Print

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

[Octo]

Hm. Ok, cool. Thanks.

[rinkworks]

But the point is, that stuff is AFTER you make the first big leap of understanding that it's not "Governor gives me 2 Labs and him 1 Lab, so it's awesome."  It's "Governor gives me 2 Labs and him 1 Lab plus whatever he bought instead of Governor."

Wait, what?  You can't factor what your opponent bought instead of Governor into the equation.  Because your opponent will buy something that turn no matter WHAT you buy.  As far as I can tell, you're saying this:

1. You buy Governor, giving yourself two Labs, and your opponent one Lab.
2. Opponent buys Lab.
3. Ergo, Governor sucks, because this is just equal all around.

But isn't this an equivalent argument?:

1. You buy one Lab.
2. Opponent buys Lab.
3. Ergo, Lab sucks, because this is just equal all around.

1. You buy Mountebank.
2. Opponent buys Mountebank.
3. Mountebank sucks, too.  No advantage here either.

[DStu]

I don't think anybody says it sucks. Bishop, CR, Vault, Governor all do not suck. But they are not just two Labs with a little help for your opponent, but, all in all nets you about a $5 card advantage compared to your opponent, which, as it is a $5 card, is about as much as you would expect.

So you really should think if you really need the power of two Labs, and how much, and how much your opponent needs the power of one Lab, and what you can do with the other options of the Governor. And Epoch's reasoning was, I think, that if you have no +Buy, so just can buy one Province/Colony, and have no other options to/don't think about remodel(ing) some VPs [which is kind of strange if you play Governor, as Governor by itself (for remodel) is a card that likes large handsizes] or whatever to really profit from the larger handsize other than pushing $7->$11 for Province, maybe the extra Lab that both of you get is helping him more than you.

[Epoch]

Wait, what?  You can't factor what your opponent bought instead of Governor into the equation.  Because your opponent will buy something that turn no matter WHAT you buy.  As far as I can tell, you're saying this:

1. You buy Governor, giving yourself two Labs, and your opponent one Lab.
2. Opponent buys Lab.
3. Ergo, Governor sucks, because this is just equal all around.

But isn't this an equivalent argument?:

1. You buy one Lab.
2. Opponent buys Lab.
3. Ergo, Lab sucks, because this is just equal all around.

1. You buy Mountebank.
2. Opponent buys Mountebank.
3. Mountebank sucks, too.  No advantage here either.

I didn't say that Governor sucks.  In the message you actually quoted, I said twice that Governor doesn't suck.

But yeah, all of your examples are, you know, basically true.  You will not get an advantage on your opponent if they mirror-strategy you (besides possible luck advantages and first-player advantage).

So, on the one hand, that's kind of trivial, and on the other hand, it's important.  You don't get an advantage in Dominion by "buying some random card that gives me a bonus."  They all give you bonuses.  That's kind of obvious when you say it that way, but man, people's analyses sure do often look myopically at, "Well, I could see a situation where this card's bonus could be useful, so it must be a good card."

Let's actually put it another way.  If you buy a Governor that you intend to use with the Labs option, you've bought yourself 2 Labs, and if your opponent buys a card that's a payload, they've effectively bought a Lab + a payload.  Which do you think is better, a fast-developing lab deck without a payload, or a fast-developing lab deck with a payload?

[jotheonah]

Another way to think about it. Imagine Governor without the benefits to your opponent. It would be an amazing card. It would be a choice between a better Lab (a five-coster), Remodel with a +action (a four-coster), and Bag of Gold, a card so good it's not even in the supply.  I would never not buy this card for 5. I would probably buy it for 6, and even 7. It would be one of those cards that would provoke a race to empty the supply. Because with the plus action and the plus card option you could just spam it endlessly, fill your deck with Gold, and then Remodel those Golds into Provinces. It's a whole strategy in one card, or excellent support for almost any other.

So the benefits to everyone else exist to keep Governor from being that good. Because with the benefits, you're happy to use Governor once or twice for various things it's good for, but if you endlessly spammed it you would help your opponent(s) too much. They make you stop and think about whether each play of the card is really worth it.

Sidenote: Would that strategy actually work? Spamming the Governors?

[HiveMindEmulator]

Sidenote: Would that strategy actually work? Spamming the Governors?

Potentially...
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=1001.0
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=838.msg16918;topicseen#msg16918

[jotheonah]

Thank you. I knew it had to have been debated before.

[Fangz]

I guess it boils down to this: in what circumstances is a Lab a better buy than a Governor? Or, in what circumstances is it best to not give your opponent that extra card? Which I'm keen to know. (The implication seems to be that two 6s are better than one 7, so perhaps always. However, obviously Governor is more complex card than that which muddies the waters - no comparison is that perfect.) Note that playing a militia et al. at the end of a Governor chain is a kind of a moot point in this question, as the thread is about giving your opponent a boost, and if you militia them then, well, you're not really giving them that much of a boost (other than giving him a better choice of 3).

The main thing is that laboratory engines have a tendency to overshoot. And governor engines more so. An engine might one turn have you draw $12 worth of stuff, and then the next draw two provinces and nothing else. In the absence of oodles of cash and convenient +buy, it's more useful to distribute that handsize increase amongst your turns than have it all hit one particular one.

[Jimmmmm]

It would be a choice between a better Lab (a five-coster), Remodel with a +action (a four-coster), and Bag of Gold, a card so good it's not even in the supply.

Nitpick: the Governor Gold option is generally worse than Bag of Gold, since BoG puts them on your deck. On the other hand, Gold is usually much less valuable when it's late enough in the game to have a BoG.

[rinkworks]

I didn't say that Governor sucks.  In the message you actually quoted, I said twice that Governor doesn't suck.

Sorry about that.  I was fixating more on the argument than the conclusion.

Let's actually put it another way.  If you buy a Governor that you intend to use with the Labs option, you've bought yourself 2 Labs, and if your opponent buys a card that's a payload, they've effectively bought a Lab + a payload.  Which do you think is better, a fast-developing lab deck without a payload, or a fast-developing lab deck with a payload?

This is a terrific way to put it.  It suggests that if the Lab option on Governor is part of your plan, you might want to have the payload ready for it first.  Of course, your opponent doesn't know you're going to use the Lab option, but I suppose if you load up on payload cards and have weak drawing power otherwise, that's a tip-off.  Complicated card.