Print

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

[rrenaud]

Games where Ill-Gotten Gains is the dominant strategy are uninteresting and not fun.  This is not complaining that I lose to IGG, or that I don't know how to play it.  It's my 5th strongest win given avail.  I win more often than I usually do both when I gain it and when I don't.  I am not complaining that it's too good.  It's somewhat frequently ignorable (maybe 30% of games) and when it's a good but not dominating option (maybe another 30%), it can be fun.  I am not complaining that it's too strong.

But when it's clearly the card to go for in the set, the game is just kind of crappy.  I feel sorry for my poor opponents when I IGG spam them, and it disrupts what would otherwise be a nice engine.  It feels different than a gardens rush say, where my opponent has the choice to go for an engine, or go for a gardens spammed deck.  When I go for an IGG, my opponent has no choice but to get spammed, and I don't have a lot of interesting decisions to make.  It leaves me bored and my opponent frustrated.

IGG, it's the new Minion, only worse.

[DrHades]

I could not agree more. Except for the part of very good win rate with IGG, I have just mediacore...

[HiveMindEmulator]

I wouldn't say it's bad for the game, because it does add something to the game when pure IGG is not the dominant strategy. But I do agree that pure IGG games are among the worst, because there are no real strategic decisions to be made.

[^_^_^_^]

Agreed. I have a pretty good win rate with it myself. Rushing IGG is easy as pie and I actually lost a smurfed game of it in 3 player where my opponent did it and I tried to do an engine. At the time I  just wanted to see if I could do an engine and still win. Nope. I got frustrated. At the end my opponent that won said "=\ that was boring sorry for your losses guys". I've never heard that ever before. Not even with Big Money rushers.

[DrHades]

At the end my opponent that won said "=\ that was boring sorry for your losses guys". I've never heard that ever before. Not even with Big Money rushers.

I said this both of the times I won with pure Doublejack 

[DG]

I've also had only modest success when rushing IGGs. It doesn't seem to need much trashing in the kingdom, even remodel or farmland, to make the IGGs less powerful. I could of course be misplaying it ...

[WanderingWinder]

Interestingly, I find I most often outplay my opponent in IGG mirrors (there's actually a lot more room for strategy than most people think), and less often when I incorrectly fail to ignore it.

[Kore]

I'm a fan of IGG and while I acknowledge that there boards where having IGG being the dominate strategy is boring, there are upsides to having it in a game as it it forces the game away from BM + X and increases the chances of a 3 pile ending. Personally, I hate it when I feel that BM + X is the best way to go and I despise double jack to the point of doing stupid things rather than playing double jack. IGG is a strong attack but it's not stronger than say Mountebank or Witch which will equally destroy a player who ignores them. At least with IGG, it will take them ~15 turns to buy out the IGGs which isn't that faster than a deck with good cycling and a curser can give out the curse pile.

IGG often has a fun interaction with trashing cards and some weaker cards like coppersmith too and on the whole increases the strategic depth of dominion.

[ecq]

What makes IGG different from other curse givers is that it starts cursing reliably every turn very early in the game, runs out 2 piles instead of one, and has fewer counters. 

IGG will get a curse in the other guy's deck one shuffle sooner than the other curse givers.  By turn 5, it's reliably giving curses basically every turn with no support cards.  Further, the hypothetical Witch deck with good cycling may be able to empty the curse pile by turn 15, but remember that IGG has emptied 2 piles by turn 15 and has no problem buying a duchy each turn.

I've personally done very well with IGG (my effect with is 3.5), but I usually decline games with it now, because it's not very fun for me.  I don't know that it's game-breaking, but on boards that support it, it's a completely dominant strategy.

[timchen]

I'd like to know which games are the 30% that IGG is ignorable. I found it is very hard for me to understand. Somehow it is a lot weaker than other cursers vs. trashers? (I don't mean in the same board; instead, there seems to be lots of boards where ok, I am going to get a witch even with this trasher available, then if there is IGG instead of the witch, it no longer worth getting.) Am I right at this?

[ecq]

I'd like to know which games are the 30% that IGG is ignorable. I found it is very hard for me to understand. Somehow it is a lot weaker than other cursers vs. trashers? (I don't mean in the same board; instead, there seems to be lots of boards where ok, I am going to get a witch even with this trasher available, then if there is IGG instead of the witch, it no longer worth getting.) Am I right at this?

Games with Traders.  This is the big one.  You spend $5 for what is essentially a self-duplicating Copper, and you're possibly handing me a Silver in the process.  Not only that, but when it happens, the piles become uneven.  No curse is given or trashed.

Games with Watchtower  Not only can I trash the curses as they come in, but I can also buy curses, trashing them immediately to make the piles uneven (obviously works best with some source of +buy).

Games with Ambassador.  I give the curses to you, and make the piles uneven by deciding how many to return to the supply.

Games with Embargo.  You hurt yourself as much as me by buying IGG and make the piles uneven.

Games with heavy trashing and a dominant engine.  Something like Chapel, Highway, Grand Market.

Games with hand size reduction attacks.  I haven't tested it, but I assume Militia or Ghost Ship would do well against IGG.  They mitigate the effects of curses while making it harder for you to get $5 with Copper/IGG. 

Games with Jack of all Trades, possibly.  Playing JoaT to trash curses while gaining silvers is nice.  You'd use the Silver to start buying out the Duchy pile before the other guy was done with IGG, beating him to the punch.

[HiveMindEmulator]

I'd like to know which games are the 30% that IGG is ignorable. I found it is very hard for me to understand. Somehow it is a lot weaker than other cursers vs. trashers? (I don't mean in the same board; instead, there seems to be lots of boards where ok, I am going to get a witch even with this trasher available, then if there is IGG instead of the witch, it no longer worth getting.) Am I right at this?

The 30% sounds really high to me too. I don't think it has anything to do with it being weaker than other cursers vs trashing. The issue with IGG is that it takes all your buys. If you'd be mostly buying money anyway, it's not a big deal since it provides money as well, but if it's possible to trash into some sort of strong engine, you can't open IGG and transition, while there is a chance of doing something like that with witch. Games with trashing into an engine can sometimes handle adding a curser, but they can't handling adding in half a dozen IGGs.

