Print

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

[werothegreat]

Sure, if you have that golden hand of Scout and four Mystics, you're glad you bought the Scout, as it's essentially a Lab.  But even without the Scout, you're still buying a Province that turn anyway.

[Burning Skull]

[pubby]

I believe I have listed those cases, and with the amount of cards listed, there has to be at least a 10% chance that you'll buy Scout on any given board. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but Scout and it's 'listed cards' are there, 8 other cards may not be enough to beat Scout.

Lots of people on this forum, including myself, have tried designing kingdoms where Scout is good. The fact is, Scout doesn't work with only 1 combo; you need multiple. And even with multiple combos, it's not that good. At it's best, its draw is about as good as Advisor.

[JW]

Scout is gained by top players in 8.5% of pro (full random) games, and much of that is presumably accounted for by Vineyards, Fairgrounds and Swindler (or something like Ironworks-Forge where it is useful just as a $4 cost action) . Either top players are all wrong, or (much more likely) Scout is horrible.

Here is aggregate data from the tool on the top 20 players on Iso: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13mQ1humtQbPLY9nbKscR65dV7hbGPdI3AQkNjMHZpeM/pubhtml?gid=495443102&single=true

[Roadrunner7671]

(1) No, it's terrible.
(2) Why is this in "Articles"?

We had a pretty good conversation about Scout above, that might help you be a little more open-minded. Secondly, I don't know how to put it anywhere else besides Articles.

[Roadrunner7671]

Scout is gained by top players in 8.5% of pro (full random) games, and much of that is presumably accounted for by Vineyards, Fairgrounds and Swindler (or something like Ironworks-Forge where it is useful just as a $4 cost action) . Either top players are all wrong, or (much more likely) Scout is horrible.

Here is aggregate data from the tool on the top 20 players on Iso: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13mQ1humtQbPLY9nbKscR65dV7hbGPdI3AQkNjMHZpeM/pubhtml?gid=495443102&single=true

Or they might be building an amazing Scout engine. It's also possible that there were no combos for Scout, because I agree that Scout is bad if you pick it up but don't build a strategy around it.

[AJD]

I don't know how to put it anywhere else besides Articles.

On the forum home page, click on (for example) "Dominion General Discussion", and then on "New Topic".

The Articles section is for in-depth essays on strategic topics.

[Roadrunner7671]

Sure, if you have that golden hand of Scout and four Mystics, you're glad you bought the Scout, as it's essentially a Lab.  But even without the Scout, you're still buying a Province that turn anyway.

But with only 2 or 3 Mystics in your hand, then you're very happy you bought Scout!

[Roadrunner7671]

I don't know how to put it anywhere else besides Articles.

On the forum home page, click on (for example) "Dominion General Discussion", and then on "New Topic".

The Articles section is for in-depth essays on strategic topics.

Thanks! It hopefully won't happen again!

[LastFootnote]

I'm just going to come out and say it: I like Scout. It combos with a lot of things, and I personally do not think it's horrible.
1. It combos with Crossroads for a deck that can use Victory cards as draw.
2. It has a weak combo with Wishing Well.
3. Can defend against deck inspector attacks if they leave Victory Cards on top of your deck.
4. Can let you draw more cards with draw-to-x, and can control what those cards are.
5. Harem, Nobles, Great Hall, etc.
6. Can combo with discard cards like Oasis and Inn (you draw Victory cards then discard them).
7. Mystic, Mystic, Mystic!
That's my opinion, but I think a lot of these reasons make Scout a card that you could buy every once and a while, and benefit from it!

Scout can hurt most of these as much as it can help.

1. If Scout and Crossroads aren't in the same hand, Scout can take VP cards away from Crossroads.
2. If you didn't have Scout, you would already have an extra good card in hand even without guessing correctly on Wishing Well.
3. Usually not worth having the extra junk card in your deck.
4. It doesn't really.  Like 2, if you didn't have Scout you would have drawn that extra card anyway.  Worse, Scout can actually draw VP cards into your hand, weakening the draw-to-X.  Scout just forces the draw-to-X card to draw Victory cards first, then offer some minimal choice in the order which might not matter anyway if you draw it all.  Drawing the Victory cards first is usually not a good thing though, which makes this a huge nombo.
5. That's the dream, but it usually doesn't work out.
6. Same problem as 1.
7. Same problem as 2.

