Print

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

[Qvist]

Just to finish this off:

Knights

10. =0 Dame Josephine
9. =0 Sir Martin
8. =0 Sir Vander
7. =0 Dame Natalie
6. =0 Dame Sylvia
5. =0 Sir Destry
4. =0 Dame Molly
3. =0 Sir Michael
2. =0 Sir Bailey
1. =0 Dame Anna

+ cards

32. =0 Adventurer
31. ▼1 Harem
30. ▲1 Farmland
29. NEW Conquest
28. NEW Annex
27. NEW Wedding
26. ▼1 Expand
25. ▼4 Hoard
24. ▲2 Bank
23. =0 Forge
22. ▲2 Prince
21. NEW Castles
20. =0 Training
19. ▼1 Nobles
18. NEW Royal Blacksmith
17. ▲1 Fairgrounds
16. ▼4 Hireling
15. =0 Altar
14. ▲2 Peddler
13. =0 Hunting Grounds
12. NEW Overlord
11. ▼2 Border Village
10. NEW Dominate
9. ▼2 Lost Arts
8. ▲1 Pathfinding
7. ▲5 Inheritance
6. =0 Grand Market
5. NEW City Quarter
4. NEW Fortune
3. =0 Goons
2. NEW Donate
1. =0 King's Court

cards

10. =0 Transmute
9. =0 Philosopher's Stone
8. ▼2 Possession
7. =0 University
6. ▲2 Golem
5. =0 Alchemist
4. =0 Apothecary
3. =0 Vineyard
2. =0 Familiar
1. =0 Scrying Pool

Events

34. ▼2 Raid
33. ▲1 Quest
32. NEW Tax
31. NEW Banquet
30. NEW Conquest
29. NEW Annex
28. NEW Ritual
27. NEW Windfall
26. ▼5 Pilgrimage
25. NEW Wedding
24. ▲2 Scouting Party
23. ▼5 Ball
22. ▲1 Seaway
21. ▼5 Mission
20. ▲1 Travelling Fair
19. ▲3 Plan
18. ▲6 Trade
17. ▼2 Expedition
16. NEW Delve
15. ▼4 Training
14. NEW Advance
13. NEW Salt The Earth
12. NEW Triumph
11. ▲2 Borrow
10. ▼3 Summon
9. =0 Alms
8. ▲2 Bonfire
7. ▲8 Save
6. NEW Dominate
5. ▼3 Lost Arts
4. ▲1 Inheritance
3. ▲1 Pathfinding
2. ▲1 Ferry
1. NEW Donate

Landmarks

21. Labyrinth
20. Aqueduct
19. Baths
18. Arena
17. Colonnade
16. Basilica
15. Battlefield
14. Palace
13. Defiled Shrine
12. Tomb
11. Tower
10. Obelisk
9. Moutain Pass
8. Orchard
7. Triumphal Arch
6. Wolf Den
5. Bandit Fort
4. Fountain
3. Keep
2. Museum
1. Wall

[werothegreat]

I'm surprised King's Court remained unseated at first.  We had 2 strong contenders from Empires - Donate and Fortune - to bump it off.

[SirSlugma]

Those landmark rankings seem a little bit off to me.  Swap Orchard and Museum and I think you're closer to their value.  I know trashing is good anyway, but Tomb should really be top 5.

Dominate seems to me like it should be higher, but it also costs 14 which really has no comparison of any sort when it comes to price point.  Its impact is still pretty significant on a lot of boards, I think.

[trivialknot]

Perhaps someone could start separate threads for each of the categories.  I can see this thread becoming very unfocused.

[2.71828.....]

I'm surprised King's Court remained unseated at first.  We had 2 strong contenders from Empires - Donate and Fortune - to bump it off.

I think KC is better than fortune, not sure about donate though

[Jfrisch]

Donate is much stronger than KC to me. I think you literally want to buy donate in 99.9+ percent of boards. That is not true for KC. Furthermore Donate is incredibly gamewarping and orders of magnitude better than Chapel.

[faust]

I think you literally want to buy donate in 99.9+ percent of boards. That is not true for KC.