[mischiefmaker]

A straight DoubleJack strategy that goes for Provinces as normal beats an IGG rush pretty easily -- you don't have to go after Duchies earlier. (So it's not just a Moat-after-the-fact, it's a Moat-after-the-fact-that-works-on-IGG!)

However, Militia and Ghost Ship are not reasons to ignore IGG. Militia may prevent your opponent from getting to IGG for a turn or two, but once the deck has a few IGG or Silver (which is what he'll buy when your attack forces him from $5 to $4), he'll hit $5 consistently -- your deck will have too many curses to hit your discard attack often, and even when it does, it's not too hard to have an IGG/IGG/copper hand.

Ghost Ship in particular is really bad against IGG, since the Ghost Ship player is often drawing Curses while the IGG player can shape his hands to get $5 exactly instead of $6 or $7.

[werothegreat]

Games where Ill-Gotten Gains is the dominant strategy are uninteresting and not fun.  This is not complaining that I lose to IGG, or that I don't know how to play it.  It's my 5th strongest win given avail.  I win more often than I usually do both when I gain it and when I don't.  I am not complaining that it's too good.  It's somewhat frequently ignorable (maybe 30% of games) and when it's a good but not dominating option (maybe another 30%), it can be fun.  I am not complaining that it's too strong.

But when it's clearly the card to go for in the set, the game is just kind of crappy.  I feel sorry for my poor opponents when I IGG spam them, and it disrupts what would otherwise be a nice engine.  It feels different than a gardens rush say, where my opponent has the choice to go for an engine, or go for a gardens spammed deck.  When I go for an IGG, my opponent has no choice but to get spammed, and I don't have a lot of interesting decisions to make.  It leaves me bored and my opponent frustrated.

IGG, it's the new Minion, only worse.

If your opponent were sensible, he'd try to at least split the IGGs with you (and thus the Curses), leaving one more pile to empty.  At that point it becomes a greening rush, which IGG can help with.

[timchen]

I'd also like to add I don't understand this "uneven" thing about IGG...

A larger curse pile is indeed a problem, but it is far less common. The more common is a larger IGG pile; which just means one has to spend a few more turns buying IGG for no harm. But how can one or two turns spent on IGG without effect so critical?

To the extreme, if I am against an IGG strategy, I can buy one curse myself to make the two piles uneven... that certainly does not help me against an IGG strategy. The IGG strategy is to get to Duchies after the IGG pile depletes... I wonder whether the "uneven effect" is an indication of people playing the strategy or the counter suboptimally. Maybe one should get to the Duchies before the piles are emptied?

[rrenaud]

When the curses are lower than the IGGs, eventually the curses become 0, and then you have to buy IGGs without the benefit of giving opponents the curse.

Clearly, having to buy out IGGs to end on piles is not as bad enough for the opponent to choose to buy out curses (with exception of watchtower).  But having an opponent not buy curses is an incredibly loose lower bound on good opponent play. 

[Beyond Awesome]

I find IGG to be the most boring straightforward curse giver in the game. I have a pretty decent win rate with it as well. It is worse than Tournament which actually requires some level of play skill. All you need to do for IGG is hit $5 every turn and when you don't, oh well just buy a silver. There is very little an opponent can do against the deck and for the most part leaves very little strategy. Many cards are simply unplayable in a IGG board. It is also more boring than Witch and Mountebank because I feel with those two cards on the board you are allowed more strategy depending on the card selection.

[Thisisnotasmile]

Meh. I don't really mind IGG. There are much worse cards for leading to clearly optimal, boring strategies. Jack of All Trades, Ambassador, Minion, Goons just to name a few. Fool's Gold is getting increasingly annoying too. It's not a great card and strategies involving it are very one dimensional by necessity. I try to avoid it at all costs to do something more interesting but when my opponent opens FG/FG I have no choice but to take 4 or 5 to block him from getting the whole stack, the only time when it becomes a decent card, which just leaves me with a deck full of crap playing some hybrid-FG strategy that gets nowhere fast.

[brokoli]

I always found IGG very fun ! I would even say it's one of the funniest cards in Hinterlands ! And the artwork of the card is awesome ^^ .
I agree with Thisisnotasmile, JoaT or Minion are more boring, when they are played as an entire strategy (minion chain or double jack)
As a curse-giver, IGG is less painful than a King's court + torturer/witch. Really, I don't understand your complaints about it.

[WrathOfGlod]

I always found IGG very fun ! I would even say it's one of the funniest cards in Hinterlands ! And the artwork of the card is awesome ^^ .
I agree with Thisisnotasmile, JoaT or Minion are more boring, when they are played as an entire strategy (minion chain or double jack)
As a curse-giver, IGG is less painful than a King's court + torturer/witch. Really, I don't understand your complaints about it.

Is that seriously your standard for a painful attack??

The problem with IGG is that in the mirror there really is no way to follow it up into an interesting strat. After you both have 5 IGGs you have a deck full of copper,IGGs and curses. This makes buying actions useless so that both sides just buy the best victory card they can every turn
Most of the other dominant strategies open up into interesting,board-dependent games after the opening.

For example double Ambassador  mirror matches tend to be won by the player with the better followup, goons games are decided by who can manage the end-game megaturns better etc.

This is the same problem people have with double-jack which is that jack has relatively few cool combos and instead just plays itself out. (I wonder if JoaT would be improved with a requirement to trash a non-treasure card?)

[Thisisnotasmile]

I always found IGG very fun ! I would even say it's one of the funniest cards in Hinterlands ! And the artwork of the card is awesome ^^ .
I agree with Thisisnotasmile, JoaT or Minion are more boring, when they are played as an entire strategy (minion chain or double jack)
As a curse-giver, IGG is less painful than a King's court + torturer/witch. Really, I don't understand your complaints about it.

Is that seriously your standard for a painful attack??

The problem with IGG is that in the mirror there really is no way to follow it up into an interesting strat. After you both have 5 IGGs you have a deck full of copper,IGGs and curses. This makes buying actions useless so that both sides just buy the best victory card they can every turn
Most of the other dominant strategies open up into interesting,board-dependent games after the opening.

