Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2  All

Author Topic: Is develop REALLY that awful?  (Read 22624 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

glennC

  • Chancellor
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22
  • Respect: +3
    • View Profile
Is develop REALLY that awful?
« on: February 05, 2012, 07:30:09 pm »
+3

Here's how I see develop:
Open with develop, and develop an expensive card into 2 cards that *end up on the top of your deck*.  This would give you a very accelerated opening.

So with a 3/4 opening, you might end up with develop and your $4 card colliding.  Develop the 4 card into a great 5 card like witch/mountebank/etc.  (Scheme would make this much worse.)  Hopefully the strength of playing the 5 early outweighs develop's weaknesses.  If there is no collision, then at least you can hopefully do something good with estate-->early silver.

Late game:  I think that develop is terrible in the late game unless there is some cute+powerful combination like King's Court + Mountebank/Torturer/etc.  Its power comes from developing an expensive card... otherwise it is the terrible version of remake.  Its benefit in the opening may make it good enough that it is ok as a dead card in the late game (e.g. like how chapel and remake are usually dead cards in the late game).

---
Develop/baron opening:  This is not so bad since baron tends to be a dead card later on.  Hopefully there are good $5 cards for the baron to turn into.  But even market is not terrible as this (I am just guessing) will be slightly slower than smithy/big money.  Treasury is obviously better than market.

---
Obviously develop depends on having suitable cards on the board.

$4 cards to open with:  baron, nomad camp (NC may make more sense as 3rd buy since develop is likely coming if you didn't draw it; or buy it with both the 2nd and 3rd buy), mining village?

Probably doesn't work:
Potion:  If there is a compelling potion card like Familiar, you might as well open silver/familiar.  If it's something like university, then the develop/potion opening may not be that awful.  If you get the collision, kill the potion for the $5 you wanted.  Otherwise you are trashing the estate for a silver and follow the university strategy.
Sea hag: This only makes sense if there is a $5 curser and Scheme on the board.  Otherwise just try to get 2 sea hags and 0 develops.

Trashing cards like bishop, remake, trader:  On one hand, you can argue that having 2 trashing cards isn't that good a strategy.  On the other hand, a develop can do exceptionally well in a small deck with many expensive cards.

$5 cards:  Aside from the top-tier $5 cards (e.g. the attacks), mint and mandarin are good to see on the board since develop lets you turn them into something more useful.
Trading post is good to see on the board.

---
Cute combinations:

9/7:
with Peddler on the board, peddler --> platinum is always good.  develop Silver --> hamlet + $4 village (or other card/action and +buy card) will help pickup peddlers.

7/5: 
king's court + torturer/mountebank/witch/rabble/etc.
forge + duchy may be ok in late game when you are rushing for VPs

6/4:
border village + almost anything (especially if governor is on the board)
border village + remodel --> province
border village + remake???  (right away you could remake BV into forge/KC, though remake is not that useful later in the game)
goons + throne room (kind of)
grand market + throne room (kind of)
grand market + conspirator
hoard + bridge (+great hall; because otherwise you normally want to buy a single really good Victory card as opposed to two, unless you have 2 hoards)
hoard + mining village (might as well sacrifice the mining village for a province or duchy instead of estate)
nobles + any village
gold + potion --> hopefully buy possession

5/3:
scheme + powerful attack (in early game)
scheme + minion (as a general strategy)
village-style card + card-drawer (torturer, etc.)
minion + menagerie (as a general strategy)
minion + fishing village and other disappearing cards (e.g. oasis)
library + disappearing cards
tunnel + discarding-card like Inn
menagerie + Inn/etc.
cartographer + wishing well
develop + any $5 to turn into a $6/$4

4/2:
tournament / haven
treasure map / haven   (open with 2 develops, turn the estates into silvers... maybe hit treasure maps once or twice)
conspirator / any +card/+action
native village / bridge  (as a general strategy)
crossroads / $4 victory (silk road, gardens, island)
crossroads / scout
island / hamlet (kind of; hamlet lets you avoid terminal action collision)

---
The best boards to open with develop (as far as I can tell):
Strong $5 attack + King's Court
Strong $5 attack + Scheme
Border Village + preferably $4 village or other non-terminal (or island)
Peddler + peddler-enabling $2/$4 cards.  (and maybe $5/$3 enablers like market)
Minion + $3 cards that help minion strategies

Trading post on a board with engine cards
Hoard/bridge/great hall

Marginal boards:
University
Treasure map / haven
Tournament / haven? (haven't tested this)
Big money $5 card (library, vault, embassy)
Tunnel + $5 discard (Embassy, Inn, etc.)

