Mandarin
Squire, Festival, University > Necropolis

Anyone want to edge case any of these, or add to the list?

So tell me... is there a case where Fortress is worse than Village?

You want to procession it then play a draw to x card afterwards.

That's no answer. You can easily draw to x anyway and then play Fortress to replace itself (or play the Fortress first, whatever). You'll have the same number of non-Fortress cards. But there is at least one edge case in the direction you were going: your hand is Procession, Library, Fortress/Village, and five junk cards. You'd like to upgrade via Procession, and then you desperately want to draw your Storeroom to recycle all this junk for coins. All the cards remaining in your deck are actions, so if you Procession Village and have seven cards left, you can use Library to home in on the one card you wanted; getting the Fortress back in your hand leaves you with eight cards and a dead Library.

It was that type of situation I was talking about.  I thought that posting the simple answer would be enough.

I think if you had said "Library" instead of "Draw to x", then it would have been enough. But Library is the only draw to x where it matters.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

jomini

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 914
  • Respect: +641
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #183 on: June 30, 2014, 05:12:48 pm »
0

Ignoring universal edge cases and on-gain effects, but not on-trash effects, I came up with the following list: (ignoring Ruins and non-Action cards). This is mostly a compilation of things already mentioned in this thread with a few I've added myself.

Bazaar, Worker's Village, Walled Village, Fortress, Mining Village, Plaza > Village, Border Village
Grand Market, Market, Treasury, Bazaar > Peddler
Grand Market > Market
Festival > Woodcutter, Nomad Camp
Goons > Militia
Alchemist, Trusty Steed > Laboratory
Expand, Butcher > Remodel
Count > Mandarin
Squire, Festival, University > Necropolis

Anyone want to edge case any of these, or add to the list?

So tell me... is there a case where Fortress is worse than Village?

Yes. Swindler. When Fortress is Swindled you can be forced to gain more Fortresses. This makes your deck larger over time and decreases the chance that Swindler will hit Prince/Peddler to get a mandatory province or reduces the odds that you will have some killer reaction card in hand over time.

E.g. You have a Feodum/Beggar setup. Your opponent swindles Feodums into Fortresses. He hits the first Fortress he gives you, you get a bonus new Fortress. Odds of your opponent triggering your Beggars go down with every Fortress added to the deck. Up until your opponent is forced to swindle a Fortress into a Feodum, you'd much rather have a higher concentration of Beggars than having more Fortresses.
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #184 on: June 30, 2014, 11:22:02 pm »
0

Ignoring universal edge cases and on-gain effects, but not on-trash effects, I came up with the following list: (ignoring Ruins and non-Action cards). This is mostly a compilation of things already mentioned in this thread with a few I've added myself.

Bazaar, Worker's Village, Walled Village, Fortress, Mining Village, Plaza > Village, Border Village
Grand Market, Market, Treasury, Bazaar > Peddler
Grand Market > Market
Festival > Woodcutter, Nomad Camp
Goons > Militia
Alchemist, Trusty Steed > Laboratory
Expand, Butcher > Remodel
Count > Mandarin
Squire, Festival, University > Necropolis

Anyone want to edge case any of these, or add to the list?

So tell me... is there a case where Fortress is worse than Village?

Yes. Swindler. When Fortress is Swindled you can be forced to gain more Fortresses. This makes your deck larger over time and decreases the chance that Swindler will hit Prince/Peddler to get a mandatory province or reduces the odds that you will have some killer reaction card in hand over time.

E.g. You have a Feodum/Beggar setup. Your opponent swindles Feodums into Fortresses. He hits the first Fortress he gives you, you get a bonus new Fortress. Odds of your opponent triggering your Beggars go down with every Fortress added to the deck. Up until your opponent is forced to swindle a Fortress into a Feodum, you'd much rather have a higher concentration of Beggars than having more Fortresses.

Edgy.
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1733
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #185 on: July 01, 2014, 07:30:58 am »
+1

Easier edge case (and also better, because the card is in hand and not in deck) is Rogue. You may want to avoid attacking with Rogue (because you would discard two Curses that your Rabbles let there). You have Forager in hand. You could trash Village and regain it with Rogue, but trashing Fortresses leaves the trash with nothing to gain, so you are forced to attack.

Menagerie is a reason to want a card out of your hand, and you can get rid of Village by trashing it, but not Fortress. But we were already ruling out Menagerie.
Logged

ehunt

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1333
  • Shuffle iT Username: ehunt
  • Respect: +1438
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #186 on: July 04, 2014, 11:51:46 am »
0

yall...
Logged

pacovf

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2949
  • Multiediting poster
  • Respect: +3243
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #187 on: July 04, 2014, 07:30:37 pm »
+1

Could someone make a list of all the "strictly better" found? I think we have:

walled/workers/mining village/bazaar/plaza > village > ruined library
grand market > market > peddler > ruined library
treasury/bazaar > peddler
festival > woodcutter > abandoned mine/ruined market
chancellor > abandoned mine
festival/university> necropolis > ruined village
level 3/2 city/alchemist/noble steed > laboratory (although cities have the problem of ambassador...)
expand/butcher> remodel
goons > militia
journeyman > smithy (... it does give some information to your opponent)
count > mandarin (unless black market and rogue/graverobber get involved, maybe? I can edit this out)

EDIT: oh hey, navical did this in the last post of page seven, now I feel smart and useful.
EDIT 2: I think it would be interesting to ignore taxman to compare the different treasures.
« Last Edit: July 04, 2014, 08:02:01 pm by pacovf »
Logged
pacovf has a neopets account.  It has 999 hours logged.  All his neopets are named "Jessica".  I guess that must be his ex.