For example double Ambassador  mirror matches tend to be won by the player with the better followup, goons games are decided by who can manage the end-game megaturns better etc.

This is the same problem people have with double-jack which is that jack has relatively few cool combos and instead just plays itself out. (I wonder if JoaT would be improved with a requirement to trash a non-treasure card?)

At least in an IGG mirror match you both spend 10 turns splitting the IGGs 5/5 and then another 5 or 6 picking up green cards and then it's all over by turn 16 and you can go and get on with the next game. In an Ambassador mirror you spend the first 20 turns doing the same thing over and over again until somebody comes out with a smaller deck, then the other guy has to flail about while the winner spends the next 15 turns building their deck back up before anyone can end the game. In a Goons match, it's the same but with the "same thing over and over again" occuring at the tail end of the match after you've spent your first 15 turns picking up as many villages and draw cards as possible to hopefully improve your chance of getting the biggest mega-turn where you can finish three piles.

[WanderingWinder]

The problem with IGG is that in the mirror there really is no way to follow it up into an interesting strat. After you both have 5 IGGs you have a deck full of copper,IGGs and curses. This makes buying actions useless so that both sides just buy the best victory card they can every turn
Most of the other dominant strategies open up into interesting,board-dependent games after the opening.

This is simply not true, and it amuses me all the people that keep saying it! There are lots of different things you can do WITH an IGG rush, both during the rush and after (actually a little bit can be done before, too). I mean, it's somewhat formulaic, but not nearly as much so as you guys are saying, not as much so as double jack, not as much so as a gardens rush, not as much as native village/bridge... it's probably about as formulaic as minion, which is a card that isn't really that formulaic either. And this, of course, only in the cases where the mirror is clear. When it's fighting some alternate strat, it can be very interesting indeed....

[kn1tt3r]

The problem with IGG is that in the mirror there really is no way to follow it up into an interesting strat. After you both have 5 IGGs you have a deck full of copper,IGGs and curses. This makes buying actions useless so that both sides just buy the best victory card they can every turn
Most of the other dominant strategies open up into interesting,board-dependent games after the opening.

This is simply not true, and it amuses me all the people that keep saying it! There are lots of different things you can do WITH an IGG rush, both during the rush and after (actually a little bit can be done before, too). I mean, it's somewhat formulaic, but not nearly as much so as you guys are saying, not as much so as double jack, not as much so as a gardens rush, not as much as native village/bridge... it's probably about as formulaic as minion, which is a card that isn't really that formulaic either. And this, of course, only in the cases where the mirror is clear. When it's fighting some alternate strat, it can be very interesting indeed....

I also feel that you can play IGG rushs very suboptimally, and I admit I've not yet figured it out completely myself.

Two questions that come up frequently are for example:

- What action cards do you want and how many of them (e.g. 1 Margrave before going for IGGs, numberous Monuments for $4, maybe trashers etc.)?

- When do you take the copper in cases you don't actually need it for your buy? Ideally you keep track of your deck composition and calculate the buying power - if it's >1.0, don't take the copper, if its <1.0, get it. However, this is a bit flawed since your buying power in the "Duchy phase" decreases faster than you can increase it during the "IGG phase" - so there's still no definite answer. Most times it's probably better to just take it (assuming almost pure IGG rushs), but as I seed in the beginning, I'm not sure.

[popsofctown]

I'm with WW.  There's way better cards to complain about than IGG.  It's no DoubleJack or Envoy/BM.  At least it costs 5, so when you hit 2, 3, or 4, you have things to think about.

[ecq]

- What action cards do you want and how many of them (e.g. 1 Margrave before going for IGGs, numberous Monuments for $4, maybe trashers etc.)?

I've been looking through my most successful IGG games.  Many of them have an action or two.  Most are obvious.  Smithy, Steward, Watchtower.  Border Village because, hey, why not?  Nomad Camp seems particularly useful if you open 4/3 because there's some chance you can hit $5 on the second hand.  Monument seems good.  Bishop seems counterproductive.

I'm trying to think of $5 cards that would be worthwhile.  I don't think there's a $5 card worth getting before IGG.  The first IGGs hurt the most, then it's diminishing returns.  Apprentice would eventually be useful, especially with +buy somewhere in the deck.  Mine is also nice, transforming Silver and IGG into in-hand IGG.  Eventually it'd convert IGG into Gold.  If you drew 5 coppers after turn 7-ish, Mint could be worthwhile.

- When do you take the copper in cases you don't actually need it for your buy? Ideally you keep track of your deck composition and calculate the buying power - if it's >1.0, don't take the copper, if its <1.0, get it. However, this is a bit flawed since your buying power in the "Duchy phase" decreases faster than you can increase it during the "IGG phase" - so there's still no definite answer. Most times it's probably better to just take it (assuming almost pure IGG rushs), but as I seed in the beginning, I'm not sure.

Taking the Copper when you don't need to spend it is almost always bad in my mind.  The only exception I can think of is if you're trying to 3 pile with Gardens.  If your buying power is < 1.0, (a) you've probably already lost, and (b) it'd be better to buy Silver on your inevitable $4 hands to catch up.  Silver will increase your buying power over 1.0, Copper will only make it asymptotically approach 1.0.

[Deadlock39]

Haggler might be a $5 worth grabbing before IGG, but I am guessing probably not.  If Border Village is also on the board, it definitely is worth grabbing first, but that is a 3 card combo, so it is a bit of an edge case.

[HiveMindEmulator]

I'm with WW.  There's way better cards to complain about than IGG.  It's no DoubleJack or Envoy/BM.  At least it costs 5, so when you hit 2, 3, or 4, you have things to think about.

I disagree. The fact that you have to buy it every time you have $5 makes it worse. With JoaT, you only have to buy 1-2 of them, leaving you all of your other buys to potentially do something different. There is often not really that much to think about when you have less than $5, because there are simply not a lot of cards in that price range that can do interesting things. Usually there is not much of a choice.

