Print

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

[ehunt]

edit: deleted and moved to correct subforum; theory please delete when you see this, sorry

[ehunt]

This is in the "Dominion General Discussion" section and not the articles section because
1) I don't truly understand these cards yet,
2) there's no thesis. It's just a bunch of rants in no particular order. Back to remedial writing class.

First of all, complaints of Warrior being OP are greatly exaggerated. Yes, you probably lose if the opponent's Warrior hits your Warrior, but the odds of this are less than, for instance, missing 3P after opening potion for a Familiar, or even splitting 4-3 where your opponent splits 5-2 on a Mountebank board. It's just not a game-warping asymmetry and not something worth disliking a card over.

Second, the common criticism of this line is: why am I filling my deck with treasures when I have Champion around who seems to really, really, want me to play a hard engine. And the answer is: well, sometimes that's tough, the line "junks" your deck with a couple silvers and golds so that you can get to champion and idk trash them and play your goons a bunch and buy out the pearl divers or whatever, but the other answer is, omg Champion is good in big money-ish decks. Ever played big money/smithy? Remember that part where you can't decide if you want another smithy or just a silver because you're scared they'll collide? Obsolete! I bought 8 rangers the other day. Ranger isn't a very good card. 8 non-terminal rangers, by contrast, make a deck pretty good.

I mean, Champion... Champion is ridiculous. The attack immunity and especially extra actions completely warp your early decisions. Laboratory becomes strictly worse than Smithy with Champion in play. But a Page on the board is so, so far from a Champion in play, that you have to revaluate the cost of everything several times over the game in light of "how soon is it to Champion time, when we're playing a completely different Game?" Same with attacks: do you really want to build a torturer chain when eventually your villages will become a waste of a buy and your torturer will become a glorified smithy? But conversely do you want to risk getting smothered before you get to Champion? Who knows?

other cards in order:

Page: She doesn't do anything but power up the Warrior.

Treasure Hunter: I'm with AdamH here, like, silver, whatever, some decks don't want it but those decks have ways of dealing with it; for every other deck, you add a couple silvers and you're happy. But treasure hunter can also do something funny in the end game, where you can easily gain a ludicrous number of silvers. Haven't yet had the pleasure of a treasure hunter/Feodum game, which I imagine is something like a duchy dance with an exponential growth function.

Warrior: The 3-4 limitation really hurts this attack (not that this is a bad thing). Now, cost reduction + lots of pages + Warrior is probably a thing, but even that is a damn tricky thing since whenever Warrior is available, Champion is available to perma-moot it. Doesn't feel like a cheap way to win at all; I'd have mad respect for someone that pulled this off against me (it has yet to happen).

Hero: the funniest, but again, not much reason to keep this one around. Maybe worth turning a second page into a hero on a colony board just to workshop platina? Dunno, haven't tried it. Good Combo with Horn of Plenty (the whole line is, of course).

this post was in the wrong forum. please delete.

[-Stef-]

this post was in the wrong forum. please delete.

You can remove it yourself.... top right of your own post says Quote, Modify, Remove

[LastFootnote]

this post was in the wrong forum. please delete.

You can remove it yourself.... top right of your own post says Quote, Modify, Remove

You can delete your replies to posts, but you cannot delete your own topics.