Joseph2302

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 817
  • Shuffle iT Username: Joseph2302
  • "Better to be lucky than good"
  • Respect: +535
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #188 on: July 04, 2014, 07:37:00 pm »
+3

baker > peddler

No, not with black market, as the coin token from baker can't be spent in Black Market, but $1 from Peddler can.
Logged
Mafia Stats:
Town: 11 games, 5 wins
Scum: 3 games, 1 win

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #189 on: July 05, 2014, 04:05:37 pm »
0

baker > peddler

No, not with black market, as the coin token from baker can't be spent in Black Market, but $1 from Peddler can.

So does Highway>Peddler hold up?
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9103
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +8890
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #190 on: July 05, 2014, 05:10:43 pm »
0

baker > peddler

No, not with black market, as the coin token from baker can't be spent in Black Market, but $1 from Peddler can.

So does Highway>Peddler hold up?
No. It's possible that the Stonemason you want to overpay for already costs $0.

KingZog3

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3158
  • Respect: +1355
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #191 on: July 05, 2014, 05:11:46 pm »
0

baker > peddler

No, not with black market, as the coin token from baker can't be spent in Black Market, but $1 from Peddler can.

So does Highway>Peddler hold up?
No. It's possible that the Stonemason you want to overpay for already costs $0.

It still lowers the cost of the thing you gain to gain though.
Logged

silvern

  • Salvager
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 62
  • Respect: +81
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #192 on: July 05, 2014, 05:25:13 pm »
+2

baker > peddler

No, not with black market, as the coin token from baker can't be spent in Black Market, but $1 from Peddler can.

So does Highway>Peddler hold up?
Throne room/king's court/procession
Logged

amalloy

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 453
  • Respect: +612
    • View Profile
    • Twitch stream
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #193 on: July 05, 2014, 05:48:34 pm »
0

baker > peddler

No, not with black market, as the coin token from baker can't be spent in Black Market, but $1 from Peddler can.

So does Highway>Peddler hold up?
No. It's possible that the Stonemason you want to overpay for already costs $0.

It still lowers the cost of the thing you gain to gain though.

Right. And you can't overpay $0, which was the point. If you play Highway/Peddler/Copper, you can gain three Stonemasons for $2 and one buy. With Highway/Highway/Copper, you need three buys and $3.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3784
  • ♦ Twilight ♦
  • Respect: +1648
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #194 on: July 05, 2014, 07:06:44 pm »
0

that's actually one of the more relevant edge cases. I recall a bunch of games where I couldn't use the overpay because the card I wanted cost 0$

KingZog3

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3158
  • Respect: +1355
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #195 on: July 05, 2014, 10:20:22 pm »
0

baker > peddler

No, not with black market, as the coin token from baker can't be spent in Black Market, but $1 from Peddler can.

So does Highway>Peddler hold up?
No. It's possible that the Stonemason you want to overpay for already costs $0.

It still lowers the cost of the thing you gain to gain though.

Right. And you can't overpay $0, which was the point. If you play Highway/Peddler/Copper, you can gain three Stonemasons for $2 and one buy. With Highway/Highway/Copper, you need three buys and $3.

Right. I actually was thinking more that it doesn't matter if stonemason is $0, only if the other card is as well, since Awaclus said Stonemason costing zero.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9103
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +8890
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #196 on: July 05, 2014, 10:31:10 pm »
+1

baker > peddler

No, not with black market, as the coin token from baker can't be spent in Black Market, but $1 from Peddler can.

So does Highway>Peddler hold up?
No. It's possible that the Stonemason you want to overpay for already costs $0.

It still lowers the cost of the thing you gain to gain though.

Right. And you can't overpay $0, which was the point. If you play Highway/Peddler/Copper, you can gain three Stonemasons for $2 and one buy. With Highway/Highway/Copper, you need three buys and $3.

Right. I actually was thinking more that it doesn't matter if stonemason is $0, only if the other card is as well, since Awaclus said Stonemason costing zero.
I was originally going to write Masterpiece, then I realized that it's more relevant for Stonemason and changed the card, but forgot to change the rest of the sentence.

Jasoba

  • Alchemist
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 38
  • Respect: +53
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #197 on: July 08, 2014, 06:07:05 pm »
0

iso>goku?

meh edge case if you want to play with bots.
Logged

pacovf

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2949
  • Multiediting poster
  • Respect: +3243
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #198 on: July 08, 2014, 06:24:18 pm »
+7

iso>goku?

meh edge case if you want to play with bots.