[tlloyd]

But in a typical IGG rush you prefer consistent $5 hands. That suggests that more coppers are beneficial. Early on the extra coppers (in combination with your IGGs) help you win the IGG/Curse split, and later they help you win the Duchy split.

[Deadlock39]

Buying nothing buy IGG and Silvers for several turns pushes your average card value much higher than $1.  Gaining Coppers you do not need is almost always going to be reducing the average value of your deck.  Geronimoo has simulated this and stated that gaining extra Coppers reduces the win rate.

[Tables]

Buying nothing buy IGG and Silvers for several turns pushes your average card value much higher than $1.  Gaining Coppers you do not need is almost always going to be reducing the average value of your deck.  Geronimoo has simulated this and stated that gaining extra Coppers reduces the win rate.

That's strange. I've just tested vs. the IGG bot in the simulator, and IGG rush gaining coppers beats out the normal IGG rush, scoring 46.6-44.6. Of course, it's possible that this IGG isn't optimal, or that he's talking about win rate vs. other strategies, but that seems pretty vague and hard to define.

[popsofctown]

I'm with WW.  There's way better cards to complain about than IGG.  It's no DoubleJack or Envoy/BM.  At least it costs 5, so when you hit 2, 3, or 4, you have things to think about.

I disagree. The fact that you have to buy it every time you have $5 makes it worse. With JoaT, you only have to buy 1-2 of them, leaving you all of your other buys to potentially do something different. There is often not really that much to think about when you have less than $5, because there are simply not a lot of cards in that price range that can do interesting things. Usually there is not much of a choice.

Huh?  The dead draw on Jack requires you to stick to treasure, until you decide you can add another dead draw/double terminal card, at which point you add a Jack.  IGG doesn't have any dead draw

[Deadlock39]

That's strange. I've just tested vs. the IGG bot in the simulator, and IGG rush gaining coppers beats out the normal IGG rush, scoring 46.6-44.6. Of course, it's possible that this IGG isn't optimal, or that he's talking about win rate vs. other strategies, but that seems pretty vague and hard to define.

I wasn't aware that gaining Copper off of IGG was something you could actually control in the simulator.  I see the rules now in the link behind my second link.

I don't spend much time in the simulator, but I generally trust Geronimoo's results
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=1061.msg16919#msg16919

I don't follow his comments here, but maybe someone else can decipher
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=842.msg13314#msg13314

[dondon151]

Huh?  The dead draw on Jack requires you to stick to treasure, until you decide you can add another dead draw/double terminal card, at which point you add a Jack.  IGG doesn't have any dead draw

But you get to look at your draw. If it's going to be a collision, then discard it.

[AJD]

Huh?  The dead draw on Jack requires you to stick to treasure, until you decide you can add another dead draw/double terminal card, at which point you add a Jack.  IGG doesn't have any dead draw

But you get to look at your draw. If it's going to be a collision, then discard it.

One of my most annoying recent Dominion moments was playing a Jack, looking at and discarding a Grand Market, and then drawing my other Grand Market.

[popsofctown]

It's still a dead draw.  You look at an estate, discard it, then draw your market.  Yes, it's a bit more flexible than drawing one card, but you're still shooting yourself in foot quite a bit.  You'd rather use it to discard coppers from the top of your deck to find silvers, not discard terminal silvers from the top of your deck to find Coppers.  (or nonterminals, you get the point).

[kn1tt3r]

Huh?  The dead draw on Jack requires you to stick to treasure, until you decide you can add another dead draw/double terminal card, at which point you add a Jack.  IGG doesn't have any dead draw

But you get to look at your draw. If it's going to be a collision, then discard it.

One of my most annoying recent Dominion moments was playing a Jack, looking at and discarding a Grand Market, and then drawing my other Grand Market.

I don't know the game obviously, but presumably it was a mistake to buy GMs at all.

[rod-]

Jack's not an engine card, don't treat it like one.  These complaints about the *FILTERED* draw occasionally drawing a card dead is like complaining that smithy sometimes draws cards dead.  Sure it can, but if it does, you're not playing the best strategy for that card.  DoubleJack is even more of an unalterable strategy than SingleSmithy.

[Titandrake]

I think the easier comparison might be IGG-Ambassador. IGG isn't anywhere as dominant as Ambassador, but it has a similar effect of warping opening buys. For Ambassador, getting Ambassador. For IGG, getting $5 as often as possible.

There are some subtleties to IGG games, just as there are for Ambassador. Admittedly, I don't think there are as many, but you do have various situations like

* With $8, Province or IGG?
* When do you start buying Estates? Once IGG is gone and you can't get a Duchy? Near the end of the race when you don't have $5? Maybe even the middle/early portion, with IGG adding coppers the hurt starts to get reduced.
* When are trashers worth sidetracking for? Chapel discourages going IGG at all, but Steward less so. Is Lookout worth picking up when you only have $3 or $4?

I still don't like IGG games. Engine possibilities just die a lot of the time, and you lose so many diverging options in the mid-game that the game starts to dull down. But it's not horrible.

[kn1tt3r]

Jack's not an engine card, don't treat it like one.  These complaints about the *FILTERED* draw occasionally drawing a card dead is like complaining that smithy sometimes draws cards dead.  Sure it can, but if it does, you're not playing the best strategy for that card.  DoubleJack is even more of an unalterable strategy than SingleSmithy.

Basically that's what I was saying about the mistake to buy GMs.

However, I feel that DoubleJack has more supporting cards you can buy than single Smithy (or even more for Envoy), which are basically most non-terminal, non-self-replacing cards that either trash or give money, like Lookout (trash priority Copper > Estate), Fishing Village, Festival(!), Lighthouse etc... This is not the case for single Smithy, since you will often draw those cards dead, which you can prevent with Jack to a great extend.

[dondon151]

It's still a dead draw.  You look at an estate, discard it, then draw your market.  Yes, it's a bit more flexible than drawing one card, but you're still shooting yourself in foot quite a bit.  You'd rather use it to discard coppers from the top of your deck to find silvers, not discard terminal silvers from the top of your deck to find Coppers.  (or nonterminals, you get the point).

