Print

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

[eHalcyon]

Maybe a category: best cards that add $0* or $1 costing cards to the supply?

With Tournament, Hermit, Urchin, Ruins, Shelters, etc.....

You can't really compare Tournament prizes to Ruins, it makes no sense.
But you could compare Tournament to looters perchance.

Yeah, I really don't think it makes any sense to compare $0* to $0. I think Donald X. once said the $0* symbol was just like a placeholder to emphasize that they can't be bought. OK, I guess they do count as costing 0 for purposes of remodeling and such, but in terms of "worth" or "value" the $0* might as well be a $@. It's just not useful to compare them directly.

Fun fact, $@ is actually used here in Canada.  Given how close we are to the States, we don't mind using USD if it's around, e.g. cashiers don't mind if they get a random American nickel vs. our own nickels.  It's pretty much the same to us.  $@ denotes the difference between USD and CAD.  So $5 USD == $5 CAD + $@.



Did anyone believe that?

[Cuzz]

Maybe a category: best cards that add $0* or $1 costing cards to the supply?

With Tournament, Hermit, Urchin, Ruins, Shelters, etc.....

You can't really compare Tournament prizes to Ruins, it makes no sense.
But you could compare Tournament to looters perchance.

Yeah, I really don't think it makes any sense to compare $0* to $0. I think Donald X. once said the $0* symbol was just like a placeholder to emphasize that they can't be bought. OK, I guess they do count as costing 0 for purposes of remodeling and such, but in terms of "worth" or "value" the $0* might as well be a $@. It's just not useful to compare them directly.

Fun fact, $@ is actually used here in Canada.  Given how close we are to the States, we don't mind using USD if it's around, e.g. cashiers don't mind if they get a random American nickel vs. our own nickels.  It's pretty much the same to us.  $@ denotes the difference between USD and CAD.  So $5 USD == $5 CAD + $@.



Did anyone believe that?

That sounds completely loony to me.

[werothegreat]

I've totally snuck Canadian dimes and quarters into coin rolls to give to the bank before.

Also, why is the internet not recognizing "snuck" as a word?  It's the past participle of "sneak"...

[microman]

I really wanted to love poor house but on soo many boards its just bad. Remake on board your coppers are poor houses instead of nothing (which you often want). No trashing or filtering and you icompletely ingnore this card. In filter scenarios it has potential but often ends up being 2 or 3.

Anyways the things that Poor house needs on the board to be good
Trashing / or some really good filtering (Vault/Storeroom)
+Actions, since you don't want money in hand your gonna need to play multiples of these.

Things poor house WANTS
Possibly card draw to get multiple poor houses.
Probably +buy to buy X+Poor house early and double province later.

Throne Roooom

I came up with a kingdom where I think poor house would really shine using all DA cards.

$5 Mystic
$5 Count
$4 Wandering Minstrel
$4 Death Cart
$4 Rats
$3 Forager
$3 Urchin
$2 Squire
$2 Vagrant
$1 Poor House

I am curious to know what some of peoples thoughts/ideas are and what kind of combos are possible.  Also, how would you open with a 4/3 or 5/2 split? Feedback please!   

Microman

[eHalcyon]

I've totally snuck Canadian dimes and quarters into coin rolls to give to the bank before.

Also, why is the internet not recognizing "snuck" as a word?  It's the past participle of "sneak"...

http://grammarist.com/usage/sneaked-snuck/

I thought it was snuck too, but apparently that's new-fangled and wrong!

(Also, sorry for derailing the thread with money talks.)

[Kuildeous]

Mercenary seems a little bit high. Is it that good?

By itself, it is a pretty darned good card. It acts as a Militia with the benefit of drawing 2 cards as well. I'd wager that alone would make it a $6 card if it were in the supply. I think $7 would be too high.

The trashing of course is a double-edged sword. When your deck works well, then your Mercenary will kick butt. If it doesn't, then your Mercenary becomes as useful as an Overgrown Estate, possibly even worse.

Ideally, you would have Mercenary only when you are prepared to use it, much like Rats. Sometimes it's awesome, and sometimes it just takes up space. The same could be said about Chapel or Young Witch.

I love Mercenary, but I always handle it with kid gloves.