That cannot be, iso 9000, while goku>9000
Logged
pacovf has a neopets account.  It has 999 hours logged.  All his neopets are named "Jessica".  I guess that must be his ex.

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #199 on: August 14, 2014, 12:58:52 pm »
0

So unless someone can convince me that there actually is a scenario where a player trying to win would rather not have to put a card on top of your deck, I'm sticking with the assertion that Scavenger is strictly better than Chancellor.

There are just some things that are always good, like virtual coins, coin tokens +buy, and +actions, without the presence of Possession, etc. of course.
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #200 on: August 14, 2014, 01:04:39 pm »
+1

Say my deck has 8 silver and two curses in it, and my discard has 8 curses. I would rather chancellor on the deck than scavenger there.
Logged

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1733
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #201 on: August 14, 2014, 01:09:34 pm »
+2

Say my deck has 8 silver and two curses in it, and my discard has 8 curses. I would rather chancellor on the deck than scavenger there.

You should have bought a Witch yourself.
Logged

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3120
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2285
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #202 on: August 14, 2014, 01:12:02 pm »
0

Say my deck has 8 silver and two curses in it, and my discard has 8 curses. I would rather chancellor on the deck than scavenger there.

You should have bought a Witch yourself.

I have tried my best, and lost the curse split 10-0.  It was familiar (edit: the card, not the situation :P) though, which makes more sense.  I still ended up winning :D
Logged
If you're wondering what my avatar is, watch this.

Check out my logic puzzle blog!

   Quote from: sudgy on June 31, 2011, 11:47:46 pm

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #203 on: August 14, 2014, 01:14:51 pm »
+1

Say my deck has 8 silver and two curses in it, and my discard has 8 curses. I would rather chancellor on the deck than scavenger there.

You should have bought a Witch yourself.
who cares about curses when I have chancellor and scavenger for cycling?
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #204 on: August 14, 2014, 01:33:12 pm »
0

Say my deck has 8 silver and two curses in it, and my discard has 8 curses. I would rather chancellor on the deck than scavenger there.

What would your respective plans/mindsets be if you had to use Chancellor and if you had to use Scavenger?
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #205 on: August 14, 2014, 01:45:03 pm »
0

Say my deck has 8 silver and two curses in it, and my discard has 8 curses. I would rather chancellor on the deck than scavenger there.

What would your respective plans/mindsets be if you had to use Chancellor and if you had to use Scavenger?
I don't understand. The reason I want chancellor on the deck is because with scavenger I have to either discard good cards or put a curse on top of my deck.
Logged

amalloy

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 453
  • Respect: +612
    • View Profile
    • Twitch stream
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #206 on: August 14, 2014, 02:04:10 pm »
0

Say my deck has 8 silver and two curses in it, and my discard has 8 curses. I would rather chancellor on the deck than scavenger there.

What would your respective plans/mindsets be if you had to use Chancellor and if you had to use Scavenger?

Here's a more specific scenario. My hand is a Curse, three Coppers, and X, where X is Chancellor/Scavenger; my discard pile is just a single Curse, because my opponent played a Witch last turn. I would like to play my X so I can buy a Duchy. But the rest of my deck is entirely full of good cards, so I don't want to discard the deck and mix all these bad cards (including my new Duchy) in. But if X is Scavenger, I still have to top a Curse for no reason.
Logged

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #207 on: August 14, 2014, 02:05:41 pm »
0

Say my deck has 8 silver and two curses in it, and my discard has 8 curses. I would rather chancellor on the deck than scavenger there.

What would your respective plans/mindsets be if you had to use Chancellor and if you had to use Scavenger?

Here's a more specific scenario. My hand is a Curse, three Coppers, and X, where X is Chancellor/Scavenger; my discard pile is just a single Curse, because my opponent played a Witch last turn. I would like to play my X so I can buy a Duchy. But the rest of my deck is entirely full of good cards, so I don't want to discard the deck and mix all these bad cards (including my new Duchy) in. But if X is Scavenger, I still have to top a Curse for no reason.
right, but he asked about topdecking, so I gave a scenario where you get something equivalent to what you said no matter what.
Logged

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #208 on: August 14, 2014, 02:06:23 pm »
0

also if your discard pile is just a single curse you probably are willing to discard your deck
Logged

amalloy

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 453
  • Respect: +612
    • View Profile
    • Twitch stream
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #209 on: August 14, 2014, 02:13:19 pm »
0

also if your discard pile is just a single curse you probably are willing to discard your deck

No, because (as I mentioned in my example) you're also shuffling in your awful hand and the Duchy you're buying, if you discard your deck. That's a lot worse than just one card. But whatever; you can put nine Curses in the discard and have the same situation but even more so.
Logged

theJester

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 107
  • Respect: +86
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #210 on: August 25, 2014, 07:57:31 am »
0

Ignoring universal edge cases and on-gain effects, but not on-trash effects, I came up with the following list: (ignoring Ruins and non-Action cards). This is mostly a compilation of things already mentioned in this thread with a few I've added myself.