Nothing that a little bit of deck management and card counting can't minimize; I'd wager that on average, the benefit gained from adding Fishing Villages or Warehouses or whatnot is a net positive (according to the thread on Jack "combos," it's true). Geronimoo asserts that the optimal buy rules when playing FV/Jack is to buy FV instead of Silver whenever possible. Granted, FV itself remedies Jack's terminal-ness, but the point is that Jack's typical +1 card draw with a preceding inspection prevents a large majority of cases of drawing Action cards dead.

Also, in most cases you'd want to draw the Estate into your hand so that you can trash it. Exceptions being, of course, needing a Copper to get to $8 or something.

Jack's not an engine card, don't treat it like one.  These complaints about the *FILTERED* draw occasionally drawing a card dead is like complaining that smithy sometimes draws cards dead.  Sure it can, but if it does, you're not playing the best strategy for that card.  DoubleJack is even more of an unalterable strategy than SingleSmithy.

Well, yeah, of course it's not an engine card. It doesn't draw adequately, it doesn't trash adequately, and it gunks up your deck with non-engine components. But you can definitely improve DoubleJack by adding a smattering of Action cards (non-terminal or terminal).

[krawhitham]

Games where Ill-Gotten Gains is the dominant strategy are uninteresting and not fun. 

I would say that any game with one dominant strategy is no fun. A mirror match where shuffle luck decide the game. Fortunately Dominion games are usually short enough for it not to matter.

[HiveMindEmulator]

Of course jack can draw stuff dead, but that doesn't mean you can't add other actions. It's not like envoy which draws 5 cards. Most of the time it only draws 1 card. The chance of this being your other card are small enough that if the other card does something good, you should get it. In fact, at least in the simulator, almost any random reasonably good $5 card + 1 jack beats the double jack bot.

[popsofctown]

hey, getting back to the root of things:  I was arguing Jack of all Trades has more dead draw than IGG.  Can we concede that it does?

That's also what the thread's about in the first place, I don't know how this tangent got so crazy. 

[dondon151]

I was arguing Jack of all Trades has more dead draw than IGG.  Can we concede that it does?

No one was arguing about this obviously trivial detail in the first place; the point of contention was that you said that because Jack has a dead draw, Jack players have to stick to treasure, which is not true.

[^_^_^_^]

And this is why we shouldn't bump threads without reason. Seriously, this is a days old point that wasn't even argued very well. Just let the thread die until someone searches for IGG and gets this thread and bumps it for a good reason (example being a new expansion that has counters to IGG)

[def]

And this is why we shouldn't bump threads without reason. Seriously, this is a days old point that wasn't even argued very well. Just let the thread die until someone searches for IGG and gets this thread and bumps it for a good reason (example being a new expansion that has counters to IGG)

And you are who to decide what we should do and what not or which thread has to die and which may live? Likewise, I'm noone to give you advice, but I read quite a few of your posts like this over the last time, sounding a bit arrogant - don't, you don't need to, stick with constructive posts with a more positive connotation.

[HiveMindEmulator]

hey, getting back to the root of things:  I was arguing Jack of all Trades has more dead draw than IGG.  Can we concede that it does?

That's also what the thread's about in the first place, I don't know how this tangent got so crazy.

That's not at all what the thread was about in the first place. The thread is about IGG leading to boring games. I guess TINAS said it's not as bad as other cards, including Jack and Ambassador (in terms of causing boring games). Then the discussion forked to whether or not these cards cause more boring games.

My opinion is that neither do, because you only buy 1-2 Ambassadors or 1-2 Jacks, and then transition. Ambassador transitions into really interesting stuff, and while Jack might not transition into engines, there are definitely a variety of choices for midgame cards since you can buy stuff for $5, so you end up with less mirrors.

The idea that doubleJack is unbeatable and immutable is completely ridiculous. People saw some simulation thread where it beats a lot of strategies which don't involve Jack and blew it out of proportion. If you add a Jack to any of those strategies, a lot of them beat doubleJack. Jack is an opening which can lead into any sort of action-light, money-heavy strategy. IGG is basically a complete strategy, since it dictates all your $5 buys for the whole game.

[chwhite]

hey, getting back to the root of things:  I was arguing Jack of all Trades has more dead draw than IGG.  Can we concede that it does?

That's also what the thread's about in the first place, I don't know how this tangent got so crazy.

That's not at all what the thread was about in the first place. The thread is about IGG leading to boring games. I guess TINAS said it's not as bad as other cards, including Jack and Ambassador (in terms of causing boring games). Then the discussion forked to whether or not these cards cause more boring games.

My opinion is that neither do, because you only buy 1-2 Ambassadors or 1-2 Jacks, and then transition. Ambassador transitions into really interesting stuff, and while Jack might not transition into engines, there are definitely a variety of choices for midgame cards since you can buy stuff for $5, so you end up with less mirrors.

The idea that doubleJack is unbeatable and immutable is completely ridiculous. People saw some simulation thread where it beats a lot of strategies which don't involve Jack and blew it out of proportion. If you add a Jack to any of those strategies, a lot of them beat doubleJack. Jack is an opening which can lead into any sort of action-light, money-heavy strategy. IGG is basically a complete strategy, since it dictates all your $5 buys for the whole game.

This, this, this.  Jack is indeed a strong enabler for money strategies, and good against many attacks, but there are many things that beat DoubleJack- sometimes a good engine, sometimes a single Jack plus a couple other useful actions.  I know many of us got caught up in the simulator results and just started assuming that JoaT was super-powerful and made the game boring, I know I sure did.  But we were wrong.  Jack is good but it's not that strong, and there are things you can add to it. 

But as much as Jack doesn't bother me nearly as much as it used to, IGG still sucks.  Yes, there is a little bit of room for strategy in IGG rushes: what to open on 4/3 (Cutpurse is an absolutely elite opener in IGG games BTW), how much copper to get, when to transition to green.  And the card's okay on the 20 or so percent of boards where IGG is worth buying but not rushing (I'd say 55 percent of the time the rush is obviously dominant, and 25 percent of the time it's completely skippable).  But there's very little room for creativity in IGG games beyond these few little tweaks; what strategy it permits is stunted and one-dimensional compared to other cards.  I agree that IGG leads to boring games; it is my least-favorite card in all of Dominion (in terms of "fun" rather than strength, obviously).