I mostly agree with you, eHalcyon, but not so much on the last three points.

5. Scout with multiple hybrid Victory cards can be worth it, but you need to have really trashed down.
6. Scout with Oasis and Inn (and Secret Chamber and Artificer etc.) is not anything like Scout with Crossroads. Crossroads actually becomes awful in a hand with no Victory cards, but these other cards are still doing fine work for you. Hand sifters and discard-for-benefit cards are definitely a combo with Scout.
7. Mystic/Scout it a legit combo. And by that I mean Mystic by itself should make you want Scout. If you haven't tried it yet, please do it before arguing this point.

Roadrunner, Scout is weak. Whether it's "bad" or "horrible" is a matter of semantics. That doesn't mean you never want to buy it, but it's rare that you do. With the exception of Mystic, no one thing on your list is strong enough to make Scout worth buying. It needs two or three before it starts being worthwhile. (And as mentioned, Crossroads and Draw-to-X are not combos with Scout.)

[Asper]

I had a deck once where my opponent went for Fortune Teller. I got an early Harem. I bought Scout. There were Shelters. Oh my, my Scout always drew my Harem when he played Fortune Teller, it's a combo!

Just that, no, any cantrip could have done that. And hey, i could have bought a Silver to have a Treasure worth $2 in my hand not only this, but also next turn. The weird thing is: Even without the Harem, it's no good. I play a Scout, now i exchanged it for the Estate/Duchy/whatever on top of my deck, awesome! Just that, no, that's what Fortune Teller's attack is in the first place - exchange one of my drawn cards with a useless VP card. I just made sure it happens now instead of next turn or after i play a drawing card.

That said, i don't mind Scout. It doesn't ruin games for me. Rebuild does that, and very very few other cards. Scout just means you have less options to look at. It's not that the card could never do something valuable, it's just that all of those options are absurdly constructed just for that ideal.

[Kirian]

We had a pretty good conversation about Scout above, that might help you be a little more open-minded.

Wow, you're right!  Five years of discussion of the merits of various Dominion cards, alone and in combination with others, have continuously shown that Scout is far below average even when accounting for amazing combos, but this thread changes everything!  My mind hasn't been this open since my brain surgery!

(I want to make it clear that this was sarcasm.  Sometimes trolls can't tell, or are intentionally obtuse.)

In the considered opinion of the community, Scout is in the bottom 10 percent of cards.  I think labeling it "horrible" is fair.  That's OK, though; Chancellor and Secret Chamber have their times to shine too.

----

The great news is, trolls can be reformed!  Take some time to read various articles and forum discussions.  You'll learn, and if you follow the same path as one former troll, you'll be better at Dominion than I am (which is, granted, not saying a lot any more).

[Roadrunner7671]

We had a pretty good conversation about Scout above, that might help you be a little more open-minded.

Wow, you're right!  Five years of discussion of the merits of various Dominion cards, alone and in combination with others, have continuously shown that Scout is far below average even when accounting for amazing combos, but this thread changes everything!  My mind hasn't been this open since my brain surgery!

(I want to make it clear that this was sarcasm.  Sometimes trolls can't tell, or are intentionally obtuse.)

In the considered opinion of the community, Scout is in the bottom 10 percent of cards.  I think labeling it "horrible" is fair.  That's OK, though; Chancellor and Secret Chamber have their times to shine too.

----

The great news is, trolls can be reformed!  Take some time to read various articles and forum discussions.  You'll learn, and if you follow the same path as one former troll, you'll be better at Dominion than I am (which is, granted, not saying a lot any more).

The thing is I'm not actually attempting to be a troll. I have read some articles and discussions, and that is why I feel the need to stick up for Scout. I haven't even mentioned the fact that late in the game, it can get Victory Cards out of your deck and keep it running smoothly. Scout and Mystic is pretty good, but Scout has a lot of other quirky uses thay can only be discovered by creating a deck that doesn't just add Scout, it uses Scout. I understand that you have seen the community's view on Scout, which is okay, I've seen them too. If you really want to, you can use Scout to the best of its ability. However, it's okay if you go on hating Scout, that's your opinion.