Bazaar, Worker's Village, Walled Village, Mining Village, Plaza > Village, Border Village
Grand Market, Market, Treasury, Bazaar > Peddler
Grand Market > Market
Festival > Woodcutter, Nomad Camp
Goons > Militia
Alchemist, Trusty Steed > Laboratory
Expand, Butcher > Remodel
Count > Mandarin
Festival, University > Necropolis

Anyone want to edge case any of these, or add to the list?

edit: removed Fortress, as discussed further down, and  Squire, which clearly has a potential on-trash penalty (e.g. hit by Swindler with Swindlers and Curses out, only other attack on the board is Sea Hag).

Scrying Pool > Spy
if we're talking purely about "action" part of the card, then Oracle>Moat, Steward > Moat and Fishing Village > Lighthouse
as mentioned, Journeyman/Catacombs > Smithy

And I'm not sure if these are included into universal edge cases, but Peddler works way better with trash for benefit cards than Market, Treasury, GM and Bazaar. For example, it can easily be Butchered into a Province, Expanded into a Colony, Salvaged for 8 coins, Apprentice for +8 cards etc.

Logged

ehunt

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1333
  • Shuffle iT Username: ehunt
  • Respect: +1438
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #211 on: August 25, 2014, 08:00:13 am »
+2

if we're talking purely about "action" part of the card, then Oracle>Moat, Steward > Moat and Fishing Village > Lighthouse
as mentioned, Journeyman/Catacombs > Smithy

And I'm not sure if these are included into universal edge cases, but Peddler works way better with trash for benefit cards than Market, Treasury, GM and Bazaar. For example, it can easily be Butchered into a Province, Expanded into a Colony, Salvaged for 8 coins, Apprentice for +8 cards etc.

Oracle > Moat can be edge-cased as the Oracle attack can help your opponent (say for instance opponent's deck is, in order, Estate Gold Gold Gold, and opponent has 5 money and a cantrip in hand).
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9103
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +8890
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #212 on: August 25, 2014, 08:23:22 am »
+4

Scrying Pool > Spy
Edge case: You have $8 already, the top card is an Estate. Spy lets you know what the card underneath the Estate is before you have to decide if you want it in your next hand or not, Scrying Pool doesn't.

Holger

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 383
  • Respect: +178
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #213 on: August 25, 2014, 02:49:11 pm »
+2

So unless someone can convince me that there actually is a scenario where a player trying to win would rather not have to put a card on top of your deck, I'm sticking with the assertion that Scavenger is strictly better than Chancellor.

Apart from what was mentioned above, such a scenario happens regularly in the early game: When I open Scavenger/X and the two cards collide on T3, I certainly don't want to topdeck a Copper or Estate, but there's nothing else in the discard.
Logged

Joseph2302

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 817
  • Shuffle iT Username: Joseph2302
  • "Better to be lucky than good"
  • Respect: +535
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #214 on: August 25, 2014, 04:30:55 pm »
0

So unless someone can convince me that there actually is a scenario where a player trying to win would rather not have to put a card on top of your deck, I'm sticking with the assertion that Scavenger is strictly better than Chancellor.

Apart from what was mentioned above, such a scenario happens regularly in the early game: When I open Scavenger/X and the two cards collide on T3, I certainly don't want to topdeck a Copper or Estate, but there's nothing else in the discard.

http://www.gokosalvager.com/static/logprettifier.html?20140823/log.5062f3dc51c3843e7939eb9f.1408832404984.txt Turn 3
Logged
Mafia Stats:
Town: 11 games, 5 wins
Scum: 3 games, 1 win

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #215 on: October 02, 2014, 04:08:46 am »
0

When does Mystic become worse than GM? Just give me a specific scenario. And for Kings Court > Throne Room as well.
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #216 on: October 02, 2014, 04:28:32 am »
+1

When does Mystic become worse than GM? Just give me a specific scenario. And for Kings Court > Throne Room as well.

Mystic < GM when you want to be sure to draw a card or want to have +Buy... KC > TR when you want to play a card one extra time....

Or maybe you actually mean, when is Mystic better and when is TR > KC.  For both, you can create scenarios with reshuffles.

Mystic > GM when there is 1 card left in your deck, you don't want to trigger a reshuffle and you have it in hand with TR.  TR-GM would cause a reshuffle, but TR-Mystic would not if you purposefully name an impossible card both times.

TR > KC when you play it on a draw card and KC would cause an unwanted shuffle on the third play.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6146
  • Respect: +6638
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #217 on: October 02, 2014, 09:58:27 am »
+1

When does Mystic become worse than GM? Just give me a specific scenario. And for Kings Court > Throne Room as well.

Mystic < GM when you want to be sure to draw a card or want to have +Buy... KC > TR when you want to play a card one extra time....

Or maybe you actually mean, when is Mystic better and when is TR > KC.  For both, you can create scenarios with reshuffles.

Mystic > GM when there is 1 card left in your deck, you don't want to trigger a reshuffle and you have it in hand with TR.  TR-GM would cause a reshuffle, but TR-Mystic would not if you purposefully name an impossible card both times.

TR > KC when you play it on a draw card and KC would cause an unwanted shuffle on the third play.