ETA: I have to also admit that there's another good thing about Jack: its presence made me realize that Bureaucrat could be used effectively, in much the same way Vault led me to start buying Secret Chamber in the right situations.

[^_^_^_^]

And this is why we shouldn't bump threads without reason. Seriously, this is a days old point that wasn't even argued very well. Just let the thread die until someone searches for IGG and gets this thread and bumps it for a good reason (example being a new expansion that has counters to IGG)

And you are who to decide what we should do and what not or which thread has to die and which may live? Likewise, I'm noone to give you advice, but I read quite a few of your posts like this over the last time, sounding a bit arrogant - don't, you don't need to, stick with constructive posts with a more positive connotation.

The main reason is that I'm used to strict, active, forums. Forums where there are mediocre posts, good posts, and great posts, and the bad posters get warned/temp banned until they either fix their bad posting and make it good or get banned for not attempting to improve their posting. For example of where I come from with these types of posts:
http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=302492
My Profile there: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/profile.php?user=3FFA
I've also had my fair share of bans/warnings and also gained a "report" button after 1 year of learning how to post and how not to post(prevents a new member/bot from spamming reports right away at random posts, thus making mods/admins jobs harder than they already are there). Thus allowing me to report bad posts.

There is also a great habit of making posts just like I do here at times of pointing out where people went wrong in their posting so they may improve it in the future.
And there is The Ten Commandments(Rules) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=17883
If you read it you'll notice how strict it is. Do note however that when playing with me I am generally quite fun

[popsofctown]

Comparing IGG and Jack was a valid way to get somewhere.  People later started comparing Jack and Envoy and that seems like it's getting kind of irrelevant to the OP.


Of course the dead draw on Jack doesn't make you buy no other actions, ever ever ever ever ever.  Otherwise DoubleJack itself would be incorrect, because you might dead draw the other Jack.  It just raises the bar a lot on what other actions you include in your deck.  IGG doesn't raise that bar as much, and thus it doesn't make games as boring as Jack does.

[dondon151]

IGG doesn't raise that bar as much, and thus it doesn't make games as boring as Jack does.

Oh, really? IGG rushing mandates that you pass up $5 actions every turn until the IGGs run out.

[jimjam]

Strategy question: What would be the correct course of action when playing with both Witch and IGG. Say both players (correctly, most likely) grab 1 Witch. Should they get a second Witch, or just start buying IGGs? After 2 Witches, should one buy IGG?
With Familiar I assume IGGs might be ignored.

[HiveMindEmulator]

Strategy question: What would be the correct course of action when playing with both Witch and IGG. Say both players (correctly, most likely) grab 1 Witch. Should they get a second Witch, or just start buying IGGs? After 2 Witches, should one buy IGG?
With Familiar I assume IGGs might be ignored.

It probably depends on what else there is, but generally I think 1 Witch and then IGGs is probably best. The second Witch you'd get too late to get enough plays in. Similarly with Familiar, it's just too slow. With any other curse-giver, I just ignore familiar.

[Kirian]

The main reason is that I'm used to strict, active, forums. Forums where there are mediocre posts, good posts, and great posts, and the bad posters get warned/temp banned until they either fix their bad posting and make it good or get banned for not attempting to improve their posting. For example of where I come from with these types of posts:
http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=302492

Yeah... this is neither TeamLiquid nor Elitist Jerks.  Oddly, this forum has almost never shown a need for moderation.  Threadjacking and thread necromancy aren't all that prevalent here despite a quite active forum.  You want TL/EJ rules for a forum?  Go post there.

On topic:  I turn more and more toward rrenaud's thinking the more times I play with IGG.  If one player gets a 5/2 split, the game is almost certainly over (and I've now played both sides of that split; both games were pretty boring and both ended exactly as you'd expect).  If IGG is dominant, it's a more boring game than Ambassador tennis, because Ambassador doesn't run two piles out in ten turns.  It's an almost certain three-pile.

More importantly--and I think this is a big problem--IGG is the only card that can give curses consistently without defense.  Masquerade can give Curses if there are normal cursers in the game, but Masquerade is one of those times when you have to really think about buying cursers anyway.  Every other Curse-giving card is an attack, and can be stymied--obviously not on all boards, but almost any reaction, HT excepted.

Consider:  would you want to play an IGG game in person?  I suspect it would be horribly boring, much like an Ambassador game in person.

[Beyond Awesome]

Strategy question: What would be the correct course of action when playing with both Witch and IGG. Say both players (correctly, most likely) grab 1 Witch. Should they get a second Witch, or just start buying IGGs? After 2 Witches, should one buy IGG?
With Familiar I assume IGGs might be ignored.

I know I'm only in my level 10's. But, if I opened 5/2, I would buy one IGG first because you will curse them faster before the first reshuffle, thus doing more damage to their deck. Also, the IGG will act as a pseudo-silver, and help you buy Witch faster. After that, I would get a Witch, and probably just pick up IGG along the ways.

[DG]

Strategy question: What would be the correct course of action when playing with both Witch and IGG. Say both players (correctly, most likely) grab 1 Witch. Should they get a second Witch, or just start buying IGGs? After 2 Witches, should one buy IGG?

Someone else posted a kingdom with this the other day and I still haven't entirely figured it out with the simulator. The witch initially seemed the stronger opener, but as soon as you added alternative drawing cards (nobles, smithy, council room) into the simulator the balance changed in favour of buying entirely iggs. I'm guessing this means it is kingdom dependant.

[vulturesrow]

Strategy question: What would be the correct course of action when playing with both Witch and IGG. Say both players (correctly, most likely) grab 1 Witch. Should they get a second Witch, or just start buying IGGs? After 2 Witches, should one buy IGG?

Someone else posted a kingdom with this the other day and I still haven't entirely figured it out with the simulator. The witch initially seemed the stronger opener, but as soon as you added alternative drawing cards (nobles, smithy, council room) into the simulator the balance changed in favour of buying entirely iggs. I'm guessing this means it is kingdom dependant.

