Print

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

[ehunt]

it isn't even that much like herald

[aku_chi]

Vassal is more like Conspirator.

[Watno]

It's also not Farmland.

[weety4]

When Herald or Vassal work they are of similar strength (Lost City vs. Double Peddler). But Vassal is terminal when it doesn't work which is why it is riskier to play it early and  why it costs less than Herald. This is why it is also harder to set up a Vassal chain than a Conspirator chain which is again why Vassal is cheaper than Conspirator.

It is quite interesting that a card which is very similar to two existing cards plays/feels quite a bit different.

[Chris is me]

When Herald or Vassal work they are of similar strength (Lost City vs. Double Peddler).

This isn't really true either. Lost City is worlds better than double Peddler, so they really play quite differently even in a deck full of Actions.

[LastFootnote]

When Herald or Vassal work they are of similar strength (Lost City vs. Double Peddler).

This isn't really true either. Lost City is worlds better than double Peddler, so they really play quite differently even in a deck full of Actions.

I disagree.

[werothegreat]

When Herald or Vassal work they are of similar strength (Lost City vs. Double Peddler).

This isn't really true either. Lost City is worlds better than double Peddler, so they really play quite differently even in a deck full of Actions.

I disagree.

It depends on what your engine is lacking, really.  If it's a sloggy game, I'd probably rather have 4 double Peddlers than 4 Lost Cities chained in a row.

[gkrieg13]

When Herald or Vassal work they are of similar strength (Lost City vs. Double Peddler).

This isn't really true either. Lost City is worlds better than double Peddler, so they really play quite differently even in a deck full of Actions.

I disagree.

It depends on what your engine is lacking, really.  If it's a sloggy game, I'd probably rather have 4 double Peddlers than 4 Lost Cities chained in a row.

But if it is a sloggy game, neither is happening.

[NoMoreFun]

Vassal's discard feature is underrated. If all the good cards in your deck are actions, Vassal is good for cycling.

Same with the "you may". Vassal handles trashers way better.

[AdrianHealey]

Vassal is fun with +1 action.

[singletee]

Chapel/Vassal is often a better opening than Chapel/Silver.

[GendoIkari]

But Vassal is terminal when it doesn't work

I've found that a big weakness of Vassal is that it can be terminal even when it does work!

[weety4]

When Herald or Vassal work they are of similar strength (Lost City vs. Double Peddler).

This isn't really true either. Lost City is worlds better than double Peddler, so they really play quite differently even in a deck full of Actions.

Two Peddlers cost 4$ whereas a Village and a Lab cost 3$ and 5$. Now two cards baked in one is of course slightly different than those two cards as singles so this is very rough but it still illustrates that "worlds better" is an exaggeration.

Lost City without the drawback would probably be a 6$ and Grand Market without the Buy is arguably even better than 6$. At least it seems virtually always better than Gold to me.

[Chris is me]

When Herald or Vassal work they are of similar strength (Lost City vs. Double Peddler).

This isn't really true either. Lost City is worlds better than double Peddler, so they really play quite differently even in a deck full of Actions.

Two Peddlers cost 4$ whereas a Village and a Lab cost 3$ and 5$. Now two cards baked in one is of course slightly different than those two cards as singles so this is very rough but it still illustrates that "worlds better" is an exaggeration.

Lost City without the drawback would probably be a 6$ and Grand Market without the Buy is arguably even better than 6$. At least it seems virtually always better than Gold to me.

Using cost as a proxy for power is not always the best idea.

You can get economy in many, many different ways. Draw and actions are a much more valuable resource.

[Awaclus]

Especially actions. The problem with actions is usually that you have to buy cards that don't really do anything on their own to get them, and Herald helps with that because it actually does something on its own (although not until you can connect it with other Actions), making it easy to just get a bunch of Heralds without losing a lot of momentum and then you have all this terminal space for free.

[GendoIkari]

Two Peddlers cost 4$ whereas a Village and a Lab cost 3$ and 5$. Now two cards baked in one is of course slightly different than those two cards as singles so this is very rough but it still illustrates that "worlds better" is an exaggeration.

Given the important cost difference between and , it's not a stretch to argue that even a single average is better than 2 average s, let alone a plus a .

[LastFootnote]

Two Peddlers cost 4$ whereas a Village and a Lab cost 3$ and 5$. Now two cards baked in one is of course slightly different than those two cards as singles so this is very rough but it still illustrates that "worlds better" is an exaggeration.

Given the important cost difference between and , it's not a stretch to argue that even a single average is better than 2 average s, let alone a plus a .

I think it's rare that a single average $5 is better than two average $4s. Like, really rare. I would rather have two Caravans over a Lab almost always.