Actually with TR+Mystic, you can name the correct card the second time without triggering the reshuffle.

With TR > KC, you might have 2 bad cards and a trasher in hand; you don't want to play the trasher 3 times.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9103
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +8890
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #218 on: October 02, 2014, 10:07:47 am »
+1

TR is also better than KC whenever you "don't care" which one you have (for example, when you have Silver, Copper, Copper, Militia, TR in hand and you're going to buy a Province that turn), because it doesn't have "may" so you can't misclick!

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1733
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #219 on: October 02, 2014, 11:22:00 am »
0

Even without reshuffle considerations, if you have Mountebank and 3 Coppers, TR is enough to buy the last Province and win, while KC may give the opponent the extra cards to pump up his 8 Gardens and make you lose the game, Province or no Province. There are also scenarios in which you would like to play Beggar twice but not three times (you want $6 now, but not the extra unnecessary Copper), scenarios in which you want to play any forced trasher a specific number of times (Trade Route or Forager for cash would not even be that edgy).

Some other Attacks that junk can deplete piles if you play them more than necessary. Also, stacking too many plays of any gainer may be bad for your deck and/or your pile status.
« Last Edit: October 02, 2014, 11:23:47 am by soulnet »
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #220 on: October 02, 2014, 11:27:04 am »
+2

TR is also better than KC whenever you "don't care" which one you have (for example, when you have Silver, Copper, Copper, Militia, TR in hand and you're going to buy a Province that turn), because it doesn't have "may" so you can't misclick!

Plus, maybe you just don't want the analysis paralysis of deciding whether or not to actually play your Action, so you play Throne Room and let Throne Room make the decision for you.
Logged

Hydrad

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 141
  • Respect: +104
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #221 on: October 02, 2014, 11:33:29 am »
0

When does Mystic become worse than GM? Just give me a specific scenario. And for Kings Court > Throne Room as well.

Mystic < GM when you want to be sure to draw a card or want to have +Buy... KC > TR when you want to play a card one extra time....

Or maybe you actually mean, when is Mystic better and when is TR > KC.  For both, you can create scenarios with reshuffles.

Mystic > GM when there is 1 card left in your deck, you don't want to trigger a reshuffle and you have it in hand with TR.  TR-GM would cause a reshuffle, but TR-Mystic would not if you purposefully name an impossible card both times.

TR > KC when you play it on a draw card and KC would cause an unwanted shuffle on the third play.

Actually with TR+Mystic, you can name the correct card the second time without triggering the reshuffle.


How does this work? if there is nothing in your deck and you name a card. even if you name a impossible card don't you have to shuffle your discard pile into the deck so that you can reveal the card?
Logged
For anyone else, such a statement would be a scum tell.  For Hydrad, it's simply a tell that you're reading something from Hydrad.

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #222 on: October 02, 2014, 11:34:49 am »
0

When does Mystic become worse than GM? Just give me a specific scenario. And for Kings Court > Throne Room as well.

Mystic < GM when you want to be sure to draw a card or want to have +Buy... KC > TR when you want to play a card one extra time....

Or maybe you actually mean, when is Mystic better and when is TR > KC.  For both, you can create scenarios with reshuffles.

Mystic > GM when there is 1 card left in your deck, you don't want to trigger a reshuffle and you have it in hand with TR.  TR-GM would cause a reshuffle, but TR-Mystic would not if you purposefully name an impossible card both times.

TR > KC when you play it on a draw card and KC would cause an unwanted shuffle on the third play.

Actually with TR+Mystic, you can name the correct card the second time without triggering the reshuffle.


How does this work? if there is nothing in your deck and you name a card. even if you name a impossible card don't you have to shuffle your discard pile into the deck so that you can reveal the card?

There is one card left.. you look at it, don't draw it with Mystic.  Grand Market makes you draw it, and then draw another one on the next play.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3784
  • ♦ Twilight ♦
  • Respect: +1648
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #223 on: October 02, 2014, 11:35:55 am »
0

there is one card in your draw pile. you play TR, Mystic, Mystic. For the first Mystic, you name scout. The card flips Copper. For the second Mystic, you name Copper. The card flips Copper, and you put it in your hand. Now your draw pile is empty, and you didn't reshuffle.

PPE WW :c

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1733
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #224 on: October 02, 2014, 11:40:32 am »
+2

there is one card in your draw pile. you play TR, Mystic, Mystic. For the first Mystic, you name scout. The card flips Copper. For the second Mystic, you name Copper. The card flips Copper, and you put it in your hand. Now your draw pile is empty, and you didn't reshuffle.

That example is wrong. As soon as you name Scout, Robz's ghost appears and takes away all your Dominion boxes while saying "that's why you can't have nice things". So, you never get to play Mystic for the second time.
Logged

Hydrad

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 141
  • Respect: +104
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #225 on: October 02, 2014, 11:42:04 am »
0

Ah I misunderstood. I thought he was saying something like if you guess it right twice it won't trigger the shuffle. Thanks
Logged
For anyone else, such a statement would be a scum tell.  For Hydrad, it's simply a tell that you're reading something from Hydrad.