Well played.

[Beyond Awesome]

The $6+ list seems way, way off to me.

Also Fountain at 4 is silly. That Landmark hardly ever matters

[Skumpy]

I'm the new guy around these parts, so please forgive me for any unintended impertinence, but I don't really understand the point of the potion cost list. Like, I used the rankings a lot to compare similar cost cards and learn what were good buys, but I don't get a whole lot out of comparing, say, Possession vs University. The lists are 5 years old at this point and while I understand that changing stuff up isn't really needed and I get that there are significant differences between $ and potions (such as multiple potion-card buys in 1 turn are rare, can't open with a potion-card, etc), I personally think treating potion costs as $3 would be a bigger help to newer players. (I could do similar rants about doing a breakdown of the 6+ cards since there's twice as many now as at the beginning and also about how ranking peddler as an $8 is confusing, but one rant's my daily quota and I don't want to make even more mountains out of molehills than I already have for a pretty well-established system).

Having said all that, thank you very much for the updates Qvist; like everybody else here, I appreciate the work you've put in. While stats and videos are nice of course, they're just the peanuts on this ice cream sundae of rankings. Stumbling upon your 2013 list review videos was how I discovered f.ds and the immense amount of strategy discussion I wasn't aware of, so I owe you a further thank you.



My reactions (because I should probably try and contribute at least something): I don't see a clear difference between King's Court and Donate at the top. I'd probably go King's Court #1 because if you consider an arbitrary board with 1 and not the other, Donate would very likely enable the engine, but King's Court can really make it boom even without trashing, and that's assuming Donate would've been the only trasher - there's not really any good comparisons for King's Court.

I don't have a whole of lot of experience with landmarks yet even 7 months later, but they seem pretty dang close to what I would rate them. Wall and Keep would've been my top 2. Fountain seems too high at 4. I think it's skippable frequently enough and even when it's a good investment, it usually doesn't require too much of a strategy adjustment. I'm really bad with Mountain Pass games, but it also seems a touch too high. It certainly doesn't suggest a need to rush for the first Province like Tournament does. I wouldn't at all be surprised to see Bandit Fort drop in the years to come. The penalty is harsh and I think it scares too many players (such as myself) into avoiding Silver and Gold altogether, but trashing them in the endgame is a very valid option. I'd like to see Tomb and Tower rise. I definitely feel like there's a pretty clear drop off in quality after Defiled Shrine. But yeah, all in all, it feels pretty accurate.

[jsh357]

The point you've realized and are dancing around is that these rankings are actually quite pointless and just done for fun. They give an illusion of helpfulness, but they are an arbitrary guideline at best no matter how they are organized. Context is just a huge factor in making purchase decisions. It doesn't matter if mountebank is "mathematically" better than an upgrade; if I need upgrade, I'll get upgrade. That's just one case, and there are countless scenarios where these rankings are no good at all. To get back to the potion thing, you are correct that the potion ranking is virtually meaningless. I laugh at anyone saying possession is a bad card or somehow worse than apothecary when it can be such a deeply centralizing card. However, I also recognize that the two cards are incomparable, not just because of their prices but because of many other factors. The same is true of something like triumph, which has the potential to be a total game decider, but is a lowly #10 here.  An even greater problem with the lists is that the voters a) have completely different ideas of what makes a card better than another b) might have used completely different sorting tools and c) all have different understandings of the game. The more time goes by and the better you get at the game, the less these lists will be useful. If they are helpful to someone starting out, okay, but I think that thinking of things in a strict order like this is ultimately detrimental. What the lists prove above all else is that dominion is too complicated to adhere to this method.