One way to think of [+2 Cards; +2 Actions] is Border Village/Lab. That's more or less a Lost City without the on-gain penalty, and it costs $6. [+1 Card; +1 Action; +$2] would have to cost more than that, I bet.

[AJD]

Two Peddlers cost 4$ whereas a Village and a Lab cost 3$ and 5$. Now two cards baked in one is of course slightly different than those two cards as singles so this is very rough but it still illustrates that "worlds better" is an exaggeration.

Given the important cost difference between and , it's not a stretch to argue that even a single average is better than 2 average s, let alone a plus a .

I think it's rare that a single average $5 is better than two average $4s. Like, really rare. I would rather have two Caravans over a Lab almost always.

One way to think of [+2 Cards; +2 Actions] is Border Village/Lab. That's more or less a Lost City without the on-gain penalty, and it costs $6. [+1 Card; +1 Action; +$2] would have to cost more than that, I bet.

[+1 Card; +1 Action; +$2] was tested at $7. It ended up as Grand Market with its weird cost and Copper restriction because testers wanted it to have +Buy, which (apparently) made it too good for $7 but not good enough for $8.

[werothegreat]

At any rate, do we really need any more vanilla cards?  Gimme more complicated nonsense cards, bring 'em on

[faust]

I think it's rare that a single average $5 is better than two average $4s. Like, really rare. I would rather have two Caravans over a Lab almost always.

Ball is currently rated 73/96 in the $5 card list. Do you think that's a gross misranking? According to your argument, Ball should be ranked significantly above 50%.

[LastFootnote]

I think it's rare that a single average $5 is better than two average $4s. Like, really rare. I would rather have two Caravans over a Lab almost always.

Ball is currently rated 73/96 in the $5 card list. Do you think that's a gross misranking? According to your argument, Ball should be ranked significantly above 50%.

I don't see why. That –$1 token is significant.

EDIT: And I should note, Ball didn't always have the –$1 token. I personally pushed for it to be nerfed. It was super-nuts before it got that penalty, especially with cost reduction but also just across the board.

[faust]

One way to think of [+2 Cards; +2 Actions] is Border Village/Lab. That's more or less a Lost City without the on-gain penalty, and it costs $6. [+1 Card; +1 Action; +$2] would have to cost more than that, I bet.

This is false; by your argument, [+1 card, +1 action, +$2] is Ball (taking two Peddlers), which costs $5 + -$1 token, which is by any reasonable metirc less than $6.

[LastFootnote]

One way to think of [+2 Cards; +2 Actions] is Border Village/Lab. That's more or less a Lost City without the on-gain penalty, and it costs $6. [+1 Card; +1 Action; +$2] would have to cost more than that, I bet.

This is false; by your argument, [+1 card, +1 action, +$2] is Ball (taking two Peddlers), which costs $5 + -$1 token, which is by any reasonable metirc less than $6.

Peddler doesn't cost $4. Poacher does, but it has a penalty.

EDIT: Also, the –$1 token is harsher than costing $1 more. It always carries over to your next turn, even if you could pay it off now.

[faust]

One way to think of [+2 Cards; +2 Actions] is Border Village/Lab. That's more or less a Lost City without the on-gain penalty, and it costs $6. [+1 Card; +1 Action; +$2] would have to cost more than that, I bet.

This is false; by your argument, [+1 card, +1 action, +$2] is Ball (taking two Peddlers), which costs $5 + -$1 token, which is by any reasonable metirc less than $6.

Peddler doesn't cost $4. Poacher does, but it has a penalty.

I think Donald X. himself said that Peddler could cost $4, which is which he chose the effect for Poacher because it had to be priced for a situation where no piles run out.

EDIT: this is the quote:

Poacher: This is in a player interaction slot, vacated by Spy. I thought of having some vanilla bonuses with the penalty of discarding a card per empty pile. The vanilla bonuses had to be essentially fair at the price of the card, since you might never empty a pile until the game was over. So really it required a vanilla card I hadn't made yet. Well there was one of those, and it was +1 Card +1 Action +$1 for $4. So there it is. Avoiding making that card all these years finally paid off.

[LastFootnote]

One way to think of [+2 Cards; +2 Actions] is Border Village/Lab. That's more or less a Lost City without the on-gain penalty, and it costs $6. [+1 Card; +1 Action; +$2] would have to cost more than that, I bet.

This is false; by your argument, [+1 card, +1 action, +$2] is Ball (taking two Peddlers), which costs $5 + -$1 token, which is by any reasonable metirc less than $6.

Peddler doesn't cost $4. Poacher does, but it has a penalty.

I think Donald X. himself said that Peddler could cost $4, which is which he chose the effect for Poacher because it had to be priced for a situation where no piles run out.

Well we're discussing my opinion, I'm pretty sure, and how internally consistent it is. I think Peddler would be too strong at $4 (but too weak at $5).