Chapel?  (use develop to rebuild a chapel deck)
« Last Edit: February 07, 2012, 02:46:45 pm by glennC »
Logged

permanoob

  • Salvager
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 66
  • Respect: +29
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #1 on: February 05, 2012, 08:55:31 pm »
0

Good work! Develop is a card that may improve over time slightly as combos are developed a little bit. I especially like Mountebank/Scheme. What if the $4 card was Ironworks so if you don't draw it with develop you can gain another one to improve your chances on the reshuffle. However these combos all basically require two other cards to be on the board besides develop which means they can't be expected to appear that often.
Logged

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1856
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #2 on: February 05, 2012, 09:49:56 pm »
0

How are you planning on matching up your Develop with your power card?
Logged

glennC

  • Chancellor
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22
  • Respect: +3
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #3 on: February 05, 2012, 10:09:04 pm »
0

I suppose you are depending on luck.  Otherwise you only get to trash your estate for a silver which you topdeck.  The topdecking is only useful in the beginning really.
Logged

HiveMindEmulator

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2222
  • Respect: +2117
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #4 on: February 06, 2012, 02:06:18 am »
+1

I actually really like develop, but I still rank it as the worst $3 card. I'm currently really overbuying it in my games to try to see how it plays out in different kingdoms. I personally don't think it's good as an opening into general strategies and rather that it needs a really specific kind of kingdom to shine. The kingdom should have cards at all prices $2-$5 that you can use at least somewhat coherently, including at least 1 village, mostly non-terminals (every time you gain 2 cards, at least one should be non-terminal), preferably one card-drawer, and preferably a $4 card that is good for opening but can be gotten rid of later). An example would be: cellar, wishing well, moneylender, worker's village, rabble, or pawn, fishing village, smithy, cutpurse, bazaar. This way you can continually just develop the most expensive card in your hand into more good cards so that you're just expanding your deck into a bunch of these cards.
Logged

Geronimoo

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1055
  • Respect: +859
    • View Profile
    • Geronimoo's Dominion Simulator
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #5 on: February 06, 2012, 04:24:18 am »
+1

Develop gains you 2 cards, so there are probably a few rush strategies that would work thanks to this card.

For instance: Silk Road rush:

Open Develop/random $4, if they collide, Develop the $4 into a random $5 + Develop which go on top. Next turn Develop the $5 into a Gold and a Silk Road (or yet another random $4).
First priority is probably to get all or close to all the Develops, then start Developing Develops into Silk Road/Estate for 5VP a turn. If the other guy is building a normal deck that can get 4 Provinces he'll stall and ... start to buy Silk Roads... yeah, it's probably not a very good plan :)

Here's a sample solitaire game:
http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201202/06/game-20120206-011106-be30a405.html
Logged

Loschmidt

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 180
  • Respect: +61
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #6 on: February 06, 2012, 06:05:08 am »
0

Nice article :D

I think the most common transition for develop will be the $4 --> $5/silver. $5's are usually cards you're happy to get and top decking a silver in the early game is quite good. So develop plus any spammable $4 is potentially a goer; e.g. spy/mining village/caravan/worker's village
Logged

brokoli

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1119
  • Respect: +786
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #7 on: February 06, 2012, 07:52:05 am »
0

Develop is tricky, but really not that bad.

I love your ideas !

Quote
minion + menagerie (as a general strategy)
This is nice, but I think Festival is far better than minion here.

Quote
library + disappearing cards
Fishing village is probably the best.
Logged

ecq

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 224
  • Respect: +162
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #8 on: February 06, 2012, 11:35:22 am »
0

Develop is good in specific situations, but it's not great in general.  It's easily the worst trasher.  In most cases it doesn't pass the Silver test.

Accelerating access to a $5 card sounds great, but there's only a 30% chance of Develop and the $4 card ending up in the same hand on turns 3 or 4.  If they're in the same hand on Turn 4, then whatever you top-deck misses the next shuffle.  If you top-deck a Curse attack, the Curse will always miss your opponent's shuffle if you're player 2.  As player 1, it'll miss his shuffle unless your Develop finds your $4 card on turn 3, which happens 15% of the time.

So what happens if the two cards don't collide?  Trading an Estate for a top-decked silver sounds like a good deal, but consider that you could have just opened Silver/X.  What you've really done is traded an Estate for a Develop.  Worse, you've delayed access to a Silver by one turn.

If you draw Develop + 3 Coppers + Estate, you could have just bought the coveted $5 card, but instead you'll see 2 $3 cards.  If you draw Develop + 4 Coppers, you could have bought a card up to $6.

