Print

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

[LetsGame]

Kings Court + Possession is pretty ridiculous. I just played this combo again on istropic. Every time I play it, my opponent quits. If you play this mid to late game you can get 3+ provinces with the other player's hand. It's hard to recover from. Plus nobody likes to watch you beat them with their own hand.

[Thisisnotasmile]

It's quite expensive to set up though...

[tko]

When I finally have 6 coin + potion, that's the turn my opponent possesses me.  OK, so it's only happened once or twice, but you really remember those bad beats.  The Possession race is a tough race to lose.  "King's Court + Possession is pretty ridiculous." - it's King's Court is the problem child here.  King's Court + Mountebank or Ambassador is also ridiculous.

[DsnowMan]

According to CR, I've won all 3 of my KC + Possession 2p games, and each time I did it without buying both (I'd have one or the other, depending on the board). I think each time my opponent pulled off the combo on me, but that clearly doesn't mean victory. One trick is to possession proof your deck, as described in the blog's strategy article, or just ignore it and go for points before they can get you.

Or you can go for the combo, but don't count on it to win everytime

[DG]

Lets look at it another way
- player one buys potion
- play two buys silver
- player one buys kings court
- player two buys province
- player one buys possession
- player two buys province
- player one plays kings court on possession, gains 3 provinces
- player two buys a province

Edit - I'd unintentionally posted this unfinished, so I'll finish it off now!

Player one needs to get strong rewards from his two expensive cards that are equivalent to the cost of a province. In the simple sequence I posted above, the possession player has only equalized the scores with very few provinces remaining in the supply.

[Blooki]

Firstly, KC will make any player cry foul at some point. Remember that, assuming you are a similarly skilled player, you'll be doling out the pain with KC your fair share of the time too. This is going to be true about any power card.

Possession however is a bit different only because I believe it requires a lot more strategy than KC and is quite often misplayed. I forget where I read it (perhaps it was theory's frontpage article on Possession), but the advice that says the key to a good Possession deck is to 'have Possession and a pile of crap (or premature VP buying, unequivocal attacks, Bishops, Monuments, etc.)' really holds true.

How Possession should really warp a game is to disincentivize each player from having a potent deck. The thing with Possession is that it's an absurdly expensive card. If one is to invest in it, it better yield significant returns. The mistake I see most players make is that they play Possession games like any other game and just cross their fingers and hope their opponents don't pull off some monster Possession turns not realizing that there's a lot they can do.

If both players go for Possessions, the resultant game should be a stalemate involving many of the aforementioned 'pile of crap' tactics. This is actually exactly what should happen if you have two equally matched players playing the same strategy near optimally.

If one player goes for Possession, then I feel the game is decided by that narrow window of the first Province and Possession buys. If the Possessor successfully nabs some Provinces with the non-Possessor's deck, he/she builds a lead puts his/her opponent in the uncomfortable spot of keeping his/her deck powered and attractively possessible. However, if the non-Possessor builds the lead first it's possible to begin greening his/her deck in such a way as to have already secured enough Provinces at the peak of his/her buying power and leave the Possessor with the scraps of his/her now somewhat green deck.

This of course is a generalization and shuffle-luck will undoubtedly be able to change how some of the narrative plays out, but I believe by understanding this general case some less experienced players may finally get over the hump of understanding how to play Possession games rather than simply complain about it.

[philosophyguy]

Blooki is right, but one more thing that is overlooked in counter-Possession decks is whether there are cards that a Possessor can use more effectively than the deck's owner. An example would trash-for-benefit cards like Salvager or Apprentince; a Possessor has every reason to "trash" a Province/Colony in order to get lots of additional cards/money, while the deck's owner will not want to do so except under extremely limited circumstances. So, if you are playing against Possession, you also need to be aware of those cards and avoid them unless you know what you are doing.

[Nitsuj]

Blooki is right, but one more thing that is overlooked in counter-Possession decks is whether there are cards that a Possessor can use more effectively than the deck's owner. An example would trash-for-benefit cards like Salvager or Apprentince; a Possessor has every reason to "trash" a Province/Colony in order to get lots of additional cards/money, while the deck's owner will not want to do so except under extremely limited circumstances. So, if you are playing against Possession, you also need to be aware of those cards and avoid them unless you know what you are doing.

I love trashers in my possession deck (other than Salvager).  I'll trash out my treasure after getting a couple possessions in my deck, and then rely on possessing opponent to get my green cards.  When possessing opponent, I'll take any green card I can get, because once you get up on possession, at that point you just want to make your deck so awful that their possession gets them nothing.  Salvager does break this though, because opponent can salvage a colony and then buy a colony.  But just about any other trasher is good to go with this strategy.

A lot of times I'll see the opponent continue to buy good treasures/actions in this situation and then complain about how possession is a stupid card and I just got lucky that I got one and they had good hands.  To which I say "Good game!" and head back to the lobby.

[Thisisnotasmile]

Yep. I still haven't forgotten a game I had a few months ago against a top-level player. I played a Possession deck against his Possession deck, but he also had Apprentices. I won. After the game he came out with comments such as "You only won because my deck was better than yours", but actually that wasn't true. His deck was actually better than... his deck. It was better for me to use than it was for him to use. He built that deck and only had himself to blame, although he couldn't see it. I don't know why this game has stuck with me for so long, probably because you don't expect the top players to come out with comments/excuses like that.

[Agrisios]

Yep. I still haven't forgotten a game I had a few months ago against a top-level player. I played a Possession deck against his Possession deck, but he also had Apprentices. I won.

I don't know whether we speak about the same game. As you didn't link it I won't do so. But what strikes me: He played your possession in a turn possessing you (without Golem or something). It was turn 17 and you got 2 Provinces/2 Duchies in the following Possession turn. This should have been either resignation or missklick.

[Thisisnotasmile]

Oh yeah, I remember commenting on that at the time. He played my Possession because he had a bad hand and wanted to get rid of it. It wasn't a bad hand for me though, which was my whole point. He couldn't see it even after that happened.

Edit: Nope, just checked it. That wasn't even a particularly bad hand for him. Who knows why he did that.

[Fangz]

The problem is that with 3+ players, counter-possession strategies don't work. You might doom the player to the left of you, but you'll be dragging yourself down with him (since you won't be buying provinces etc on your own turns, only theirs), while the player to the right of you will benefit from the other player's naivety and probably win the game.

[msuroo]

The problem is that with 3+ players, counter-possession strategies don't work. You might doom the player to the left of you, but you'll be dragging yourself down with him (since you won't be buying provinces etc on your own turns, only theirs), while the player to the right of you will benefit from the other player's naivety and probably win the game.

Wait, people play dominion with more than 2 players? 

[Deadlock39]

The strategy might be sound, but in practice, it can be quite hard to build a deck that is a pile of junk plus Possessions (or King's Court's and Possessions).  Just being able to buy Possession with you deck means it is going to be reasonably good.  It ends up being a race to ramp up to $6P, and then another race to muck your deck up before your opponent can use it. 

[dan11295]

Ability to "muck up your deck" depends obviously on how you built your deck prior to Possession becoming a factor as well as the cards in play. Just buying green cards regardless of what coin you have is a start. Also buying VP cards if they are available (these are good for defense in any Possession game). Trashers can help some, but be wary of "trash for benefit" cards. Forge and Salvager in particular are major liabilities. Too easy to your opponent to get a Province (or more) by simply playing these cards on your possessed turn.