Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Hard counters vs. soft counters  (Read 9108 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

BMan

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25
  • Respect: +45
    • View Profile
Hard counters vs. soft counters
« on: October 16, 2012, 11:11:11 pm »
+2

We hear a lot around here about "hard counters" and "soft counters." But what are they? The term has floated around the gaming world for some time, particularly in the video game world. They simply mean this: A hard counter is a response to an attack that not only renders that attack nearly or completely useless, it may well convert the attack into an outright benefit. A soft counter is a response to an attack that still causes some damage to be suffered, but less damage than if that counter had not been played. One can extend that concept to plays beyond mere attacks; more on that later.

In Dominion, the textbook case of the hard counter is the Moat: It shuts down every Attack in the game, and it makes giving opponents Curses significantly harder. It may not make the Curses systematically go away as with Watchtower, but at least it holds them back, plus it can deal with any other Attack. Ambassador? Not happening. Saboteur? Haha, you've completely wasted that card now. And Donald X was kind enough to include the Moat on the recommended first-game board, something that gives newbies a little bit of security from that pesky Militia.

Some hard counters, by contrast, are situational to the Attack. One case of this is the Sea Hag, whose hard counters include Jack of all Trades and Lookout: Both of these cards are guaranteed to hit the Curse just gained, so long as that Curse hasn't already been moved (say, with another Sea Hag). Jack already knows that the next card is worthy of being trashed, and if he already had a Curse in his hand, he can just discard that top-of-deck Curse. Lookout loses its single biggest liability after a Sea Hag gives you a Curse: It is guaranteed to hit at least one card you know you want to trash.

One soft counter to Sea Hag is Farming Village. It doesn't get rid of the Curse; it just moves it to your discard pile. But by doing so, at least you'll see the Curse on one fewer shuffles. Considering that Curses' deck-clogging can be just as bad, if not worse, than their -1 VP, this can make a difference in a close game.

Note that a soft counter to one attack can be a hard counter to another, and of course, it may not counter a third attack at all. Again, Farming Village provides a great example. Its soft counter to Sea Hag is even softer against other cursers, because those Curses start in your discard pile. But against top-of-deck attacks such as Spy, Fortune Teller, and especially Rabble, suddenly Farming Village becomes a hard counter. Have you ever been unfortunate enough to have to put three Victory cards back on your deck because of a Rabble chain? No problem, just play a Farming Village and discard them all, plus any additional Victory or Curse cards immediately behind them. Bonus points if any of those cards are Tunnels!

Possibly the defining hard counter in the game is when Scheme is the Bane to Young Witch. All you have to do is pick up a Scheme and keep putting it back on top after every turn that you play it, and presto--Young Witch is completely shut down. It becomes nothing more than a very bad Warehouse. Aside from Minion, your opponent will likely have a great deal of difficulty overcoming this.

Speaking of Minion, that introduces the ideas of soft and hard counters to strategies, not just Attacks. Has your opponent stocked up on Treasuries? Play a discarding attack. What about an everlasting KC-KC-Scheme-Scheme hand? Minion wipes that out. But be careful, Minion has ways of being hard-countered, such as via Tunnel, or Library, or Horse Traders...

The line can get a little fuzzy when trying to figure out where the line between "hard counter" and "soft counter" is. Few would argue that Library is anything but a hard counter to Militia, because not only does playing it in response give you +5 Cards unconditionally, you can go right past any Actions, meaning you are guaranteed to not draw any actions dead (unless your deck is very thin). But what about Watchtower, which is still strong but a strictly worse reaction to Militia? And Jack of all Trades, which would be just a Smithy-plus-benefits? I still think the case can be made that all three are hard counters, because while Watchtower and Jack don't get you as many cards as Library does, they do other things that make them powerful. So perhaps it is not just the card's reacting to the Attack, but what it does in addition, that can help separate hard from soft counters? Let the jury decide.

Now it's your turn. What are some of your favorite hard counters and soft counters, other than the ones listed here?
Logged

ConMan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1400
  • Respect: +1706
    • View Profile
Re: Hard counters vs. soft counters
« Reply #1 on: October 17, 2012, 12:05:27 am »
0

I like the fact that many Attacks are their own counter (whether soft or hard). Examples:
Torturer provides +3 Cards to counter discarding 2
Goons, Cutpurse, Mountebank and Militia give you +$, nice if you've discarded a Copper or two
Thief or Brigand stole your treasure? Steal some back!
Similarly, if a Pirate Ship left you treasure-less, you can just use yours to get some coinage
And if an opponent's Spy, Oracle or Scrying Pool have left junk on top of your deck, you can use them to clear it off
Logged

Qvist

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2400
  • Shuffle iT Username: Qvist
  • Respect: +4085
    • View Profile
Re: Hard counters vs. soft counters
« Reply #2 on: October 17, 2012, 03:38:59 am »
0

The most famous hard counters are probably those to discarding attacks (see many memes in the meme thread). These include Menagerie, Tunnel, Library, Watchtower, Jack of All Trades and Horse Traders.

