Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Ranking BM+X terminals  (Read 20218 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5477
  • Respect: +2850
    • View Profile
Re: Ranking BM+X terminals
« Reply #25 on: May 11, 2012, 10:06:02 pm »
0

Is there a way to get a separate ranking for non-attacks when they compete with non-attacks?
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4371
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Ranking BM+X terminals
« Reply #26 on: May 11, 2012, 10:25:49 pm »
0

Is there a way to get a separate ranking for non-attacks when they compete with non-attacks?
Why do you want a separate ranking?

HiveMindEmulator

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2222
  • Respect: +2099
    • View Profile
Re: Ranking BM+X terminals
« Reply #27 on: May 17, 2012, 05:55:25 pm »
0

I attempted to replicate some of what I thought were the more interesting results, and my results differ from yours in a few cases, so I was hoping you could post the bots you used.

I have Margrave beating Library (~49-42), and I have Vault beating Noble Brigand (~54-42).

I didn't put any effort into optimizing VP card buys, so that might be the difference (I could see Library maybe beating Margrave via early VP buys, counting on the filtering from Margrave to get them out of the way). I just took the default bots with Margrave buying 2, Library 3, Vault unlimited (but 1 above Gold), and Noble Brigand 4. I also tried messing around with limiting number of NBs based on amount of treasure, but couldn't really find something that beat Vault.
Logged

ftl

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2056
  • Shuffle iT Username: ftl
  • Respect: +1342
    • View Profile
Re: Ranking BM+X terminals
« Reply #28 on: May 17, 2012, 06:21:15 pm »
0

Hm, I think you're right, I'll go back and check.
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4371
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Ranking BM+X terminals
« Reply #29 on: May 20, 2012, 07:59:28 pm »
0

This might help you out:

For those who want it, here's an XML of all the latest single-card optimizations I have.

Edit: Click on the link above the quote to get to my post. The file is attached there.

HiveMindEmulator

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2222
  • Respect: +2099
    • View Profile
Re: Ranking BM+X terminals
« Reply #30 on: May 21, 2012, 11:43:30 am »
0

So the Noble BrigandWW bot beats the current Vault bot, but loses if the Vault player buys 1 Vault ahead of Gold.
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4371
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Ranking BM+X terminals
« Reply #31 on: May 21, 2012, 12:06:01 pm »
0

You can just about toss the torturer results out the window, because the simulator plays TERRIBLY against it. Oracle is underrated, rather than overrated, because it plays the gain part worse than the attack. And I don't think noble brigand is much overrated at all, in these strict matchups. Obviously, in real games, if there's some good virtual money around, or if you can pick up venture or harem or something... but in the head-to-head, you're dependent on that silver/gold.

ycz6

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 676
  • Respect: +410
    • View Profile
Re: Ranking BM+X terminals
« Reply #32 on: August 16, 2012, 04:15:44 pm »
0

So now we have Beggar, Catacombs, Count, Cultist, Hunting Grounds, Pillage, Scavenger, and Storeroom.

There's also Death Cart, which might not count since you also get Ruins? We've also got Rogue and Knights, but those seem like they'd be a little weird to simulate.
Logged

mischiefmaker

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 185
  • Respect: +107
    • View Profile
Re: Ranking BM+X terminals
« Reply #33 on: September 13, 2012, 09:08:25 pm »
0

Counterfeit is worth taking a look at too.
Logged

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1853
    • View Profile
Re: Ranking BM+X terminals
« Reply #34 on: September 13, 2012, 09:22:07 pm »
0

I don't really think Counterfeit is a good BM+X card. It's somewhere between a Moneylender and a Salvager that can't trash non-Treasure cards, and neither are particularly great in BM+X.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  All
 

Page created in 0.062 seconds with 22 queries.