You are probably referring my game that I posted:

http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20120117-210519-457a0beb.html

and the previous discussion for those who are interested: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=1480.0

Here are my thoughts as it pertains to this discussion (noobish as they are). I thought taking the IGG with my first 5 was the right play because of it putting the curse into the opponent's deck right then, rather than waiting for Witch to show up after the reshuffle. I did hem and haw over the initial buy for a while.

[ehunt]

I still don't understand the argument that I should buy witch over IGG the first time I hit five. It's the difference between putting a curse in the opponent's deck possibly once more over the course of the game versus getting the curse in a full shuffle earlier. The earlier turns are way more important. It's the same reason you don't pull a witch out of the black market deck when there's only a couple provinces left.

[Razzishi]

More importantly--and I think this is a big problem--IGG is the only card that can give curses consistently without defense.  Masquerade can give Curses if there are normal cursers in the game, but Masquerade is one of those times when you have to really think about buying cursers anyway.  Every other Curse-giving card is an attack, and can be stymied--obviously not on all boards, but almost any reaction, HT excepted.

Trader and Watchtower work perfectly fine against it.

[Asklepios]

I'd agree that IGG is quite a low skill card, but there's still potential for playing around with it.

In a recent game, my opponent and I both went for IGG rush, but whereas he went for Duchy's, I went for Gardens, buying just one duchy when it ended the game. End result was slightly in my favour. Likewise, I've had some success in copper manipulation paired with IGG.

Incidentally, in a straight IGG to Duchy rush, is the best strategy to ALWAYS add the copper, even if you don't need it right now? Part of me worries that doing so reduces the odds of the occasional lucky province, but another part of me thinks that avoiding getting <$5 is more important...

[Deadlock39]

From Geronimoo:

According to simulations you want to get the Copper from IGG only if it will allow a better buy that turn.

http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=1061.msg16919#msg16919

I don't know for sure if this was tested for IGG vs IGG.  Perhaps in the mirror match, the rules are different.

[^_^_^_^]

From Geronimoo:

According to simulations you want to get the Copper from IGG only if it will allow a better buy that turn.

http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=1061.msg16919#msg16919

I don't know for sure if this was tested for IGG vs IGG.  Perhaps in the mirror match, the rules are different.

Yes but that is a standard case. Does it also apply for with gardens?

[DStu]

Yes but that is a standard case. Does it also apply for with gardens?

You are not seriously asking this, or?

[Deadlock39]

The original question about Copper gaining wasn't related to the Gardens game that was mentioned.  (That is my at least interpretation of what was said.)  I can't imagine anything other than gaining Copper every single time you can is the right strategy when Gardens are on the board.

[toaster]

Of course, one problem with viewing IGG as overwhelmingly dominant is that is can cause you to put on blinders and fail to recognize when it's a bad option:

http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20120125-000429-2133d9d9.html

[Deadlock39]

I've got that one beat toaster... I did realize about half way through this game or so that I was a complete fool, and was going to get destroyed, but I didn't really see any way out of it so I just stuck to the plan.  I really should have stuck around for one more turn to let him piledrive the Provinces (sorry Dux), but I was ashamed of my stupidity and resigned.

http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20111204-181312-b8fab835.html

[chwhite]

Of course, one problem with viewing IGG as overwhelmingly dominant is that is can cause you to put on blinders and fail to recognize when it's a bad option:

http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20120125-000429-2133d9d9.html

Yeah, there are definitely situations where IGG is a bad option in a way that other curse-givers aren't.  I'm particularly ashamed of this one:

http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20111116-180516-5779b4ec.html

Don't let the close score fool you, this was an utter bloodbath.

[Anon79]

My favourite part of chwhite's game: with Chapel on the board, the following happens!

Code: [Select]

--- Obi Wan Bonogi's turn 1 ---
Obi Wan Bonogi plays 2 Coppers.
Obi Wan Bonogi buys a Duchess.

[Tahtweasel]

Of course, one problem with viewing IGG as overwhelmingly dominant is that is can cause you to put on blinders and fail to recognize when it's a bad option:

http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20120125-000429-2133d9d9.html

Yeah, there are definitely situations where IGG is a bad option in a way that other curse-givers aren't.  I'm particularly ashamed of this one:

http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20111116-180516-5779b4ec.html

Don't let the close score fool you, this was an utter bloodbath.

I'm not completely convinced that you did anything wrong, at least early on. It feels like OBB might have had better shuffle luck than you did.

[popsofctown]

IGG doesn't raise that bar as much, and thus it doesn't make games as boring as Jack does.

Oh, really? IGG rushing mandates that you pass up $5 actions every turn until the IGGs run out.

There aren't many 5$ actions that fit into BM/Jack, either.  At least there are 3$ and 4$ actions that go with IGG and that's interesting.  Wasn't there a frontpage article about Jack pointing out that in CouncilRoom that the only actions you that recorded doing well alongside Jack was some handsize reducers?

[dondon151]

There aren't many 5$ actions that fit into BM/Jack, either.  At least there are 3$ and 4$ actions that go with IGG and that's interesting.  Wasn't there a frontpage article about Jack pointing out that in CouncilRoom that the only actions you that recorded doing well alongside Jack was some handsize reducers?

Uh, on the contrary, Jack usually improves with most $5 Actions, even if they're not handsize reducers.

[HiveMindEmulator]

There aren't many 5$ actions that fit into BM/Jack, either.  At least there are 3$ and 4$ actions that go with IGG and that's interesting.  Wasn't there a frontpage article about Jack pointing out that in CouncilRoom that the only actions you that recorded doing well alongside Jack was some handsize reducers?

I think you are thinking of this article, though it doesn't reference councilroom at all. The article is pretty wrong and really misleading and has led to a lot of complaints about Jack. Simulator says pretty much any reasonable $5 card + money with a jack (or 2) at the opening beats jack+money.

[rrenaud]

Maybe it was this post by me that he was referring to?

http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=1431.msg23933#msg23933

I've tried to find synergistic cards with Jack of all Trades on the http://councilroom.com/supply_win page.  Maybe I should work on making the data easier to copy to the forum?  But JoaT seems pretty damn resistant to helping anything.