[Skumpy]

The point you've realized and are dancing around is that these rankings are actually quite pointless and just done for fun. They give an illusion of helpfulness, but they are an arbitrary guideline at best no matter how they are organized. Context is just a huge factor in making purchase decisions. It doesn't matter if mountebank is "mathematically" better than an upgrade; if I need upgrade, I'll get upgrade. That's just one case, and there are countless scenarios where these rankings are no good at all. To get back to the potion thing, you are correct that the potion ranking is virtually meaningless. I laugh at anyone saying possession is a bad card or somehow worse than apothecary when it can be such a deeply centralizing card. However, I also recognize that the two cards are incomparable, not just because of their prices but because of many other factors. The same is true of something like triumph, which has the potential to be a total game decider, but is a lowly #10 here.  An even greater problem with the lists is that the voters a) have completely different ideas of what makes a card better than another b) might have used completely different sorting tools and c) all have different understandings of the game. The more time goes by and the better you get at the game, the less these lists will be useful. If they are helpful to someone starting out, okay, but I think that thinking of things in a strict order like this is ultimately detrimental. What the lists prove above all else is that dominion is too complicated to adhere to this method.

The only thing I'd have to say in response is that, speaking as somebody who did learn a lot from these lists, it's not the small Mountebank vs Upgrade differences that teach new players, it's the Mountebank vs Saboteur chasms. I didn't know what I was doing for a long time, so learning what cards are deceptively weak/strong (and after getting experience, why) is a big help. Obviously, while the rankings are imprecise, they're pretty darn accurate when it comes to the significant differences in quality (though not without some rare exceptions: case and point, compare the change in opinion for Tunnel and Develop over the years).

But thank you for the answer jsh, basically put into words my inner feelings as you yourself said. Agree with 99.99+ percent of it.

[Cave-o-sapien]

The $6+ list seems way, way off to me.

Also Fountain at 4 is silly. That Landmark hardly ever matters

I wonder how often Fountain is a detrimental distraction.

[trivialknot]

Fountain really does stand out as the most misranked landmark.  Do the highest ranked players know something I don't?  Maybe Fountain looked really good in late 2016, and now we all know better?

Mountain Pass seems like a particularly difficult landmark to rank.  What would it even mean to say "Mountain Pass is strong"?  Is that like saying "You should usually go for Mountain Pass points"?  Or, "The person who wins Mountain Pass is in a stronger position"?  Obviously, the question of whether the points are worth the debt depends on how much debt it is.  But I would say that Mountain Pass is weak, because it barely influences your overall strategy, and barely affects when you decide to green.

I would put Mountain Pass below Tower, for sure.  Tower occasionally dominates games by enabling a rush.

[GendoIkari]

  What would it even mean to say "Mountain Pass is strong"? 

I have this same question about all Landmarks. With cards and events, one simple way to think of the ranking is "how often to you buy this"? Or, "if you could choose a card that you can buy but your opponent couldn't, which would you choose"? But with Landmarks, those ideas don't work.

My guess for a meaning "how high is this Landmark ranked" would be something like "how likely are you to play differently because this Landmark is in the game". Is that how other people think of it?

[LastFootnote]

  What would it even mean to say "Mountain Pass is strong"? 

I have this same question about all Landmarks. With cards and events, one simple way to think of the ranking is "how often to you buy this"? Or, "if you could choose a card that you can buy but your opponent couldn't, which would you choose"? But with Landmarks, those ideas don't work.

My guess for a meaning "how high is this Landmark ranked" would be something like "how likely are you to play differently because this Landmark is in the game". Is that how other people think of it?

That's how I think of it.

[trivialknot]

  What would it even mean to say "Mountain Pass is strong"? 

I have this same question about all Landmarks. With cards and events, one simple way to think of the ranking is "how often to you buy this"? Or, "if you could choose a card that you can buy but your opponent couldn't, which would you choose"? But with Landmarks, those ideas don't work.

My guess for a meaning "how high is this Landmark ranked" would be something like "how likely are you to play differently because this Landmark is in the game". Is that how other people think of it?

Yes, IMO that's how we should think of it.

But say that you're playing lots of games with people who really underrate Mountain Pass, and bid too low.  You might get the impression that Mountain Pass is really strong.  And then, when you rank the cards, you might have difficulty overcoming the intuition that Mountain Pass should be highly ranked.

There's a similar problem in ranking Aqueduct and Defiled Shrine.  I feel that Aqueduct should be ranked much higher, but maybe the reason I feel that way is because my play group undervalues the VP.  Does Aqueduct actually change my overall strategy by much?