[eHalcyon]

I mostly agree with you, eHalcyon, but not so much on the last three points.

5. Scout with multiple hybrid Victory cards can be worth it, but you need to have really trashed down.
6. Scout with Oasis and Inn (and Secret Chamber and Artificer etc.) is not anything like Scout with Crossroads. Crossroads actually becomes awful in a hand with no Victory cards, but these other cards are still doing fine work for you. Hand sifters and discard-for-benefit cards are definitely a combo with Scout.
7. Mystic/Scout it a legit combo. And by that I mean Mystic by itself should make you want Scout. If you haven't tried it yet, please do it before arguing this point.

5. Sure, but it's rare for the stars to align.  That's what I was getting at.

6. Yeah, but that's not a point in Scout's favour.  Here are the possibilities:

6a) Scout and sifter collide.  Scout draws junk cards into your hand for the sifters to discard.  Cool.
6b) You draw sifter before Scout.  The sifter works as normal and is fine, Scout works as normal and is poor.
6c) You draw Scout before sifter.  Scout works as normal and is poor.  The sifter works as normal, except where it may have discarded a junk card before, now you may have to discard something not as junky.  It performs just a little worse.

So it's not really a combo.  Overall the result is neutral, except neutral Scout is bad.  If you have the option of Oasis, it's probably better to get a second Oasis rather than a Scout to try to feed it.

7. I'm not really convinced.  I can believe that it's passable.  But consider:

7a) Scout and Mystic don't collide.  Then Scout is just a bad card in your deck.
7b) Scout and Mystic collide.  Scout enables Mystic to draw the next card... except if Scout weren't in your deck, that card would have been in your hand to begin with, and you'd have a chance with Mystic to draw something else.  It's still a net loss.
7c) Scout and 2 Mystics collide.  If Scout enables both Mystics to draw, you're up 1 card.  Except if you didn't have Scout, you'd have the next card in hand at the start and the Mystics together guarantee that you draw another card as well, maybe even two if you guess correctly both times.  You're up 1 card, which means that 2 Mystics alone are just as good even without the Scout support.

It's not until your single Scout is enabling 3 Mystics that there's actually an advantage there, and that's asking for a lot.  The rest of the benefit is just in Scout's own ability to pull green cards.  In a sense, Scout+Mystic kind of makes Scout more like a cantrip with the Scout effect on top, which is certainly better... but it's not much better than Vagrant.

[LastFootnote]

7. Mystic/Scout it a legit combo. And by that I mean Mystic by itself should make you want Scout. If you haven't tried it yet, please do it before arguing this point.

7. I'm not really convinced.  I can believe that it's passable.  But consider:

7a) Scout and Mystic don't collide.  Then Scout is just a bad card in your deck.
7b) Scout and Mystic collide.  Scout enables Mystic to draw the next card... except if Scout weren't in your deck, that card would have been in your hand to begin with, and you'd have a chance with Mystic to draw something else.  It's still a net loss.
7c) Scout and 2 Mystics collide.  If Scout enables both Mystics to draw, you're up 1 card.  Except if you didn't have Scout, you'd have the next card in hand at the start and the Mystics together guarantee that you draw another card as well, maybe even two if you guess correctly both times.  You're up 1 card, which means that 2 Mystics alone are just as good even without the Scout support.

It's not until your single Scout is enabling 3 Mystics that there's actually an advantage there, and that's asking for a lot.  The rest of the benefit is just in Scout's own ability to pull green cards.  In a sense, Scout+Mystic kind of makes Scout more like a cantrip with the Scout effect on top, which is certainly better... but it's not much better than Vagrant.

It's much better. The ability to decide which card Mystic is going to draw is often very significant, both for your current turn and your next turn. No joke.

Enabling 3 Mystics with one Scout is common. You don't have to collide all 3 Mystics in the same hand as your Scout; any Mystics you reveal with Scout can be drawn by a Mystic in your hand, and then you still know what the top card of your deck is for that Mystic. Rinse and repeat.

If you're still not convinced that it's a combo, I refer you to the bolded part of my post above. Yes, I'm being a bit of a jerk, but COME ON, man. Don't sit here arguing theory with me when I've used this combo a bunch and you apparently never have. Try it out and decide for yourself!