It's good in situations where you want to acquire a lot of cards (Vineyards, Silk Road, Border Village + Conspirator, Grand Market, Scrying Pool, etc).  Those games aren't the norm, though.
Logged

DStu

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2627
  • Respect: +1490
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #9 on: February 06, 2012, 11:48:41 am »
0

Logged

greatexpectations

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1096
  • Respect: +1066
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #10 on: February 06, 2012, 11:54:31 am »
0

Develop gains you 2 cards, so there are probably a few rush strategies that would work thanks to this card.

For instance: Silk Road rush:

Open Develop/random $4, if they collide, Develop the $4 into a random $5 + Develop which go on top. Next turn Develop the $5 into a Gold and a Silk Road (or yet another random $4).
First priority is probably to get all or close to all the Develops, then start Developing Develops into Silk Road/Estate for 5VP a turn. If the other guy is building a normal deck that can get 4 Provinces he'll stall and ... start to buy Silk Roads... yeah, it's probably not a very good plan :)

i recently won one with a similar type of strategy, though i used only a few develops.  having green options at 2/4/5/6 helped.
http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20120201-200444-bced9ef1.html
Logged
momomoto: ...I looked at the tableau and went "Mountebank? That's for jerks."
rrenaud: Jerks win.

Tahtweasel

  • Navigator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 71
  • Respect: +36
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #11 on: February 06, 2012, 01:35:56 pm »
0

Develop is a very poor copper-trasher, and a rather poor estate-trasher (essentially it's a half-Remake.)

To use it well, you have to have a plan to trash the more expensive cards.

An ideal Develop play is something like this.

Develop Ill-Gotten Gains into Border Village and Smithy, gain an Ill-Gotten Gains from Border Village. You've just cursed your opponent and gotten yourself a guaranteed village-smithy combo for your next turn.

Or:

Develop Gold into King's Court and Hunting Party and put them on your deck.
Logged

aaron0013

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 308
  • Respect: +219
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #12 on: February 06, 2012, 01:43:28 pm »
0

$4 cards to open with:  baron, nomad camp (NC may make more sense as 3rd buy since develop is likely coming if you didn't draw it; or buy it with both the 2nd and 3rd buy), mining village?

Maybe I'm completely wrong about this, but nomad camp seems to be a terrible choice in this situation.  According to theory's evaluation of woodcutter, it is one of the worst cards for its cost in the game.  After buying two nomad camps in the first 3 buys, you would be stuck with a lame nomad camp while your opponent has bought more reliable cards such as silver.  Hopefully, you can develop the other one, but engine building cards seem like they would be better for your money.
Logged

RisingJaguar

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 527
  • Respect: +184
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #13 on: February 06, 2012, 02:06:46 pm »
0

$4 cards to open with:  baron, nomad camp (NC may make more sense as 3rd buy since develop is likely coming if you didn't draw it; or buy it with both the 2nd and 3rd buy), mining village?

Maybe I'm completely wrong about this, but nomad camp seems to be a terrible choice in this situation.  According to theory's evaluation of woodcutter, it is one of the worst cards for its cost in the game.  After buying two nomad camps in the first 3 buys, you would be stuck with a lame nomad camp while your opponent has bought more reliable cards such as silver.  Hopefully, you can develop the other one, but engine building cards seem like they would be better for your money.
I think you misunderstand his situation, which is understandable.  He's saying if you have 3/4 split, you buy develop/nomad's camp.  Normally you only get 15% chance (5/12 * 4/11) but now that you already have nomad's camp top decked, you get 36% (4/11). 

The second part you get confused is the 4/3 example,  He's saying buy any $4 and develop.  If on turn 3, you get the $4 card but no develop.  You can buy nomad's camp as it would likely collide with develop (4/7). 
Logged

Loschmidt

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 180
  • Respect: +61
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #14 on: February 06, 2012, 04:20:52 pm »
0

Develop is a very poor copper-trasher, and a rather poor estate-trasher

If you think about develop as a Trasher it really is sub par, as ecq said its easily the worst. But given you trash one card but gain two, its not a trasher its a gainer. Its more of a workshop variant rather than a remake variant, this is why it works in Gardens games but is terrible if you're trying to use it to thin out your crap.

In the right situations it gains you good cards $4 --> silver/$5 or a $5 --> gold/$4 and it puts both of them on the deck! This is a very powerful combination of gaining a top decking in the early/middle game.

How are you planning on matching up your Develop with your power card?
Accelerating access to a $5 card sounds great, but there's only a 30% chance of Develop and the $4 card ending up in the same hand on turns 3 or 4.

