Print

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

[Dubdubdubdub]

This one may be obvious to most, but with these two cards on the board I win almost every time.

Menagerie is one of my favorite cards. I love building the engine around it that it needs. On its own, Menagerie isn't particularly fast; it should be assisted by all the other kingdom cards you're buying. With Hamlet around, that is not a problem.

Menagerie has 2 problems:
- your deck is full of coppers and estates, so it's hard to get all different cards in your hand (especially after drawing 3 cards from your first Menagerie).
- getting all this variety in cards often leads to a surplus of terminal actions. This is bad.

Hamlet solves both. Being able to discard up to 2 worthless cards from your hand makes your Menagerie hit almost every time. And the +buy and +action are almost always worth it. The action helps you play all the remodels and militias and bridges you draw, while the buy will at least get you another Hamlet (or new card you didn't have in your deck yet).
The discard ability also makes it viable to start buying Menageries earlier in the game. This is great: one of Menagerie's weaknesses is that it doesn't really fire off until mid-game. These cards were made for each other.

[barsooma]

I remember the Cornucopia cards first hit isotropic... this combo was the first I found and I was in love with it.
However, I think it's actually pretty weak and can easily be a trap.

Consider: to activate menagerie, you will need to play managerie, hamlet and usually discard at least one card... to draw 3 cards.
Unless you have something useful to do with those extra actions and buys, you're just spinning your wheels.

[brokoli]

Menagerie is my favorite card, and probably one of the most powerful. Hamlet + menagerie is an excellent combo. No, it isn't weak.
Hamlet doesn't require you to discard a card, because menagerie is a cantrip. You will just discard if you have copies of a same card, and this case is so rare !
And even if you have to discard, it isn't a problem.

Hamlet + Library is also a good combo.

[barsooma]

Menagerie is my favorite card, and probably one of the most powerful. Hamlet + menagerie is an excellent combo. No, it isn't weak.
Hamlet doesn't require you to discard a card, because menagerie is a cantrip. You will just discard if you have copies of a same card, and this case is so rare !
And even if you have to discard, it isn't a problem.

Hamlet + Library is also a good combo.

Yes, I know what the cards do.
My point is that the advantage of hamlet added to menagerie is that you can activate the menageries by discarding duplicates. But this means that you are losing one more card in order to get any advantage.

I'm not say that menagerie or hamlet are bad cards, and they do have some nice synergy, but in practice this combo is not nearly as appealing as it first appears, and is definitely not something you can base a deck around.

Compared to something like fishing village + torturer this hardly deserves the title of combo.

[jonts26]

I think this is actually something you can base your deck on. It just needs a little support. It works best with any easily spammable action that gives coin, especially cantrips to facilitate deck cycling. Something like conspirator with these two cards out is absolutely deadly.

[brokoli]

But this means that you are losing one more card in order to get any advantage.

Ok, I'll discard an estate or a province from my hand. Where is the problem ? And If I discard a copper, It's like a stable...
The fact is that often, you'll not need to discard (except with laboratories, caravan, ...). The hamlet is just a help, and will work normally.

With cards like Festival, Horse traders, fishing village, warehouse, and terminal silvers like mountebank, it's very good.

[barsooma]

But this means that you are losing one more card in order to get any advantage.

Ok, I'll discard an estate or a province from my hand. Where is the problem ? And If I discard a copper, It's like a stable...
The fact is that often, you'll not need to discard (except with laboratories, caravan, ...). The hamlet is just a help, and will work normally.

With cards like Festival, Horse traders, fishing village, warehouse, and terminal silvers like mountebank, it's very good.

The problem is you are using three cards (hamlet, menagerie, whatever you discard) in order to draw 3.
You're basically making a complicated, expensive village.

Sure it can work sometimes (the conspirator example seems particularly good), and if you have uses for those +actions and +buys then great. I just don't think it's anything to get too excited over.