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #226 on: October 02, 2014, 04:25:48 pm »
0

I think this whole list dissolved down to these concrete comparisons (ignoring cost, as stated) that I can remember from this thread:

Goons>Militia
Expand>Remodel
Nobles>Necropolis (sure there is an edge case here)
Walled Village, Worker's Village, Bazaar, etc.>Village
Bazaar, Market, GM>Peddler

...And possibly Diadem>Copper,Silver

Am I wrong with the last one?
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

Polk5440

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1590
  • Respect: +1534
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #227 on: October 02, 2014, 04:29:50 pm »
0


...And possibly Diadem>Copper,Silver

Am I wrong with the last one?

Counting House doesn't work on Diadem....

But if you are comparing Copper in hand to Diadem in hand, then Coppersmith.
Logged

amalloy

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 453
  • Respect: +612
    • View Profile
    • Twitch stream
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #228 on: October 02, 2014, 04:31:36 pm »
0

I think this whole list dissolved down to these concrete comparisons (ignoring cost, as stated) that I can remember from this thread:

Goons>Militia
Expand>Remodel
Nobles>Necropolis (sure there is an edge case here)
Walled Village, Worker's Village, Bazaar, etc.>Village
Bazaar, Market, GM>Peddler

...And possibly Diadem>Copper,Silver

Am I wrong with the last one?

I'd rather have a Necropolis in my deck than a Nobles if my opponent is playing Tribute. In hand, I'd prefer a Necropolis if I need to play Crossroads for actions but don't want to trigger a shuffle (Edit okay this one makes no sense I can just play the Nobles for actions first). The list goes on.

And there was a generic edge case for Treasures already: because of Taxman, no Treasure is ever strictly better than another: if what I really need is to force my opponent to discard a Silver, then having a Diadem does me no good.
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #229 on: October 03, 2014, 04:45:52 am »
0

Followers>Witch, entertain me with an edge case.
Noble Steed > Laboratory, no edge case here.
Hunting Grounds > Smithy, probably an edge case.
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

Zappie

  • Thief
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 95
  • Respect: +44
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #230 on: October 03, 2014, 04:56:16 am »
+1

Followers grap(s) the last estate, causing you to lose on a three pile ending.
HG smithy is like a lot of other cards that force a bad reshuffle. In this case,it can also be trashed by knight, forcing you to draw green.

Noble steed is a name i like a lot.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9103
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +8890
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #231 on: October 03, 2014, 05:07:08 am »
+2

Followers>Witch, entertain me with an edge case.
You don't want the Estate in your deck? Actually, that's pretty much every time so it probably doesn't count as an edge case.

silverspawn

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3784
  • ♦ Twilight ♦
  • Respect: +1648
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #232 on: October 03, 2014, 05:10:05 am »
0

You could probably rule out a lot of examples by thinking about them a little, especially when the edgecase is really obvious like it is for followers. even the discard can totally be an advantage for draw-to-x, menagerie

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1733
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #233 on: October 03, 2014, 11:47:36 am »
+1

You could probably rule out a lot of examples by thinking about them a little, especially when the edgecase is really obvious like it is for followers. even the discard can totally be an advantage for draw-to-x, menagerie

Not everyone is as smart as you.
Logged

Polk5440

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1590
  • Respect: +1534
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #234 on: October 03, 2014, 01:28:20 pm »
0

You could probably rule out a lot of examples by thinking about them a little, especially when the edgecase is really obvious like it is for followers. even the discard can totally be an advantage for draw-to-x, menagerie

Not everyone is as smart into Dominion as you.
Logged

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3120
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2285
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #235 on: October 03, 2014, 01:44:31 pm »
0

Noble Steed > Laboratory, no edge case here.

I feel like there has to be something with something like Black Market+Diadem+Poor House, but I can't think of anything yet...
Logged
If you're wondering what my avatar is, watch this.

Check out my logic puzzle blog!

   Quote from: sudgy on June 31, 2011, 11:47:46 pm

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #236 on: October 03, 2014, 01:49:12 pm »
0

Diadem>Masterpiece

As already discussed, Taxman.  For this specific case, there's also Mint (can't mint a Diadem).




In order for A > B to be true (barring the universal edge cases), we need these to be true:

1. A and B share the same card types, which matters for Tribute and Jester.
2. A and B are not Treasure cards, which matters for Taxman.
3. A can do everything that B does, or else you will sometimes prefer B to do its special thing.
4. A does not force you to do anything that B doesn't also.

3 prevents a coin token card from being better than a standard virtual coin card, because you may prefer the virtual coin when using Black Market.  Same goes for a card B that has you discard when card A doesn't, due to Tunnel.

4 covers a lot of stuff you might not expect.  If it forces you to draw or even reveal an extra card, that can be undesirable for reshuffle considerations.  If it forces you to attack, that can be bad because your opponents may have reactions that benefit them.  If it forces you to play an extra card or to topdeck something, well there are situations where you don't want those things either.

4 doesn't cover extra coins (virtual or token), because having more money to spend never hurts you.  It doesn't cover extra buys or actions for the same reason.