[pingpongsam]

Anyone who has ever played a cursing game with me knows I do not fear the curse. People are so curse averse that their reactionary strategy is easy to identify and beat to pieces while taking curses the whole game. It is not rare for me to take all 10 curses and beat my opponent. Considering the psychological element of the card and how easy it is to leverage a win I'll have to vote Curse as my favorite $0 card.

There are games the Curse is to be avoided or at least evenly distributed but they are far fewer than most people surmise. The e-look on people's faces when you end the game by piling out duchies, curses and some other card (bonus points for Estates) while they have 4 of the Provinces and a clear path to the remainder is just priceless.

[WheresMyElephant]

I think Ruined Library is definitely better than ruined market in most situations. If you have actions it's just as if it wasn't there. Ruined Market might be really useful in rare situations, but these are even more rare if your deck is clogged with ruins.

I actually wouldn't rule out the possibility that even Ruined Village is better than Ruined Market. Peddlers and Conspirators and Draw to X engines may not be the norm, but neither are engine games where you would go this far for a buy and no others are available. (To say nothing of the argument that Ruins games are bad for engines in general.)

There are games the Curse is to be avoided or at least evenly distributed but they are far fewer than most people surmise. The e-look on people's faces when you end the game by piling out duchies, curses and some other card (bonus points for Estates) while they have 4 of the Provinces and a clear path to the remainder is just priceless.

Man, that is awfully close mathwise. 4 Provinces equals all the Duchy points in the game, and 10 Curses knocks out almost all the Estate points you can hope for. If your opponent is smart enough to grab a few other VP on the side (including late Duchies) you're a goner. (And if he has "a clear path to the rest" of the Provinces when you end the game, it really sounds like he misplayed the endgame and didn't foresee the possibility you would pile out. What happens if they're smarter?)

[werothegreat]

I've totally snuck Canadian dimes and quarters into coin rolls to give to the bank before.

Also, why is the internet not recognizing "snuck" as a word?  It's the past participle of "sneak"...

http://grammarist.com/usage/sneaked-snuck/

I thought it was snuck too, but apparently that's new-fangled and wrong!

(Also, sorry for derailing the thread with money talks.)

I guess we're all so used to swim/swum and sing/sung.  We should extrapolate this and have tweak/twuck and cheat/chut.

[Young Nick]

I just want to second the idea to include base cards in the Qvist card lists. Silver, Gold, and Duchy would be especially interesting. How many $2's are worse than Estate?

[Hockey Mask]

I've totally snuck Canadian dimes and quarters into coin rolls to give to the bank before.

Also, why is the internet not recognizing "snuck" as a word?  It's the past participle of "sneak"...

http://grammarist.com/usage/sneaked-snuck/

I thought it was snuck too, but apparently that's new-fangled and wrong!

(Also, sorry for derailing the thread with money talks.)

I guess we're all so used to swim/swum and sing/sung.  We should extrapolate this and have tweak/twuck and cheat/chut.

So what is the past-tense of "fickle"?

[eHalcyon]

I've totally snuck Canadian dimes and quarters into coin rolls to give to the bank before.

Also, why is the internet not recognizing "snuck" as a word?  It's the past participle of "sneak"...

http://grammarist.com/usage/sneaked-snuck/

I thought it was snuck too, but apparently that's new-fangled and wrong!

(Also, sorry for derailing the thread with money talks.)

I guess we're all so used to swim/swum and sing/sung.  We should extrapolate this and have tweak/twuck and cheat/chut.

So what is the past-tense of "fickle"?

Fickle isn't a verb.

[pingpongsam]

What happens if they're smarter?)

The world may never know. 

[pingpongsam]

Anyone who has ever played a cursing game with me knows I do not fear the curse. People are so curse averse that their reactionary strategy is easy to identify and beat to pieces while taking curses the whole game. It is not rare for me to take all 10 curses and beat my opponent. Considering the psychological element of the card and how easy it is to leverage a win I'll have to vote Curse as my favorite $0 card.