EDIT: Vagrant/Mystic is also a great combo, don't get me wrong. Obviously you usually don't have all three cards on the board, so it doesn't matter much for the purposes of this discussion.

[enfynet]

Should we have a Scout-Off tournament? Say, about 10,000 mirror matches (or simulations) should really show where Scout compares to any other card.

First up: Scout $4 vs Silver $3

Next: Scout $4 vs Pearl Diver $2

I don't think it's fair to have Scout challenge any actual $4 cards.

[eHalcyon]

I've tried it!  It just has never really seemed that amazing to me.

[Roadrunner7671]

Should we have a Scout-Off tournament? Say, about 10,000 mirror matches (or simulations) should really show where Scout compares to any other card.

First up: Scout $4 vs Silver $3

Next: Scout $4 vs Pearl Diver $2

I don't think it's fair to have Scout challenge any actual $4 cards.

Hmm...interesting. I think I may take you up on that, but I think we an challenge Coppersmith and Thief.
How do you propose we go about this? We play games with Scout and see how it goes?

[Roadrunner7671]

I've tried it!  It just has never really seemed that amazing to me.

No, no. I'm not saying Scout is amazing, I'm not even saying it's good. I'm just saying it doesn't deserve it's reputation for being in the bottom 5 worst $4 cards, you can make Scout good.

[Roadrunner7671]

7. Mystic/Scout it a legit combo. And by that I mean Mystic by itself should make you want Scout. If you haven't tried it yet, please do it before arguing this point.

7. I'm not really convinced.  I can believe that it's passable.  But consider:

7a) Scout and Mystic don't collide.  Then Scout is just a bad card in your deck.
7b) Scout and Mystic collide.  Scout enables Mystic to draw the next card... except if Scout weren't in your deck, that card would have been in your hand to begin with, and you'd have a chance with Mystic to draw something else.  It's still a net loss.
7c) Scout and 2 Mystics collide.  If Scout enables both Mystics to draw, you're up 1 card.  Except if you didn't have Scout, you'd have the next card in hand at the start and the Mystics together guarantee that you draw another card as well, maybe even two if you guess correctly both times.  You're up 1 card, which means that 2 Mystics alone are just as good even without the Scout support.

It's not until your single Scout is enabling 3 Mystics that there's actually an advantage there, and that's asking for a lot.  The rest of the benefit is just in Scout's own ability to pull green cards.  In a sense, Scout+Mystic kind of makes Scout more like a cantrip with the Scout effect on top, which is certainly better... but it's not much better than Vagrant.

It's much better. The ability to decide which card Mystic is going to draw is often very significant, both for your current turn and your next turn. No joke.

Enabling 3 Mystics with one Scout is common. You don't have to collide all 3 Mystics in the same hand as your Scout; any Mystics you reveal with Scout can be drawn by a Mystic in your hand, and then you still know what the top card of your deck is for that Mystic. Rinse and repeat.

If you're still not convinced that it's a combo, I refer you to the bolded part of my post above. Yes, I'm being a bit of a jerk, but COME ON, man. Don't sit here arguing theory with me when I've used this combo a bunch and you apparently never have. Try it out and decide for yourself!

EDIT: Vagrant/Mystic is also a great combo, don't get me wrong. Obviously you usually don't have all three cards on the board, so it doesn't matter much for the purposes of this discussion.

Even though you mostly hate Scout, I'm glad you can see where I stand with Mystic.

[eHalcyon]

I've tried it!  It just has never really seemed that amazing to me.

No, no. I'm not saying Scout is amazing, I'm not even saying it's good. I'm just saying it doesn't deserve it's reputation for being in the bottom 5 worst $4 cards, you can make Scout good.

But every card has times when it shines, and most of the situations you list in the OP aren't even valid.  Which $4 cards would you say are worse than Scout?

[enfynet]

I've tried it!  It just has never really seemed that amazing to me.

No, no. I'm not saying Scout is amazing, I'm not even saying it's good. I'm just saying it doesn't deserve it's reputation for being in the bottom 5 worst $4 cards, you can make Scout good.

But every card has times when it shines, and most of the situations you list in the OP aren't even valid.  Which $4 cards would you say are worse than Scout?

I can't find anything on this list that seems to be always worse than Scout. I can hardly find anything that is sometimes worse than Scout.

