Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Setting up the "golden deck" (Chapel/Bishop)  (Read 2990 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Quadell

  • Scout
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 44
  • Respect: +107
    • View Profile
Setting up the "golden deck" (Chapel/Bishop)
« on: April 13, 2012, 03:08:52 pm »
0

I recently watched a video (though I can't seem to find it now) of a very good player winning with what he called a "golden deck". Bishop and Chapel were in the supply, with no attacks available besides Pirate Ship. He bought a Chapel and Bishop on turns 1 and 2, and then chapeled down to 5 cards as quickly as possible. He then bishoped his least useful card each turn, buying money, until he had enough to bishop away a Province each turn for 5 VP, and still buy a new Province each turn. (Actually, he was buying/trashing a Colony each turn, but the principle is the same.) The strategy was extremely fast, and although it's susceptible to most attacks, Pirate Ship did nothing to it.

I was impressed, and looked for discussion on how to set this up. I couldn't find posts on it... is there one I missed?

Sure enough, yesterday I found myself in a game containing Bishop, Chapel, and no likely attacks to slow it down. I set it up the same way, and it worked beautifully. (Game log.) Bureaucrat could have slowed it down, but I don't think it would have prevented me from winning. I know I messed up on turn 4, chapeling only 2 instead of 4 cards, a slip of the finger. But other than that, did I play this optimally?

My shuffle luck was decent in that game, but I'd like some advice on setting this up when the shuffles don't work out, and I assume the same skills would be applicable when setting up any extremely-small-deck combo strategies. With good shuffle luck I can buy my first Province on turn 8, and then on each turn afterwards. But I'm not sure how to handle bad shuffle luck. For instance, bad luck might lead to a Chapel-Bishop collision on turn 3 where I chapel 2 Estates and a Copper, then 4 Copper on turn 4 where I buy a Silver, then $6 (4 Copper and a Silver) on turn 5. It seems like I should pass in that case, buying nothing, hoping to shrink my deck as quickly as possible. But it seems ridiculous not to buy a Gold, since I'll need a Gold soon anyway. Which is the better move?

In general, I trying to figure out what the best way is to set this up when the shuffles aren't cooperating. Thanks for any advice.
Logged

jonts26

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2746
  • Shuffle iT Username: jonts
  • Respect: +3668
    • View Profile
Re: Setting up the "golden deck" (Chapel/Bishop)
« Reply #1 on: April 13, 2012, 03:20:30 pm »
+1

Video here.

Logged

Voltgloss

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 224
  • Respect: +596
    • View Profile
Re: Setting up the "golden deck" (Chapel/Bishop)
« Reply #2 on: April 13, 2012, 03:29:45 pm »
+1

Not sure on the shuffle luck question, but I do have a different bit of advice to offer:  when you're planning to run the Golden Deck, veto Embargo instead of Possession.  If your opponent Embargoes Provinces once you've committed to your strategy, the perfect balance of the Golden Deck gets thrown off-kilter by those extra Curses.  This is especially an issue when the opponent can then catch up via alternate VP (and there was a LOT of alternate VP on this board). 

Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7096
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9411
    • View Profile
Re: Setting up the "golden deck" (Chapel/Bishop)
« Reply #3 on: April 13, 2012, 04:01:08 pm »
0

I'm uncertain about WW's analysis of playing second with the Golden Deck... assuming both players finish their deck on the same turn, both should get 21 points from that stage of the game (3 trashed Provinces plus one in hand).  That means the final score will come down to who trashed for the most points in the building phase--and if both got the same, P2 can force a draw.  Am I missing something in my math here WW?
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

mnavratil

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 216
  • Respect: +83
    • View Profile
Re: Setting up the "golden deck" (Chapel/Bishop)
« Reply #4 on: April 13, 2012, 04:38:46 pm »
+2

Probably the best analysis of setting a golden deck up is done here:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=506.0

It goes a little bit in depth into setting this up and average number of turns.
Logged

Quadell

  • Scout
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 44
  • Respect: +107
    • View Profile
Re: Setting up the "golden deck" (Chapel/Bishop)
« Reply #5 on: April 13, 2012, 10:45:19 pm »
+1

Thanks! I'll switch to there.

EDIT: Er, when I try, it tells me "Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days. Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic." So I guess it's better to use this new thread instead. (I'm kinda new to these forums, and I'm not sure of the etiquette.)

I don't have a good way to simulate this easily, but I've played perhaps a hundred solitaire setups, and I'm pretty sure Bishop/Chapel is the best opening. I've tried buying only one treasure before paring down to 5 cards, and I've tried buying 2 treasures before hitting the 5-card goal, and both seem good. (In each case, a first Province on turn 8 is common, with turn 9 also common, and occasional horrid misfires that don't line up for a painfully long time.) I'm pretty sure that buying a third treasure is slower, even if it's gold. And that second treasure might be suboptimal too; I'm just not sure. Each card you buy increases the odds that it will take several turns longer to get down to 5 cards; it's usually better to "trade up" to gold once you have control. I also tried buying nothing between turn 2 and when I get a 5-card hand, but that's clearly slower.

To be more specific, if you have a 5-card deck of Bishop, Chapel, and Copper x 3, it takes 4 more turns to get a Province. If your 5-card deck has two Silvers instead of Coppers, it just takes 2 more turns to get a Province. That's worth it. But an additional Gold, even if you can buy it, only gains you a turn once you get in set up, while making it much more likely to take many more turns to get to that 5-card goal.

