Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 17  All

Author Topic: Strictly better than....  (Read 111103 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2587
  • Respect: +2479
    • 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: +1751
    • 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: 3431
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2706
    • 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: 2587
  • Respect: +2479
    • 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: +136
    • 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: 2587
  • Respect: +2479
    • 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: +620
    • 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: 2587
  • Respect: +2479
    • 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: 2587
  • Respect: +2479
    • 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: +620
    • 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: +88
    • 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

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1528
  • Shuffle iT Username: ehunt
  • Respect: +1855
    • 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: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12848
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
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.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Holger

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 736
  • Respect: +458
    • 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
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 858
  • Shuffle iT Username: Joseph2302
  • "Better to be lucky than good"
  • Respect: +575
    • 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: (correct as of 2017)
Town: 22 games, 8 wins
Scum: 5 games, 3 wins

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +136
    • 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: +9187
    • 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: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • 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: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12848
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
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!
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1751
    • 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: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7861
    • 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: 142
  • Shuffle iT Username: Hidrad
  • Respect: +109
    • 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: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7861
    • 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

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3190
    • 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: +1751
    • 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
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 17  All
 

Page created in 0.057 seconds with 21 queries.