Making develop and your developing target line up is one of the biggest problems with develop. There are a few things to consider about this. Firstly that developing strategies are aided by sifting cards (e.g. cellar/warehouse). These will help by a) helping develop and your target line up, and b) develop will help you get good cards, but it wont help you get rid of bad cards so sifting will still be necessary

Secondly people seem to forget that develop itself presents a solution to the collision problem; its a top-decker. As glennC mentioned in his post you can do this:

$4 --> $5/develop
$5 --> $6/$4

As Donald would say, thats a cute move. You used your develop to help you line up another develop and a $5, and then you managed to top deck a gold and a $4. (If you were some sort of really awesome dude, you could incorporate a village and a drawing card and do this in the same turn)

Its summary its totally not a power card (check the $3 price tag) so it needs support, its an incredibly poor trasher (you end up with more than you started with) but its a gainer than can top-deck. And in the right circumstances a lot of fun to play.
Logged

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1856
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #15 on: February 06, 2012, 05:16:47 pm »
0

Secondly people seem to forget that develop itself presents a solution to the collision problem; its a top-decker. As glennC mentioned in his post you can do this:

$4 --> $5/develop
$5 --> $6/$4

The problem in the first place is matching up the Develop with your $4 card. If your target is a $6/$4 combination, then yeah, all you need to do is to match your Develop with your $4 card, but you've taken an extra turn to get that combination and you've taken a second, relatively useless Develop into your deck. You don't really want to even Develop other Develops unless there's good $2s on the board, and even then, few of them are good enough that you'd be willing to topdeck them.

(Plus you've left yourself with 3-card hands on 2 consecutive turns.)
Logged

HiveMindEmulator

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2222
  • Respect: +2117
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #16 on: February 06, 2012, 05:29:55 pm »
0

You don't really want to even Develop other Develops unless there's good $2s on the board, and even then, few of them are good enough that you'd be willing to topdeck them.
The point about $2 cards is really important. While the strong part of develop is developing expensive stuff, sometimes you won't be able to do anything better than developing a $3 card. So it's important that there is a $2 card that you're at least willing to topdeck.
Logged

HB

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25
  • Respect: +13
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #17 on: February 06, 2012, 05:35:49 pm »
0

Develop gains you 2 cards, so there are probably a few rush strategies that would work thanks to this card.

For instance: Silk Road rush:

Open Develop/random $4, if they collide, Develop the $4 into a random $5 + Develop which go on top. Next turn Develop the $5 into a Gold and a Silk Road (or yet another random $4).
First priority is probably to get all or close to all the Develops, then start Developing Develops into Silk Road/Estate for 5VP a turn. If the other guy is building a normal deck that can get 4 Provinces he'll stall and ... start to buy Silk Roads... yeah, it's probably not a very good plan :)

Here's a sample solitaire game:
http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201202/06/game-20120206-011106-be30a405.html

What about Gardens? Develop + Gardens sounds like a neat strategy when there is no workshop or similar.
Logged

ftl

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2056
  • Shuffle iT Username: ftl
  • Respect: +1344
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #18 on: February 06, 2012, 05:42:10 pm »
0

I would worry a little that if you're using Develop to pick up Gardens and Estates (both of which you want in a gardens strategy) then you're top-decking them, slowing your cycling (preventing you from seeing that develop again) and messing up your next turn.

It's still a gainer, though, so it should work passably, but probably not as well as other Gardens enablers. Has anyone here with more experience tried or simulated this?
Logged

DG

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4074
  • Respect: +2624
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #19 on: February 06, 2012, 06:16:09 pm »
0

My best use for develop so far has been to speedily rebuild a chapel deck. Each turn would I trash a worker's village to gain a treasury and menagerie, draw them that turn, then play an ironworks to get another worker's village. Whilst this was tidy but not spectacular it worked well based on
(1) being able to draw the developed cards the same turn
(2) having a supply of cards to develop that weren't going to be missed
(3) tightly controlled drawing so that the develop never was drawn with bad cards
(4) it was never a waste of a terminal action
Logged

chwhite

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1065
  • Respect: +441
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #20 on: February 06, 2012, 06:22:50 pm »
0

I still haven't really gotten the hang of using Develop the way it "should" be used, turning one good card into two good cards; I've definitely missed out on some good combos this way but most of the time it's just too slow.  (Big exception: turning $5s into Grand Markets.  That's usually worth it.)

