Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 17  All

Author Topic: Strictly better than....  (Read 39211 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

KingZog3

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3160
  • 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: 1459
  • 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: 1459
  • 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: 9273
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +9022
    • 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: +9080
    • 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: 3855
  • ♦ Twilight ♦
  • Respect: +1666
    • 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: 614
  • Shuffle iT Username: yed
  • Respect: +564
    • 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: 9273
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +9022
    • 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
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3812
  • Respect: +2274
    • 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: +9080
    • 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: 6270
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7432
    • 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: 6270
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7432
    • 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: +9080
    • 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: 963
  • Respect: +1869
    • 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: +9080
    • 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: 3855
  • ♦ Twilight ♦
  • Respect: +1666
    • 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: 963
  • Respect: +1869
    • 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: 6270
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7432
    • 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: 6270
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7432
    • 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: +9080
    • 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
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 17  All
 

Page created in 0.098 seconds with 21 queries.