As for attacks, it seems to me that any time an opponent curses me it sets me back a turn. On my next turn, I have to lose a card by bishoping and declining to buy in order to get back in the swing of things. (I could put it off a turn, or two if I'm lucky, but I risk not drawing my Bishop. If that happens, I have to skip the turn completely, or give up on the golden deck strategy.) I doubt the strategy can be sustained at all in a tableau that includes cursing. And Embassy can hurt a little too, though it only sets you back a single turn (per buy).

Militia (or Goons or Margrave or Ghost Ship) also sets you back a turn each time you're militiaed, though you can still Bishop a Silver for 2 VP and use the Gold to buy it back, so it's not a totally lost turn. 2 VP per turn is pretty slow though. I don't know if a Militia barrage could effectively defeat a golden deck strategy or not. And Embargo on Provinces is absolutely poison, as Voltgloss pointed out below. Deck attacks like Pirate Ship, Saboteur, Oracle, Fortune Teller, etc., have no effect at all (though note that Noble Brigand is just as damaging to this deck as Witch is). And Bureaucrat and Cutpurse might slow you down a tad, or perhaps not at all.

If someone does effective simulate different strategies for setting up the golden deck, I'd love to hear the results. For instance, I'd still like to know at what point it's better to abandon the plan and try a more traditional Bishop strategy.
« Last Edit: April 13, 2012, 11:38:37 pm by Quadell »
Logged

Fabian

  • 2012 Swedish Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 666
  • Respect: +542
    • View Profile
Re: Setting up the "golden deck" (Chapel/Bishop)
« Reply #6 on: April 13, 2012, 11:34:17 pm »
+4

I still haven't watched that WW video past the first 30 seconds or so, it's too painful :(
Logged

jonts26

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2746
  • Shuffle iT Username: jonts
  • Respect: +3668
    • View Profile
Re: Setting up the "golden deck" (Chapel/Bishop)
« Reply #7 on: April 13, 2012, 11:54:47 pm »
+2

FYI, that upvote was for moral support, not for reveling in your pain.
Logged

Rabid

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 840
  • Shuffle iT Username: Rabid
  • Respect: +643
    • View Profile
Re: Setting up the "golden deck" (Chapel/Bishop)
« Reply #8 on: April 14, 2012, 08:14:00 am »
+1


I don't have a good way to simulate this easily, but I've played perhaps a hundred solitaire setups, and I'm pretty sure Bishop/Chapel is the best opening. I've tried buying only one treasure before paring down to 5 cards, and I've tried buying 2 treasures before hitting the 5-card goal, and both seem good. (In each case, a first Province on turn 8 is common, with turn 9 also common, and occasional horrid misfires that don't line up for a painfully long time.) I'm pretty sure that buying a third treasure is slower, even if it's gold. And that second treasure might be suboptimal too; I'm just not sure. Each card you buy increases the odds that it will take several turns longer to get down to 5 cards; it's usually better to "trade up" to gold once you have control. I also tried buying nothing between turn 2 and when I get a 5-card hand, but that's clearly slower.


Nice post, it should be noted that this changes in the mirror match, as you get to trash to your opponents bishop.
Logged
Twitch
1 Day Cup #1:Ednever

paddyodoors

  • Guest
Re: Setting up the "golden deck" (Chapel/Bishop)
« Reply #9 on: April 14, 2012, 08:18:01 am »
+1

I'm curious: under what circumstances do you move forward with what I call a poor-man's golden deck strategy?  A more-than-5-card deck that seeks to trash the high VP card and then buy another copy; rinse; repeat.

In this Colony game yesterday, pursuing a deck like this, I ended up buying the first Colony on turn 9 and buying the last Colony (my sixth) on turn 14. (http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20120413-182622-1de163ce.html)

The board had no attacks and no +buy; Scheme, Conspirator, and Bishop were present.

My plan was to
-use a Bishop,
-pick up two Schemes along the way (no more no less),
-use the Schemes to support the Bishop (trash something every turn no matter what),
-and then transition into a conspirator chain to get up to $11.
-Once I buy the Conspirators, the Schemes stay on top every turn, thus ensuring that the Conspirators will trigger (amazing thematic interaction... "the Conspirators are scheming!!!"  big surprise there.  :) ).
-Bishop away the Colony,
-Buy another.
-Rinse; repeat.

I make my plan and then my opponent (apologies to zarathustra for using our game for a forum post) opens Black Market.  Oops -- I hadn't thought to check the Black Market deck.  In it, there are several nice things.  One of them is really NOT nice -- Ghost Ship.  With no +actions/+cards for me to go on, Ghost Ship (even one) would destroy this strategy (especially since Scheme was in the kingdom -- 1 Ghost Ship is all he would need).

I decided to go for my original plan, chewing up as many of the Colonies as possible.  I was counting on Ghost Ship not coming up early in his Black Market draws.  Even once he bought it, it would have to come around in his hand, so I knew I would have a little foreknowledge.  And when he bought Bishop for his second buy, I concluded that the trashing from his bishop would greatly assist me in speeding up my plans, so I went ahead with them.  It was a wild ride.

So?  Thoughts on the poor-man's golden deck? (Not really golden, it's true.)

zarathustra is a higher-level player than me, and a better one, too.  I think this win might just be luck.
Logged
Pages: [1]
 

Page created in 0.082 seconds with 20 queries.