However, if the board is sufficiently slow than Develop can work.  I like it as a Turn 3-4 buy in Sea Hag games; trashing one card a turn is not great if there are other options, but the game is going to be long enough that it's better than nothing.  And of course, turning the Hag into a $5 and a Silver is nothing to be sneezed at. 
« Last Edit: February 06, 2012, 06:44:30 pm by chwhite »
Logged
To discard or not to discard?  That is the question.

glennC

  • Chancellor
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22
  • Respect: +3
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #21 on: February 06, 2012, 06:44:31 pm »
0

Quote
Develop + Gardens
Develop + Gardens + Crossroads seems like it could be a viable strategy???  You can develop $3 cards into gardens/crossroads.  Crossroads is guaranteed to be at least +3actions/+1card right?

Then again, you might rather develop a Gardens (really!) into a $5 you want to deplete (probably Duchy) and another develop.  Next turn, develop the $5 into a Gardens and a $6.  Worse comes to worse you have your Develops colliding and I suppose you can turn them into Gardens/Estate... which is not that awful.  (Or Crossroads if it exists.)

Quote
then yeah, all you need to do is to match your Develop with your $4 card, but you've taken an extra turn to get that combination and you've taken a second, relatively useless Develop into your deck.
It's probably only compelling if border village is on the board.  Then you probably don't mind having so many develops.

I suppose other instances where you wouldn't mind having a lot of develops:
Treasure Map
Spam strategies like gardens.  The +buy and attack of Goons may be compelling too if it is on the board?

----

I definitely do see the disadvantages.  Unless there is a really compelling combination on the board, you might as well be playing your most expensive card.  Otherwise you play develop and have 3 cards to buy something not-so-great and your next turn has to be really good to compensate.

There may be midgame uses??  If you have some kind of engine going on, then developing a gold into King's Court and +action Drawer would ensure that you get your engine to fire the next turn.  (And the turn after that, etc.)

Quote
Firstly that developing strategies are aided by sifting cards (e.g. cellar/warehouse).
Haha this seems like polishing a turd.  It might be more interesting to use warehouse to get rid of Develop?  Of course if King's Court is on the board then some of those combinations are very compelling.

Quote
However, if the board is sufficiently slow than Develop can work.  I like it as a Turn 3-4 buy in Sea Hag games; trashing one card a turn is not great if there are other options, but the game is going to be long enough that it's better than nothing.  And of course, turning the Hag into a $5 and a Silver is nothing to be sneezed at. 
I think I'd still rather buy a second Sea Hag.  And if you have your develop collide with Sea Hag... I think I'd rather curse.  (Unless there is a $5 curser; obviously a $5 curser and scheme on the board changes things.)
« Last Edit: February 06, 2012, 07:13:01 pm by glennC »
Logged

rotundo

  • Pearl Diver
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10
  • Respect: +3
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #22 on: February 06, 2012, 07:48:12 pm »
0

I just played a game yesterday with Ill-Gotten Gains, Border Village and Feast. Develop was a beast!

http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20120205-202617-deb3775a.html.

With the right action cards on the board, it can play very well with Vineyards too:

http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20120114-121038-fe52ed9d.html
Logged

glennC

  • Chancellor
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22
  • Respect: +3
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #23 on: February 06, 2012, 11:54:27 pm »
0

Quote
http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20120114-121038-fe52ed9d.html
I'm not sure if I agree with your opponent's play.  He was buying mining village in the midgame without good terminal actions.  He should've bought silver instead in my opinion.  He ended the game with only a single gold.

To counter the vineyards rush... maybe he should've went hard on cities.  Hard to say there.  The problem with trying to compete with vineyards is that
(A) the other player can be careful about not emptying the piles and forcing a city rush.  Without a +buy on the board the player buying cities can have a hard time depleting 1/2 piles.  He doesn't control when the game ends.
(B) its hard for a non-vineyards player to buy all 8 provinces and force a game end that way.  Not with this board since there isn't a mega-turn or engine strategy (unless you plan on a 2-pile city megaturn; with only 1 pile depleted, city doesn't give that important +buy).

I wouldn't have developed estates into Great Halls so early.  I think it would've made sense to get silver or more develops (just for the spam power).

----

I still really think that Chancellor is the worst $3 card.  Chancellor doesn't have any situations where it truly shines.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2012, 11:58:30 pm by glennC »
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9542
  • Respect: +10577
    • View Profile
Re: Is develop REALLY that awful?
« Reply #24 on: February 07, 2012, 04:00:34 pm »
0

So I decided to try it:

http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20120206-190713-c135492b.html

Worked pretty well for me. I opened Develop/Navigator; they didn't colide. I played Develop 4 times throughout the game. Once for Estate -> Silver, the other 3 for Navigator -> Laboratory + Silver.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0
Pages: [1] 2  All
 

Page created in 0.057 seconds with 22 queries.