[jotheonah]

Hamlet also draws a card. So you're playing two cards and discarding up to two unwanted cards for a total of four new cards. In the best case scenario, drawing-wise, you're up by 2 cards (played Hamlet and Menagerie, drew one from Hamlet and 3 from Menagerie). In the worst scenario, you're at the same number of cards you started with (minus Hamlet, Menagerie, and two discards, plus 4 drawn cards), only you've had a chance to get rid of two you didn't want (a Cellar-like ability) and you're up and action and a buy. So there's no scenario where you're "spinning your wheels." You've either gotten a non-terminal smithy or a Cellar/Warehouse effect combined with a Worker's Village.

[barsooma]

Hamlet also draws a card. So you're playing two cards and discarding up to two unwanted cards for a total of four new cards. In the best case scenario, drawing-wise, you're up by 2 cards (played Hamlet and Menagerie, drew one from Hamlet and 3 from Menagerie). In the worst scenario, you're at the same number of cards you started with (minus Hamlet, Menagerie, and two discards, plus 4 drawn cards), only you've had a chance to get rid of two you didn't want (a Cellar-like ability) and you're up and action and a buy. So there's no scenario where you're "spinning your wheels." You've either gotten a non-terminal smithy or a Cellar/Warehouse effect combined with a Worker's Village.

Good point, don't know what I was thinking there.

I guess I'm trying to come up for an explanation for what I know is true through experience: these two cards alone are not good.

They may enable a range of other combos, but seeing hamlet and menagerie on the board and buying them as a "combo" is a surefire road to defeat.

[Dubdubdubdub]

I didn't reply myself yet, because I couldn't come up with a good reason why I disagreed with you. I love Hamlet/Menagerie, and contrary to your experience it wins me a whole lot of games. So looking for a way to explain why they don't seem to work together all that well may not be necessary

For the record, how do you set this combo up? I usually start the engine by buying a silver and a good terminal card, then the hamlet and menagerie. This works very well if the terminal card is a cost $4 attack, like Militia. From then on, I will play it (and an increasing amount of different action cards) almost every turn.

[jotheonah]

Some people like to use "Combo" to mean two cards that, combined with treasure, win the game. Hunting Party combos demand a minimum of card types. But obviously this is just the opposite. If you're using Menagerie, you want to have a lot of different cards. Almost by definition this is just not going to net you a handful of Platinum.

So maybe it's better to say that Hamlet is a good lubricant to grease the temperamental engine card which is menagerie. As the OP says, Hamlet fixes the drawbacks of a Menagerie based strat: the fact that Menageries will "miss" when you have doubles in your hand and that you often end up with a lot of terminals and not enough +actions.

[Kirian]

I think the important thing about this "combo"--and as jotheonah notes, most people might not call it that but, frankly, I would think it is--is to look at the final outcome.

Best case:  After playing Hamlet, no duplicates in hand.  You get +1 action, +3 cards.  That's the same as two Labs, or a Stables without the discard.

Next case:  You have to discard a card.  You get to choose between +2 actions, +2 cards--a Level 2 City--or +1 action, +1 buy, +2 cards--equivalent to a Worker's Village plus a Moat.  But you get to choose between them--and you got to sift a card in the process.

Worst case:  You have to discard two cards.  You end with +2 actions, +1 buy, +1 card, equivalent to a Worker's Village.  But you also got to sift two cards in the process, which could be huge.  And to get forced into this, after playing Hamlet you need two pairs or a triple.

In other words, in many cases this is better than buying some of the better $5 cards out there.

Now, Menagerie can shine on its own with good trashing... but this gives Menagerie a chance without trashing, for only $2.

There's a reason Hamlet will likely be the best of the $2 cards when theory posts those, and Menagerie will likely be in the top 5 $3 cards.  Combining them can be really big.

[chwhite]

I guess I'm trying to come up for an explanation for what I know is true through experience: these two cards alone are not good.

Menagerie and hamlet are both, by themselves, incredibly good: useful enough to buy in the vast majority of setups, and a crucial element of game-winning engines in a large minority of games.  This is simply incorrect.

[barsooma]

I guess I'm trying to come up for an explanation for what I know is true through experience: these two cards alone are not good.

Menagerie and hamlet are both, by themselves, incredibly good: useful enough to buy in the vast majority of setups, and a crucial element of game-winning engines in a large minority of games.  This is simply incorrect.