[funkdoc]

i was ready to rant about the lack of artisan then realized 2nd edition wasn't in this list

thanks as always!

[faust]

  What would it even mean to say "Mountain Pass is strong"? 

I have this same question about all Landmarks. With cards and events, one simple way to think of the ranking is "how often to you buy this"? Or, "if you could choose a card that you can buy but your opponent couldn't, which would you choose"? But with Landmarks, those ideas don't work.

My guess for a meaning "how high is this Landmark ranked" would be something like "how likely are you to play differently because this Landmark is in the game". Is that how other people think of it?

That's how I think of it.

Yes, me too. Then I don't get the ranking of Mountain Pass, because it basically never affects the way you build your deck, other than that you cannot buy cards while paying off the debt.

[O]

  What would it even mean to say "Mountain Pass is strong"? 

I have this same question about all Landmarks. With cards and events, one simple way to think of the ranking is "how often to you buy this"? Or, "if you could choose a card that you can buy but your opponent couldn't, which would you choose"? But with Landmarks, those ideas don't work.

My guess for a meaning "how high is this Landmark ranked" would be something like "how likely are you to play differently because this Landmark is in the game". Is that how other people think of it?

That's how I think of it.

Yes, me too. Then I don't get the ranking of Mountain Pass, because it basically never affects the way you build your deck, other than that you cannot buy cards while paying off the debt.

Mountain pass is essentially an alt-VP in that it throws off the "5-3 province autoloses" paradigm and can enable some slower-to-ramp engines to work. Though it is generally worse at this than all the other alt VP methods.

[Awaclus]

Also, it incentivizes buying the first Province because then you get to set the price to the lowest number your opponent isn't willing to pay or the highest he is, depending on which one you're going for.

It's also good for strategies that don't have to buy anything, such as Lurker/HG.

[Omastar68]

Well, I was already planing to say I think Dame Natalie is underrated. I guess the silly thing there is that I'd only really want her to move 1 place anyways. 2 cards, a Necropolis, discarder, cantrip, trashing...those are all things that might be worse than "gain a card costing up to three," but I think it's more common for that gaining to be better than a terminal Silver.

I've had some good games w/ Natalie, one was really fun w/ Training and Merchant. But it's pretty common for a card that you basically always want in bulk to appear that Natalie can gain. Merchant, Harbinger, cheap Villages, Wishing Well, Pearl Diver, Vagrant, Patrician, etc. And it's a Knights board obviously, so more Lighthouses, and possibly Moats, is better. Speaking of Knights, she gains cheaper cards that can be trashed, reducing your odds of having good cards trashed. This is especially useful if you lose the knights split(not that all or any of them always get bought, but still.) And if you assume that there're enough actions, there are even more cheap cards you'd want a lot of. Like Vassal, and terminal draw(maybe, at least something like Courtyard.) It's pretty cheap gaining, but cost reducers can make it very strong. And even if she's not close to the top of the pile, if there are cost reducers knights are extra likely to be bought.

Feodum makes gaining a Silver better, and Estates can be worth gaining too. For instance, emptying the Estates so opponents can't cash in on Wild Hunt, or if you have Groundskeeper(s) in play. Triumph, Inheritance, maybe even Baron or Island(as reasons to gain Estates w/ Natalie.) I guess a few other things, the cheap gaining can help some w/ Fountain, or w/ Aqueduct moving a vp token from Silvers to better a victory buy. Avoid Embargoes, possibly even Tax. Keep. Some synergy w/ Throne Room variants if there are cheap cantrips. Lots of small stuff, but compare that to a terminal Silver. That just doesn't seem very impressive. I'd(tentatively) agree Sylvia>Vander, but that's about it. 2 coin isn't that much, and it might very well be more than enough(yay! 10 and 1 buy...) or not enough anyways(7...well I was just gonna get a Lab anyways. Didn't really need Sylvia after all!) If you are consistently drawing your deck, then gaining Silvers would be better.