Maybe Inn is the card that gains the most?  +3% chance of buying, win stats basically the same, an extra .07 inns bought per game.

Maybe JoaT tends to shorten games, most cards are purchased less often when its available.

[Kahryl]

While Hinterlands introduces a lot of awesome cards, I think IGG and JoaT are the worst-designed cards in Dominion.  Before they came out I vetoed randomly; now I'm seriously considering vetoing those.

[HiveMindEmulator]

Maybe it was this post by me that he was referring to?

http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=1431.msg23933#msg23933

I've tried to find synergistic cards with Jack of all Trades on the http://councilroom.com/supply_win page.  Maybe I should work on making the data easier to copy to the forum?  But JoaT seems pretty damn resistant to helping anything.

Maybe Inn is the card that gains the most?  +3% chance of buying, win stats basically the same, an extra .07 inns bought per game.

Maybe JoaT tends to shorten games, most cards are purchased less often when its available.

But you're looking for something else there. You're trying to see if the presence of Jack makes certain cards more likely to be part of a winning strategy. The comment was about X+Jack+money being better than Jack+money. This kind of question is better answered by simulation, and the simulator says the following $5 cards (possibly among others -- all I did to make this list was take the default bots and add a jack or 2 and compare to the jack bot) X satisfy this:
bazaar, cartographer, council room, duke, embassy, explorer, festival, inn, lab, library, merchant ship, mountebank, rabble, royal seal, stables, stash, torturer, vault, venture, wharf, witch

That's a pretty long list, which suggests that Jack+money is a pretty poor strategy. This means that even in the presence of jack, you have some interesting decisions to make. If there are more than one of these cards around, which one (or two) do you go for? And this is just $5 cards. The lower cost cards may also influence the decision between the 5s just as in a game without jack.

[WanderingWinder]

Maybe it was this post by me that he was referring to?

http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=1431.msg23933#msg23933

I've tried to find synergistic cards with Jack of all Trades on the http://councilroom.com/supply_win page.  Maybe I should work on making the data easier to copy to the forum?  But JoaT seems pretty damn resistant to helping anything.

Maybe Inn is the card that gains the most?  +3% chance of buying, win stats basically the same, an extra .07 inns bought per game.

Maybe JoaT tends to shorten games, most cards are purchased less often when its available.

But you're looking for something else there. You're trying to see if the presence of Jack makes certain cards more likely to be part of a winning strategy. The comment was about X+Jack+money being better than Jack+money. This kind of question is better answered by simulation, and the simulator says the following $5 cards (possibly among others -- all I did to make this list was take the default bots and add a jack or 2 and compare to the jack bot) X satisfy this:
bazaar, cartographer, council room, duke, embassy, explorer, festival, inn, lab, library, merchant ship, mountebank, rabble, royal seal, stables, stash, torturer, vault, venture, wharf, witch

That's a pretty long list, which suggests that Jack+money is a pretty poor strategy. This means that even in the presence of jack, you have some interesting decisions to make. If there are more than one of these cards around, which one (or two) do you go for? And this is just $5 cards. The lower cost cards may also influence the decision between the 5s just as in a game without jack.

I'm rather surprised Jester doesn't make the cut.
Well, if you're taking the existing bots, that's probably why - several of these cards are optimized play for that card, and they'd need to be re-optimized for reality with Jack. And several aren't optimized and just buy one of said card, and need to be re-optimized for reality with Jack.
Yeah, straight double Jack is darned strong, but there's lots of other stuff that adds to it - just, it doesn't add THAT much to it.

[HiveMindEmulator]

I'm rather surprised Jester doesn't make the cut.
Well, if you're taking the existing bots, that's probably why - several of these cards are optimized play for that card, and they'd need to be re-optimized for reality with Jack. And several aren't optimized and just buy one of said card, and need to be re-optimized for reality with Jack.
Yeah, straight double Jack is darned strong, but there's lots of other stuff that adds to it - just, it doesn't add THAT much to it.

Well, the list isn't that authoritative, it's just to give an idea of how many $5 cards can work with Jack. I'm not sure about Jester. You can try to optimize it, but really it doesn't do anything exciting here. Most of the time, you're going to hit silver or copper, neither of which is going to change too much, so you're kind of just taking a terminal silver.
And I'm not sure what you mean by "it doesn't add THAT much". Most of these (completely unoptimized) bots are 10-20% favorites over double Jack.

[WanderingWinder]

I'm rather surprised Jester doesn't make the cut.
Well, if you're taking the existing bots, that's probably why - several of these cards are optimized play for that card, and they'd need to be re-optimized for reality with Jack. And several aren't optimized and just buy one of said card, and need to be re-optimized for reality with Jack.
Yeah, straight double Jack is darned strong, but there's lots of other stuff that adds to it - just, it doesn't add THAT much to it.

Well, the list isn't that authoritative, it's just to give an idea of how many $5 cards can work with Jack. I'm not sure about Jester. You can try to optimize it, but really it doesn't do anything exciting here. Most of the time, you're going to hit silver or copper, neither of which is going to change too much, so you're kind of just taking a terminal silver.
And I'm not sure what you mean by "it doesn't add THAT much". Most of these (completely unoptimized) bots are 10-20% favorites over double Jack.

10% favorite isn't much of a lead. If I win 55%-45%, you aren't actually going to notice it that often. Not to mention that this is actually smaller than 1st-turn advantage tends to be. But my bigger point is that they don't make near as much difference as even a little shuffle luck.

The idea with Jester is that giving copper is the one kind of thing Jack can't really deal with, giving curses can give you a nice lead in an endgame. Grabbing silver doesn't matter much but is still nice. Grabbing gold is simply excellent. Certainly I wouldn't want doubleJack+Jester. But iirc, singleJack is almost as good as doubleJack, and singleJack+Jester I would expect to be better. Shrug.

[HiveMindEmulator]

I think there's actually a pretty big difference between a player who wins 45% of the time and one who wins 55% of the time. I don't think anyone is really interested in playing a strategy that only wins 40-45% of the time, which is what double jack is.