There are games the Curse is to be avoided or at least evenly distributed but they are far fewer than most people surmise. The e-look on people's faces when you end the game by piling out duchies, curses and some other card (bonus points for Estates) while they have 4 of the Provinces and a clear path to the remainder is just priceless.

yum, curses...
http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201209/10/game-20120910-085643-c45c7c2b.html

[rinkworks]

Also, why is the internet not recognizing "snuck" as a word?  It's the past participle of "sneak"...

http://grammarist.com/usage/sneaked-snuck/

I thought it was snuck too, but apparently that's new-fangled and wrong!

From that page:  "There is no basis for saying snuck is incorrect."

[shMerker]

Given that English classics like Jabberwocky and Hamlet contain words made up by their authors I'm pretty sure it's totally wispific to just say whatever and generally not worry too much that the dictionarists haven't caught up with your verbage yet. If you don't cite them then maybe one day they'll cite you.

[aaron0013]

I've totally snuck Canadian dimes and quarters into coin rolls to give to the bank before.

Also, why is the internet not recognizing "snuck" as a word?  It's the past participle of "sneak"...

http://grammarist.com/usage/sneaked-snuck/

I thought it was snuck too, but apparently that's new-fangled and wrong!

(Also, sorry for derailing the thread with money talks.)

Sneak, sneaking, sneaked, have sneaked

[Octo]

Just to heartlessly drag this wildly derailed topic back on track for a moment:

The fact that all the 0* are stacked at the top without exception highlights that comparing them with the 0s and 1s is pretty futile. It might be the right order, but we don't learn anything from that, which is the important bit. The order they appear in, yeah that's worth discussing perhaps, but not in the context of "are they better than curse?" which is pointless.

Also, the context of all these cards is completely different: Shelters, Ruins and Curses. The first you can't buy, you only ever have one and are designed to leave your deck, the others are actually punishments. Would I rather have X or Y? just isn't relevant when you don't have a choice with the Shelters.

Also - Copper? Did the other basic supply cards make it into the lists?

[pingpongsam]

worth discussing perhaps, but not in the context of "are they better than curse?" which is pointless... ...are actually punishments.

If a card allows a psychological bent to the game wherein a player is focused on a strategy contingent on that card to the detriment of selecting a better strategy involving different cards on that same board then, from the other player's more enlightened perspective, that particular card holds a higher value than its price would reflect, especially in light of the fact that in this circumstance said player is interested in accumulating as many as possible which sure doesn't sound much like punishment to me.

Possibly a more relevant position to take from your vantage is that Curse cards are not actionable cards and generally require a card costing more than 0/1 in order to deliver therefore putting the curse cards themselves outside of the discussion. To that I would counter that many, many times I have used extra buys to drive out the curse pile to end a game. Therefore, the value of curse as an often overlooked $0 card is reentered into the discussion with a valid basis for consideration.

Also - Copper? Did the other basic supply cards make it into the lists?

What other basic supply cards costing $0/1 were omitted from the list?

[Octo]

What other basic supply cards costing $0/1 were omitted from the list?

As in, was silver in the "best $3" list? Was Province in the $6 above category?

--

Regardless, Curses were designed as punishments, let's say that much. Yes, they can help you (eg taking a curse to use with ambassador) and we've all bought a curse or two to end the game, but to compare Followers with Curse in any meaningful way is, I still hold, pointless. Yes, you might want to take a curse over Followers to end the game, but for one thing you can't because it doesn't work like that - if you're taking a prize then you're not in your buy phase and so you cannot get a curse (yet), and vice versa, so the 'choice' at that moment is non-existent as taking a prize doesn't preclude taking a curse. Second the benefit you're placing on curses is not at all specific to them, it's true of all supply cards. Yes, Prizes are non-supply, but as mentioned non-supply cards are not mutually exclusive with your buy and so the proposed end-game choice does not exist. The comparisons just janky, and regardless of the minutiae of the discussion the net result in this case is still "yeah, on the whole Followers is better than Curse". Great.

Yes, some decisions are context sensitive and the're much nuance in Dominon, but that's not the point of these lists is it? These lists are to generalise and give a rough representation of which are thought be on-the-whole better than others. You may be in a situation where you want to take a Curse over a Province or something (I note that VP cards do not appear in these lists either, think about why), but are we going to start having a serious discussion about which card - Province or Curse - is generally, on-the-whole better and you'd rather have as a general rule of thumb?