Anyways, that's all I had for knights. A lot of people seem to question the rankings for landmarks, me too. Tomb and Wolf Den definitely seem more important than Bandit Fort or Fountain most of the time. Palace can be a lot of setup for not that much. I mean often you'll want the Golds, and maybe the Silvers, anyways, but generally all the ones that start w/ 6 per player like Battlefield and Labyrinth seem more important. Speaking of Labyrinth, how is that last? It can be really nice since you generally want to gain more than 1 card a turn anyways, and the person who starts doing that first can gain an advantage. Baths should be last imo. It's rarely important, and really is just small help for dud turns. Tower seems oddly high. Emptying a pile is easy enough(depends what pile:) ) but you need a lot more than your opponent to get a significant vp swing, and that's just not practical much of the time. Only other thing is I agree w/ people who say Mountain Pass isn't that good.

[Jacob marley]

  What would it even mean to say "Mountain Pass is strong"? 

I have this same question about all Landmarks. With cards and events, one simple way to think of the ranking is "how often to you buy this"? Or, "if you could choose a card that you can buy but your opponent couldn't, which would you choose"? But with Landmarks, those ideas don't work.

My guess for a meaning "how high is this Landmark ranked" would be something like "how likely are you to play differently because this Landmark is in the game". Is that how other people think of it?

That's how I think of it.

I don't see the point of ranking landmarks at all, as they are not something you buy, they are just there, and if anything, they may change the relative value of the other cards/events in the kingdom due to their effects, not that they have value relative each other or other elements of the game.

[Qvist]

While the value of having Landmark rankings is of course questionable, it didn't hurt anyone to rank them. We can then still decide if we want to rank them again in the end of this year.

[trivialknot]

I find the landmark rankings to be the most interesting part!  The top 3 landmarks, at least, make a lot of sense--Wall, Keep, and Museum really change how you play.  The bottom 7 landmarks consist of all the landmarks with 6 VP per player, plus Aqueduct.  It will be interesting to see if any of these things change next year.

[LibraryAdventurer]

I think Donate is overrated. It costs debt so both players have equal access to it. Sure, you'll probably buy it every game it appears, but so will your opponent. It changes the game significantly, but there are other cards/events that give a bigger advantage when you buy them.

Inheritance is higher than Pathfinding on the 6+ list, but Pathfinding is higher on the event list. weird. (I have Inheritance #1 on events and #6 on 6+.)

my 6+ list

Code: [Select]

31 farmland
30 harem
29 expand
28 hoard
27 bank
26 conquest
25 prince
24 wedding
23 forge
22 peddler
21 nobles
20 annex
19 fairgrounds
18 royal blacksmith
17 altar
16 fortune
15 castles
14 hireling
13 training
12 pathfinding
11 hunting grounds
10 dominate
9 lost arts
8 donate
7 overlord
6 inheritance
5 border village
4 city quarter
3 goons
2 grand market
1 king's court


[Qvist]

Inheritance is higher than Pathfinding on the 6+ list, but Pathfinding is higher on the event list. weird. (I have Inheritance #1 on events and #6 on 6+.)

Hm, that is indeed weird. Let me look soon if I messed something up as this shouldn't happen at all.

[gloures]

Inheritance is higher than Pathfinding on the 6+ list, but Pathfinding is higher on the event list. weird. (I have Inheritance #1 on events and #6 on 6+.)

Hm, that is indeed weird. Let me look soon if I messed something up as this shouldn't happen at all.

One possible cause for this is that maybe people who rank Inheritance over Pathfinding put, on average, a bigger gap between them in the 6+ list than the people who rank them the other way around...

[McGarnacle]

Surprised Familiar is ahead of Vineyard. Glad to see Possession and Golem switch places. Golem is just such a cool card, too bad it kinda sucks.

[AJD]

Surprised Familiar is ahead of Vineyard.

Surprised Familiar
Action–Attack
$3P

+1 Card
+1 Action
…Oh! Hi there, sorry, I wasn't ready. No, it's okay, just give me a sec. All right, here we go:
Each other player gains a Curse. There, that should do it.