Code: [Select]

Bureaucrat
Feast
Gardens
Militia
Moneylender
Remodel
Smithy
Spy
Thief
Throne Room
Baron
Bridge
Conspirator
Coppersmith
Ironworks
Mining Village
Scout
Caravan
Cutpurse
Island
Navigator
Pirate Ship
Salvager
Sea Hag
Treasure Map
Potion
Bishop
Monument
Quarry
Talisman
Worker's Village
Farming Village
Horse Traders
Remake
Tournament
Young Witch
Jack of all Trades
Noble Brigand
Nomad Camp
Silk Road
Spice Merchant
Trader
Armory
Death Cart
Feodum
Fortress
Ironmonger
Marauder
Procession
Rats
Scavenger
Sir Martin
Wandering Minstrel
Advisor
Herald
Plaza
Taxman
Duplicate
Magpie
Messenger
Miser
Port
Ranger
Transmogrify
Fugitive
Mission
Pilgrimage
Warrior
Envoy
Walled Village
Keeping in mind that at the very least, there need to be ONE $4 card at the bottom of the list.

[Roadrunner7671]

I've tried it!  It just has never really seemed that amazing to me.

No, no. I'm not saying Scout is amazing, I'm not even saying it's good. I'm just saying it doesn't deserve it's reputation for being in the bottom 5 worst $4 cards, you can make Scout good.

But every card has times when it shines, and most of the situations you list in the OP aren't even valid.  Which $4 cards would you say are worse than Scout?

I can't find anything on this list that seems to be always worse than Scout. I can hardly find anything that is sometimes worse than Scout.

Code: [Select]

Bureaucrat
Feast
Gardens
Militia
Moneylender
Remodel
Smithy
Spy
Thief
Throne Room
Baron
Bridge
Conspirator
Coppersmith
Ironworks
Mining Village
Scout
Caravan
Cutpurse
Island
Navigator
Pirate Ship
Salvager
Sea Hag
Treasure Map
Potion
Bishop
Monument
Quarry
Talisman
Worker's Village
Farming Village
Horse Traders
Remake
Tournament
Young Witch
Jack of all Trades
Noble Brigand
Nomad Camp
Silk Road
Spice Merchant
Trader
Armory
Death Cart
Feodum
Fortress
Ironmonger
Marauder
Procession
Rats
Scavenger
Sir Martin
Wandering Minstrel
Advisor
Herald
Plaza
Taxman
Duplicate
Magpie
Messenger
Miser
Port
Ranger
Transmogrify
Fugitive
Mission
Pilgrimage
Warrior
Envoy
Walled Village
Keeping in mind that at the very least, there need to be ONE $4 card at the bottom of the list.

No, Thief is worse. Taxman and Coppersmith are pretty bad. Nomad Camp is iffy. Talisman? Come on! Scout keeps your engine running and enables a lot of cards on this list. Scout also helps all the ones that draw on this list by controlling what they draw.

[DStu]

I've tried it!  It just has never really seemed that amazing to me.

No, no. I'm not saying Scout is amazing, I'm not even saying it's good. I'm just saying it doesn't deserve it's reputation for being in the bottom 5 worst $4 cards, you can make Scout good.

But every card has times when it shines, and most of the situations you list in the OP aren't even valid.  Which $4 cards would you say are worse than Scout?

I can't find anything on this list that seems to be always worse than Scout. I can hardly find anything that is sometimes worse than Scout.

Code: [Select]

Bureaucrat
Feast
Gardens
Militia
Moneylender
Remodel
Smithy
Spy
Thief
Throne Room
Baron
Bridge
Conspirator
Coppersmith
Ironworks
Mining Village
Scout
Caravan
Cutpurse
Island
Navigator
Pirate Ship
Salvager
Sea Hag
Treasure Map
Potion
Bishop
Monument
Quarry
Talisman
Worker's Village
Farming Village
Horse Traders
Remake
Tournament
Young Witch
Jack of all Trades
Noble Brigand
Nomad Camp
Silk Road
Spice Merchant
Trader
Armory
Death Cart
Feodum
Fortress
Ironmonger
Marauder
Procession
Rats
Scavenger
Sir Martin
Wandering Minstrel
Advisor
Herald
Plaza
Taxman
Duplicate
Magpie
Messenger
Miser
Port
Ranger
Transmogrify
Fugitive
Mission
Pilgrimage
Warrior
Envoy
Walled Village
Keeping in mind that at the very least, there need to be ONE $4 card at the bottom of the list.