I posted this checklist much earlier in the thread.  It should help you, Flip5ide.

Trusty Steed > Laboratory passes these tests.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3784
  • ♦ Twilight ♦
  • Respect: +1648
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #237 on: October 03, 2014, 03:28:22 pm »
+3

how about a card that doesn't ignore the universal edge case? even if two cards cost the same, and have the same name, the better card could still be bad for the fact that it  makes your opponent buy it incorrectly. or, your opponent will discard the better card with his spy, but he will let you keep the weak card, even though it's correct play to discard either.

so, you need a card that's better without anyone realizing it. silently replace great hall in a game with a great hall. the great hall has "+1 Card, +1 Action, worth 1VP" It also has "+1 VP" on play, but that's not printed on the card. You also can't let the players know what changed at the end of the game, because that might affect their psyche for the next game. because the new card has to look exactly like the old card anyway, you don't even have to design a new one. just switch them without doing anything. if a player wins by this effect, which is reasonably likely, he won't ever know. but you will know. He will have won. at least, in your head. because great hall is strictly!!!!! better than great hall.

amalloy

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 453
  • Respect: +612
    • View Profile
    • Twitch stream
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #238 on: October 03, 2014, 03:56:27 pm »
+6

how about a card that doesn't ignore the universal edge case? even if two cards cost the same, and have the same name, the better card could still be bad for the fact that it  makes your opponent buy it incorrectly. or, your opponent will discard the better card with his spy, but he will let you keep the weak card, even though it's correct play to discard either.

so, you need a card that's better without anyone realizing it. silently replace great hall in a game with a great hall. the great hall has "+1 Card, +1 Action, worth 1VP" It also has "+1 VP" on play, but that's not printed on the card. You also can't let the players know what changed at the end of the game, because that might affect their psyche for the next game. because the new card has to look exactly like the old card anyway, you don't even have to design a new one. just switch them without doing anything. if a player wins by this effect, which is reasonably likely, he won't ever know. but you will know. He will have won. at least, in your head. because great hall is strictly!!!!! better than great hall.

What...?
Logged

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #239 on: October 04, 2014, 07:47:46 am »
0

You could probably rule out a lot of examples by thinking about them a little, especially when the edgecase is really obvious like it is for followers. even the discard can totally be an advantage for draw-to-x, menagerie

I literally just posted those examples to keep the thread going. Feigning ignorance a little.
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #240 on: October 04, 2014, 02:24:50 pm »
+2

You could probably rule out a lot of examples by thinking about them a little, especially when the edgecase is really obvious like it is for followers. even the discard can totally be an advantage for draw-to-x, menagerie

I literally just posted those examples to keep the thread going. Feigning ignorance a little.

Why? If the thread has run its course, let it die peacefully.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3784
  • ♦ Twilight ♦
  • Respect: +1648
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #241 on: October 04, 2014, 02:40:48 pm »
0

actually, my example doesn't work because of masquerade/rogue trash->gain. the +1 VP needs to be on buy instead, then it should be perfect.

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #242 on: October 05, 2014, 12:10:32 am »
0

You could probably rule out a lot of examples by thinking about them a little, especially when the edgecase is really obvious like it is for followers. even the discard can totally be an advantage for draw-to-x, menagerie

I literally just posted those examples to keep the thread going. Feigning ignorance a little.

Why? If the thread has run its course, let it die peacefully.

.... RIP thread
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +134
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #243 on: February 26, 2015, 05:34:36 am »
0

I just said that cards can't be strictly better if they don't share the same type.  The reason they can't be strictly better is because there are lots of cards that care about type, so there are situations when you would, for example, prefer to have a Curse to a Copper.

It is possible there is a type pairing that doesn't actually matter, but I can't think of anything at the moment.

What is a plausible edge case where you would prefer a curse to a copper, barring Fairgrounds, Masquerade, etc.?
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9103
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +8890
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #244 on: February 26, 2015, 05:51:28 am »
0

I just said that cards can't be strictly better if they don't share the same type.  The reason they can't be strictly better is because there are lots of cards that care about type, so there are situations when you would, for example, prefer to have a Curse to a Copper.

It is possible there is a type pairing that doesn't actually matter, but I can't think of anything at the moment.

What is a plausible edge case where you would prefer a curse to a copper, barring Fairgrounds, Masquerade, etc.?

I frequently trash Coppers over Curses in Mountebank games.

Deadlock39

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1645
  • Respect: +1607
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #245 on: February 26, 2015, 11:40:57 am »
+1

I just said that cards can't be strictly better if they don't share the same type.  The reason they can't be strictly better is because there are lots of cards that care about type, so there are situations when you would, for example, prefer to have a Curse to a Copper.

It is possible there is a type pairing that doesn't actually matter, but I can't think of anything at the moment.

What is a plausible edge case where you would prefer a curse to a copper, barring Fairgrounds, Masquerade, etc.?

I mean, this is a question about what is and isn't allowed for this definition. 