[Triumph44]

Because Donate can be bought with debt and King's Court cannot be, I'd still have KC over Donate even though there are games where KC is skippable - in a game with Donate, all players will almost certainly use it at some point, but the race to KC in certain games and then lining it up with other actions can really swing things.  It's unlikely that you will ever lose a game just because someone Donated more optimally than you, but you will lose games when your opponent manages to line up his KC with his Swindler/Mountebank/Cultist whatever before you. 

I suppose it's just a question of what the rankings mean.

[traces Around]

It's unlikely that you will ever lose a game just because someone Donated more optimally than you

This is basically how all Donate games are lost.

Also, if you don't buy Donate on a board that it is on, you lose (unless opponent does something stupid), meanwhile there are boards where buying KC is losing.

[Triumph44]

It's unlikely that you will ever lose a game just because someone Donated more optimally than you

This is basically how all Donate games are lost.

Also, if you don't buy Donate on a board that it is on, you lose (unless opponent does something stupid), meanwhile there are boards where buying KC is losing.

That seems awfully glib on Donate - you and your opponent may not even be pursuing the same strategy, Dominion being what it is, not to mention the large mitigating factor of shuffle luck which can still manifest itself even after a Donate.

[Titandrake]

It's unlikely that you will ever lose a game just because someone Donated more optimally than you

This is basically how all Donate games are lost.

Also, if you don't buy Donate on a board that it is on, you lose (unless opponent does something stupid), meanwhile there are boards where buying KC is losing.

That seems awfully glib on Donate - you and your opponent may not even be pursuing the same strategy, Dominion being what it is, not to mention the large mitigating factor of shuffle luck which can still manifest itself even after a Donate.

Sure, there's still shuffle luck, but what you just said applies to any card/event - Goons, King's Court, etc. So it's not a good argument against Donate in particular.

When people pursue different strategies, it's because they don't agree on which one the right one is. Donate has a habit of turning even small mistakes into decisive ones because it chops out massive amounts of shuffle luck.

[O]

It's unlikely that you will ever lose a game just because someone Donated more optimally than you

This is basically how all Donate games are lost.

Also, if you don't buy Donate on a board that it is on, you lose (unless opponent does something stupid), meanwhile there are boards where buying KC is losing.

That seems awfully glib on Donate - you and your opponent may not even be pursuing the same strategy, Dominion being what it is, not to mention the large mitigating factor of shuffle luck which can still manifest itself even after a Donate.

Sure, there's still shuffle luck, but what you just said applies to any card/event - Goons, King's Court, etc. So it's not a good argument against Donate in particular.

When people pursue different strategies, it's because they don't agree on which one the right one is. Donate has a habit of turning even small mistakes into decisive ones because it chops out massive amounts of shuffle luck.

It almost certainly does on net, but by how much really? It removes lots of later shuffle luck but the single highest % "shuffle luck" occurrence is the opening shuffle, and donate very often can make 4-3 vs 3-4 and 5-2 vs 2-5 relevant shuffle luck, while normally it isn't applicable.

[grrgrrgrr]

I probably haven't played enough empires, but why are Fortune and City Quarter higher rated than Grand Market?

[Jacob marley]

Both have extremely powerful effects, and don't have the awkward no copper restriction on GM.  Especially if there are good engine components and trashing, City Quarter is an absolute must for drawing your deck, then you have 2 actions to play all the actions you just drew.  Name another card that could let you draw up to 4 cards as a first play (more with beginninge of turn handsize increasers) then gives you two actions...

And who doesn't want to double their money.  The hope of doing so is what keeps all the casinos in business.

[Awaclus]

I probably haven't played enough empires, but why are Fortune and City Quarter higher rated than Grand Market?

Because City Quarter is way overrated and Fortune is extremely strong while Grand Market isn't super amazing.

[McGarnacle]

I probably haven't played enough empires, but why are Fortune and City Quarter higher rated than Grand Market?

Because City Quarter is way overrated and Fortune is extremely strong while Grand Market isn't super amazing.

I agree with this.