No, Thief is worse. Taxman and Coppersmith are pretty bad. Nomad Camp is iffy. Talisman? Come on! Scout keeps your engine running and enables a lot of cards on this list. Scout also helps all the ones that draw on this list by controlling what they draw.

Most of the ones you mention, while weak, have relatively common cases (~10%), where they have a strong influence on the board, where ignoring their presence is a big mistake. Scout is maybe marginally usefull in about that range.
- Thief: Completely kills BigMoney vs. engine
- Coppersmith: Can be good money payload for an engine, easily terminal +$4++
- Nomad Camp: It's a +buy after all, often you just need one.  Yeah, you would take any, even a Ruined Market, but they are not on this board
- Talisman: Come on! Cheap components engines exists.  And cost reducers.

Most of these are that if they magically appear in a usual deck, you would prefer Scout over them. But that doesn't happen usually (without Swindlers). But you have to gain them on purpose usually, and as there is always an alternative on what to gain, only helping marginally often is usually worse than helping a lot seldomly.

[Roadrunner7671]

I've tried it!  It just has never really seemed that amazing to me.

No, no. I'm not saying Scout is amazing, I'm not even saying it's good. I'm just saying it doesn't deserve it's reputation for being in the bottom 5 worst $4 cards, you can make Scout good.

But every card has times when it shines, and most of the situations you list in the OP aren't even valid.  Which $4 cards would you say are worse than Scout?

I can't find anything on this list that seems to be always worse than Scout. I can hardly find anything that is sometimes worse than Scout.

Code: [Select]

Bureaucrat
Feast
Gardens
Militia
Moneylender
Remodel
Smithy
Spy
Thief
Throne Room
Baron
Bridge
Conspirator
Coppersmith
Ironworks
Mining Village
Scout
Caravan
Cutpurse
Island
Navigator
Pirate Ship
Salvager
Sea Hag
Treasure Map
Potion
Bishop
Monument
Quarry
Talisman
Worker's Village
Farming Village
Horse Traders
Remake
Tournament
Young Witch
Jack of all Trades
Noble Brigand
Nomad Camp
Silk Road
Spice Merchant
Trader
Armory
Death Cart
Feodum
Fortress
Ironmonger
Marauder
Procession
Rats
Scavenger
Sir Martin
Wandering Minstrel
Advisor
Herald
Plaza
Taxman
Duplicate
Magpie
Messenger
Miser
Port
Ranger
Transmogrify
Fugitive
Mission
Pilgrimage
Warrior
Envoy
Walled Village
Keeping in mind that at the very least, there need to be ONE $4 card at the bottom of the list.

No, Thief is worse. Taxman and Coppersmith are pretty bad. Nomad Camp is iffy. Talisman? Come on! Scout keeps your engine running and enables a lot of cards on this list. Scout also helps all the ones that draw on this list by controlling what they draw.

Most of the ones you mention, while weak, have relatively common cases (~10%), where they have a strong influence on the board, where ignoring their presence is a big mistake. Scout is maybe marginally usefull in about that range.
- Thief: Completely kills BigMoney vs. engine
- Coppersmith: Can be good money payload for an engine, easily terminal +$4++
- Nomad Camp: It's a +buy after all, often you just need one.  Yeah, you would take any, even a Ruined Market, but they are not on this board
- Talisman: Come on! Cheap components engines exists.  And cost reducers.

Most of these are that if they magically appear in a usual deck, you would prefer Scout over them. But that doesn't happen usually (without Swindlers). But you have to gain them on purpose usually, and as there is always an alternative on what to gain, only helping marginally often is usually worse than helping a lot seldomly.

You're just making this stuff up. Thief over Scout? You'd do that probably less than 20% of the time. Talisman? I doubt you want that. The main reason that you would take Silver over Scout is because Silver is a solid card and Scout is a mediocre one. Does that mean Scout is weak? Of course not! You'd get Silver over Chapel after the first 5 turns, but that doesn't mean Chapel is weak.