I think it is reasonable to restrict cases where the only reason you want one card over another is because it is a different card (Fairgrounds, Menagerie, ect) This is an obvious restriction because you aren't really preferring B over A, but rather preferring anything that is not A over A.

I think it is also reasonable to restrict cases where you want a worse card. (Possession, Masquerade, Opponent's Tribute, Ect.) I don't even think this case has any merit, because it isn't describing a case where card B is better than card A, but rather just a situation where you happen to prefer the card that is worse.  (This should really cover situations where you would prefer to draw less cards due to shuffle timing also.)

The grey area is regarding cards that care about specific cards or types of cards.  Does Tournament's existence make a VP card that costs $8 and is worth 7VP not strictly better than Province?  I think people will have differing opinions here.  If you don't think this one counts, then Awaclus' example doesn't either.  Personally I think everything within the scope of the official cards is fair game outside of the above exclusions.  Off the top of my head, Poor House is another reason to prefer Curse over Copper.

I think the only worthwhile discussion here is what is the point of "strictly better" in the first place. "Strictly better" is usually part of discussing how to properly price fan cards. If your card is strictly better than Laboratory (+2 cards +2 actions) you probably need to price it higher than $5 or add some sort of penalty.

But... Does this have any merit that "almost strictly better" doesn't.  Probably not beyond puzzle threads like this one.  No one is going to say that the  $8/7VP Super Province is a good card just because you might prefer Province on a Tournament board.

So what's my point... I don't know anymore. Somehow I got into an argument about "strictly better".  My opponents have the opinion (I think) that Copper is strictly better than Curse because the edge cases are too insignificant. My opinion is that strictly means no edge cases. Ultimately Witherweaver suggested that "not having another strictly better discussion is strictly better than having one" which I can certainly agree with.

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9103
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +8890
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #246 on: February 26, 2015, 11:45:25 am »
+1

I don't even think this case has any merit, because it isn't describing a case where card B is better than card A, but rather just a situation where you happen to prefer the card that is worse.  (This should really cover situations where you would prefer to draw less cards due to shuffle timing also.)

But how do you define "better"?

Deadlock39

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1645
  • Respect: +1607
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #247 on: February 26, 2015, 12:05:06 pm »
0

Better

Edit: In all seriousness, I don't think my statement there is that complicated or confusing.  I don't think those so called "Edge Cases" have merit.  This is the same as saying Colony is better than Estate - Edge Case: it is in my opponents deck! No, the Estate isn't "better", it is "better" for me if my opponent has the card that is not "better".  It does not change the relative worth of the two cards, it only describes a scenario where the worse card is preferred.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2015, 12:15:10 pm by Deadlock39 »
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9103
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +8890
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #248 on: February 26, 2015, 12:08:27 pm »
0

Better

How do you apply those definitions to Dominion?

polot38

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 51
  • Respect: +34
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #249 on: February 26, 2015, 12:26:28 pm »
+1

Mandarin and Count.

Notice that the question was about which one was strictly better to have in your hand, and the only thing that makes count not strictly superior to mandarin is mandarins on-buy effect.

There are also obvious ones, like expand/remodel.

Also, depending on what you mean by "ignoring prices", peddler and market.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2015, 12:30:12 pm by polot38 »
Logged

Rubby

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 170
  • Respect: +318
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #250 on: February 26, 2015, 09:14:43 pm »
+13

So here's something I put together showing what's strictly better than what among official Action cards with vanilla on-play effects (and choices of vanilla on-play effects), considering ONLY on-play effects and ignoring edge cases.

Relevant to recent debates here? Not especially.

Useful? Not really.

Mildly interesting to look at? Sort of, maybe!

« Last Edit: October 02, 2015, 11:45:45 pm by Rubby »
Logged

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3120
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2285
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #251 on: February 26, 2015, 09:29:30 pm »
+3

So here's something I put together showing what's strictly better than what among official Action cards with vanilla on-play effects (and choices of vanilla on-play effects), considering ONLY on-play effects and ignoring edge cases.

Relevant to recent debates here? Not especially.

Useful? Not really.

Mildly interesting to look at? Sort of, maybe!



Worker's Village is strictly better than Village.
Logged
If you're wondering what my avatar is, watch this.

Check out my logic puzzle blog!

   Quote from: sudgy on June 31, 2011, 11:47:46 pm

Rubby

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 170
  • Respect: +318
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #252 on: February 26, 2015, 10:01:55 pm »
0

Worker's Village is strictly better than Village.

Good catch - fixed.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9077
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #253 on: February 26, 2015, 10:35:44 pm »
0

Worker's Village is strictly better than Village.

Good catch - fixed.

I don't see Count > Mandarin, which should be included if you are only considering on-play effects.

You might want to specify which edge cases you are excluding.

Edit: Great Hall should probably have many more lines going to it.  You're missing Pearl Diver and Vagrant, just to name a couple.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2015, 10:37:49 pm by eHalcyon »
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6215
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7413
    • View Profile
Re: Strictly better than....
« Reply #254 on: February 26, 2015, 10:40:01 pm »
0

And, of course, we've talked about how Ruins are better than their counterparts.
Logged

AJD

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2649
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +2932
    • View Profile