[aku_chi]

Links to threads with some additional discussion, in case people are following links from the pinned thread:

The Dominion Cards Lists 2016 Edition: $6 Cards
The Dominion Cards Lists 2016 Edition: Landmarks

[Beyond Awesome]

I probably haven't played enough empires, but why are Fortune and City Quarter higher rated than Grand Market?

Because City Quarter is way overrated and Fortune is extremely strong while Grand Market isn't super amazing.

I agree with this.

There have been several boards where I ignored Fortune lately. It's good boosting economy, but City Quarter is a crazy good engine card. You draw everything and get all the actions.

[Awaclus]

There have been several boards where I ignored Fortune lately. It's good boosting economy, but City Quarter is a crazy good engine card. You draw everything and get all the actions.

Fortune is not good for boosting economy, it's one of the strongest payloads in the game. If it's an engine board, you can ignore Fortune basically only if Bridge or Bridge Troll is in it, and even then it's not obviously the case that you should.

Without trashing, City Quarter is hardly as good as Village. It doesn't enable an engine if an engine wasn't already possible.

[Chris is me]

There have been several boards where I ignored Fortune lately. It's good boosting economy, but City Quarter is a crazy good engine card. You draw everything and get all the actions.

Fortune is not good for boosting economy, it's one of the strongest payloads in the game. If it's an engine board, you can ignore Fortune basically only if Bridge or Bridge Troll is in it, and even then it's not obviously the case that you should.

Without trashing, City Quarter is hardly as good as Village. It doesn't enable an engine if an engine wasn't already possible.

This is among the hollowest of statements. Village doesn't enable an engine unless an engine was already possible. Smithy doesn't enable an engine unless an engine was already possible. Highway doesn't enable an engine unless an engine was already possible. See, I can do this all day.

City Quarter is not good with no trashing whatsoever. Correct, it is not always good. When it is good, it's generally much better than Lost City - of similar draw power to Scrying Pool or Madman. That's certainly more valuable than Grand Market's ceiling, and it certainly works on boards as the only way to increase handsize, and sometimes as the only Village, if other conditions are right. It is an engine component, which is not an entire engine by itself, but it can be the key Village and/or draw card, so the entire engine doesn't need to be there like you say.

[McGarnacle]

There have been several boards where I ignored Fortune lately. It's good boosting economy, but City Quarter is a crazy good engine card. You draw everything and get all the actions.

Fortune is not good for boosting economy, it's one of the strongest payloads in the game. If it's an engine board, you can ignore Fortune basically only if Bridge or Bridge Troll is in it, and even then it's not obviously the case that you should.

Without trashing, City Quarter is hardly as good as Village. It doesn't enable an engine if an engine wasn't already possible.

This is among the hollowest of statements. Village doesn't enable an engine unless an engine was already possible. Smithy doesn't enable an engine unless an engine was already possible. Highway doesn't enable an engine unless an engine was already possible. See, I can do this all day.

City Quarter is not good with no trashing whatsoever. Correct, it is not always good. When it is good, it's generally much better than Lost City - of similar draw power to Scrying Pool or Madman. That's certainly more valuable than Grand Market's ceiling, and it certainly works on boards as the only way to increase handsize, and sometimes as the only Village, if other conditions are right. It is an engine component, which is not an entire engine by itself, but it can be the key Village and/or draw card, so the entire engine doesn't need to be there like you say.

We have all drawn City Quarter with no action cards. Plus if your action density is high enough to really draw a lot, you could be using something else for draw.

[Chris is me]

There have been several boards where I ignored Fortune lately. It's good boosting economy, but City Quarter is a crazy good engine card. You draw everything and get all the actions.

Fortune is not good for boosting economy, it's one of the strongest payloads in the game. If it's an engine board, you can ignore Fortune basically only if Bridge or Bridge Troll is in it, and even then it's not obviously the case that you should.

Without trashing, City Quarter is hardly as good as Village. It doesn't enable an engine if an engine wasn't already possible.

This is among the hollowest of statements. Village doesn't enable an engine unless an engine was already possible. Smithy doesn't enable an engine unless an engine was already possible. Highway doesn't enable an engine unless an engine was already possible. See, I can do this all day.