Being a element of a game-winning engine is pretty much the opposite of being alone.
I'm not disputing that these are useful cards, but calling them a good combo is stretching things I think.
What I am trying to say is that if you tried something like BM + hamlet + menagerie (as a type of draw enhancement) you will get stomped.

[popsofctown]

Someone once challenged me to beat his Chapel, Bridge, Possession, King's Court, Laboratory subkingdom with my own set of any five cards in the game.  I ran Hamlet Menagerie and managed to win.  (after several tries with other strategies).

The deck cycles very quickly, don't miss that aspect.

[Dubdubdubdub]

What I am trying to say is that if you tried something like BM + hamlet + menagerie (as a type of draw enhancement) you will get stomped.

Now here is something we can agree on. When you have Hamlet/menagerie (and duplicates, possibly), they mainly serve to play a chain of different actions. I've never tried this with pure big money, but it doesn't sound good. In a province game, I would at least need to end up with 2 golds/silvers or 3 coppers, disregarding kingdom-treasures. This means I won't discard those with Hamlet if I draw them early on, making menagerie worthless.

About the word 'combo': it's a matter of semantics. I think you are right in the sense that these two cards alone won't win you the game. But they set up a certain kind of play that is similar every time (and different enough to stay entertaining). I named it so, because that way it would fit nicely in the 'Articles' section of this forum. I think wether or not my post should be considered an article is at least as debatable

[Geronimoo]

NOT calling this a combo is just silly... To me a combo is two cards that on their own are unspectacular, but when combined have an effect far greater than the sum of their parts. This is very much the case with Hamlet/Menagerie. Hamlet basically gives you a +buy if you'd play it on its own (which is unspectacular) and Menagerie will only draw 3 in a varied deck, then if you draw more Menageries it's unlikely they will do more than cycle (even in the deck made for it). The combo allows you to play Menagerie in an untrimmed deck AND when you draw 3 with it, the Hamlet will ensure subsequent plays of Menagerie will keep drawing 3.

To illustrate this, try the Goons/Menagerie bot in my simulator that buys only Menagerie, Hamlet and Goons (no Chapel or other trashers). It beats just about anything, even the Council Room/Goons bot which uses Chapel to set up.

[rinkworks]

I agree with those calling this a combo and also those saying that Hamlet and Menagerie probably aren't optimal on their own.  They don't have to suffice on their own to be a combo -- they merely have to complement each other and fuel each other up.

Menagerie on its own is a good card.  Hamlet adds value of its own (a source of extra actions and +buy) while making Menagerie work better by activating it whenever it fails to activate on own.  That's fantastic.

But of course you'd add more stuff to the deck.  You at least want to put a terminal in there, because you'll always be able to play one.  You may well want more, to make use of the extra actions Hamlet can give you.  Throw in a Witch, for example.  But the extra stuff can be anything.  Menagerie and Hamlet is the combo that keeps the deck rolling and enables you to play your supplemental components.

[Donald X.]

To me a combo is two cards that on their own are unspectacular, but when combined have an effect far greater than the sum of their parts.

So, for King's Court / Goons / Masquerade, are you going to say that it isn't a combo because it's three cards, or that it isn't a combo because the cards are spectacular, or are you going to say that those cards are in fact unspectacular or that the combined effect isn't greater than the sum of the parts?

"The whole is greater than the sum of the parts" is exactly how I define "combo," but obv. the parts can still be fantastic in isolation. For that matter the whole doesn't need to be far greater, just greater.

[WanderingWinder]

To me a combo is two cards that on their own are unspectacular, but when combined have an effect far greater than the sum of their parts.

So, for King's Court / Goons / Masquerade, are you going to say that it isn't a combo because it's three cards, or that it isn't a combo because the cards are spectacular, or are you going to say that those cards are in fact unspectacular or that the combined effect isn't greater than the sum of the parts?

"The whole is greater than the sum of the parts" is exactly how I define "combo," but obv. the parts can still be fantastic in isolation. For that matter the whole doesn't need to be far greater, just greater.

And I want to say that it does need to be significantly better. For me, cards can have positive synergy (together, they're greater than sum of the parts) without being combos per se. But probably more people go in line with your definition than mine.