[pingpongsam]

So, you're not arguing with me you're arguing with the list of cards. Very well then, let us wait and see what rebuttals the list of cards has for you.

[Octo]

....what?

To re-iterate: I'm questioning the value of creating/discussing such a list, given that there's a fair amount of apples being compared with oranges in it eg Non-supply to $0 cost supply. It might be interesting to discuss, but there's probably very little to be gained from actually ordering them in any sense. Also, given that the author of this list seems to be trying to create something to fit in with all the other Best Cards list, I'm questioning some of their inclusions in it eg Copper and Curse - seeing as no other basic supply cards have been included thus far, which would alter the $6+ category significantly. That's all. Which non-supply cards are best would be useful, which ruins are the most painful and which shelter should you ditch first etc. are all valuable in their own right, but in my opinion if you just push them all together it just confuses the findings.

[rinkworks]

....what?

To re-iterate: I'm questioning the value of creating/discussing such a list, given that there's a fair amount of apples being compared with oranges in it eg Non-supply to $0 cost supply. It might be interesting to discuss, but there's probably very little to be gained from actually ordering them in any sense. Also, given that the author of this list seems to be trying to create something to fit in with all the other Best Cards list, I'm questioning some of their inclusions in it eg Copper and Curse - seeing as no other basic supply cards have been included thus far, which would alter the $6+ category significantly. That's all. Which non-supply cards are best would be useful, which ruins are the most painful and which shelter should you ditch first etc. are all valuable in their own right, but in my opinion if you just push them all together it just confuses the findings.

I think you're thinking my original post was intended to be more authoritative than it was.  Certainly my post was inspired by Qvist's lists, but I was just having fun, in the full knowledge that many of the comparisons are apples and oranges.

Insofar as Qvist's official lists go, my stance is:

* The next version of the lists should have Silver, Gold, and Platinum in them, because they do compete with the kingdom cards at their price levels and because it would be informative to do so without making the lists less informative than before.

* I have no opinion about whether the basic Victory cards should appear or not.  Although you can use the same justification for including them as I have for the basic Treasures, somehow they feel different, and I can't put my finger on why.

* Poor House should go on the $2 list, since that's where its competition is.  But Shelters should not.

* It would be entertaining and perhaps also informative to have a separate list ranking Ruins, Shelters, Copper, and Curse, even though such a list would serve a slightly different purpose than the other lists.  Why?  These are all cards you'd probably rather not have, so there's that common link.  Although you can't generally choose which of these you get, having an authoritative ranking would enhance our collective understanding of the game in general.  That is, it could help us put in perspective the relative penalties of Cache and Death Cart, weigh Cursing attacks against Looting attacks, help prioritize trashing junk cards, and so on.

* For the same reasons, a separate list of $0* cards would be nice, too.

[Octo]

Well, thanks for the detailed reply. I didn't think your list itself was intended to be authoritative, just that such a list was the end goal of the thread, but maybe I misjudged that.

Anyway, yeah, I pretty much agree with all you've said there, including not being sure about the basic VP cards' inclusion. They're weird, it's like, they work so differently, they're total dead weight until the end of the game at which point they're the only thing that counts, so that makes the comparisons ..... strained? It's weird though that including the non-basic ones seems fine.

[mDuo13]

I'm not sure about general applicability, but I've seen Poor House be a great card... to target with Band of Misfits. Strange, that you'd spend $5 to get a card that imitates a $1, but the point of Band of Misfits is you can choose to make it a Poor House when that means getting $4 (or even $3), and make it something else when you have treasures in your hand.

As for situations where you want to actually buy the Poor House itself: pretty situational. My gut tells me it's probably better than Diadem on average. Then again, I haven't yet seen the (theoretical) situations where Poor House is actually a net loss of money.

I agree with Copper's placement on the list. Actually I agree with most of the list. There's obviously a humungous gap between "The Good" and "The Bad" but there are certainly times (more often than people think) where having plenty of Copper in your deck is a good thing.

Hovel is especially annoying on a few boards because it's a typeless card for almost anything that cares about card types (Ironworks, Ironmonger -- or, on the plus side, Tribute). Sooooo much worse than an Estate.