City Quarter is not good with no trashing whatsoever. Correct, it is not always good. When it is good, it's generally much better than Lost City - of similar draw power to Scrying Pool or Madman. That's certainly more valuable than Grand Market's ceiling, and it certainly works on boards as the only way to increase handsize, and sometimes as the only Village, if other conditions are right. It is an engine component, which is not an entire engine by itself, but it can be the key Village and/or draw card, so the entire engine doesn't need to be there like you say.

We have all drawn City Quarter with no action cards. Plus if your action density is high enough to really draw a lot, you could be using something else for draw.

"You could be using something else" is an argument against the use of any card, ever, that doesn't actually apply because kingdoms are restricted in size.

I'm not saying City Quarter is always the best card nor am I saying it's a one piece engine. It's just really good at what it does, it's reasonably priced (really), and it's a Village too. Obviously if there are easier togain components that cover all your needs you get those instead. Whatever.

[Awaclus]

There have been several boards where I ignored Fortune lately. It's good boosting economy, but City Quarter is a crazy good engine card. You draw everything and get all the actions.

Fortune is not good for boosting economy, it's one of the strongest payloads in the game. If it's an engine board, you can ignore Fortune basically only if Bridge or Bridge Troll is in it, and even then it's not obviously the case that you should.

Without trashing, City Quarter is hardly as good as Village. It doesn't enable an engine if an engine wasn't already possible.

This is among the hollowest of statements. Village doesn't enable an engine unless an engine was already possible. Smithy doesn't enable an engine unless an engine was already possible. Highway doesn't enable an engine unless an engine was already possible. See, I can do this all day.

City Quarter is not good with no trashing whatsoever. Correct, it is not always good. When it is good, it's generally much better than Lost City - of similar draw power to Scrying Pool or Madman. That's certainly more valuable than Grand Market's ceiling, and it certainly works on boards as the only way to increase handsize, and sometimes as the only Village, if other conditions are right. It is an engine component, which is not an entire engine by itself, but it can be the key Village and/or draw card, so the entire engine doesn't need to be there like you say.

It's not a hollow statement if you don't misinterpret it on purpose. Village and Smithy are both much more likely to enable an engine than City Quarter because they are cheaper and less situational. You don't go to lengths to build the engine just because City Quarter is there. You do go to lengths to build the engine just because Fortune is there.

"You could be using something else" is an argument against the use of any card, ever, that doesn't actually apply because kingdoms are restricted in size.

It applies to City Quarter much more than it does to Fortune.

[trivialknot]

One thing I hear people say on streams is "Fortune is super good, so I better pick up a Gladiator".  And that's kind of like saying "Trashing is super good, so I better open with Bishop."

I dunno, I think players will eventually realize Gladiator isn't that good, and this will cause Fortune to show up less often, and later in the game.  And then Fortune just won't be as good.

[Awaclus]

One thing I hear people say on streams is "Fortune is super good, so I better pick up a Gladiator".  And that's kind of like saying "Trashing is super good, so I better open with Bishop."

That is true to an extent, but Gladiator is actually a decent card on its own in a lot of early game situations (just like Bishop is a decent card for the VP), and being able to control when Fortune gets revealed is not nothing.

[Chris is me]

One thing I hear people say on streams is "Fortune is super good, so I better pick up a Gladiator".  And that's kind of like saying "Trashing is super good, so I better open with Bishop."

I dunno, I think players will eventually realize Gladiator isn't that good, and this will cause Fortune to show up less often, and later in the game.  And then Fortune just won't be as good.

Gladiator is just fine. Hitting the $3 with it is very nice for a cheap terminal, and all too often the cost of using that terminal space early is very worth it.

[Jacob marley]

If your payload is treasure cards, City Quarter looses a lot of its punch and you are better off with other draw.  If you have action card payload and can trash your starting cards, City Quarter becomes a monster.

[Limetime]

I wonder what a bot that just bot the top action card on these qvist lists and then greened at some point would be ranked.

[JW]

I wonder what a bot that just bot the top action card on these qvist lists and then greened at some point would be ranked.

The Villa idiot!