Edit: Another hard counter is Trader to Mountebank (or basically to any curser).
« Last Edit: October 17, 2012, 05:24:47 am by Qvist »
Logged

vintermann

  • Chancellor
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 21
  • Respect: +7
    • View Profile
Re: Hard counters vs. soft counters
« Reply #3 on: October 17, 2012, 05:06:28 am »
0

A totally hard counter to an attack (or strategy), to me implies that the attack (or strategy) will simply never be pursued (or if it is, it will be an objectively bad choice).

But most counters are at least slightly soft. Although menagerie can make torturers help rather than hurt, if buying menageries is costly (say, no +buy, or other important 3-4 cost cards) it might be worth buying them for the +3 cards and the occasional attack that gets through.
Logged

WheresMyElephant

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 135
  • Respect: +63
    • View Profile
Re: Hard counters vs. soft counters
« Reply #4 on: October 17, 2012, 01:28:04 pm »
+1

A totally hard counter to an attack (or strategy), to me implies that the attack (or strategy) will simply never be pursued (or if it is, it will be an objectively bad choice).

But most counters are at least slightly soft.

I agree with this. In particular, I absolutely don't consider Moat a hard counter as suggested in the original article. If anything it's a textbook soft counter: it reduces the impact of attacks but you're still going to suffer somewhat. It's very rare that Moat is the center of a plan that almost or completely nullifies an attacking deck. (It's possible with Scheme and such, but you usually can't just flood your deck with Moats).

Hard counters to me include things like a Minion engine versus Chancellor/Stash, or a really good YW bane.  Or using a Curser to derail an IGG/Duchy rush. As you say, they're rare in Dominion; or at least it's rare that one card counters another so strongly that the latter can't be saved with good supporting cards (i.e. hard counters exist but are usually board-dependent). Unless of course you count weak strategies, which are trivially "countered" by everything.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2012, 01:33:27 pm by WheresMyElephant »
Logged

jomini

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1060
  • Respect: +768
    • View Profile
Re: Hard counters vs. soft counters
« Reply #5 on: October 17, 2012, 01:56:34 pm »
0

"Hard" vs "Soft" counters are more of a continuum than a binary classification. Something like Watchtower is a hard counter to all junking attacks. However, some setups are harder than even these. For instance, Tunnel is much harder of a counter against discard attacks than Moat. Moat normally means that sometimes your militia won't hit him, Tunnel means you most likely won't buy militia, and tunnel/courtyard means that you will all but certainly not buy the militia. Likewise, as hard Wt counters curse givers, Wt/Market square counters them harder. Instead of merely junking a curse to no effect, you now give a gold and potentially let him draw back up to a larger hand.


Some of my personal favorite counters are more tactics than cards:
1. Top deck control. Use Courtyard, Mandarin, discard/Scavenger, etc. to put the one card you always need on top of your deck. For instance, golem just blows past most top deck mucking and makes for a strong engine kickoff. Farming village, market square (e.g. vs swindler), watchtower/village (against discards or junkers), etc. can all make life so hard on the poor attacker. The absolute best from this strain is top decking a curse against Mountebank, you really need a strong, strong engine to pull this off reliably, but when you can, nothing is better than discarding a curse each time to the mountebank.
2. Force your opponent to help you. Wt/Mrksqr is great for just about anything, if you discard, you can draw back or just buy & trash a copper/curse for the gold, if you get cursed - free gold, if you get swindled - free gold and he thins your deck. As a bonus Wt/Mrksqr is great for ensuring that you can top deck new buys and generate economy so the combo hits far more often early on. Another fun trick is to pile out the peddlers and try to engineer setups with high peddler density so the opponet really gambles on the free province when he swindles. Something like Inn is great for creating a draw deck with high peddler odds. Another nasty option is to discard 7 peddlers, draw one, and then end your turn (storeroom is good for setting this up without wasting as much coin), yeah it tends to be overkill, but it can be great for robbing the opponent of 2 coin a hand.
3. Massive punishment absorption. My opponent built a Kc/Torturer engine once, I got a Forge. Needless to say I ate 6 curse in one turn. Another fun time was when an opponent tried to go for a Kc/Masq pin and I would keep sending over a Feodum.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2012, 09:18:02 pm by jomini »
Logged

ycz6

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 676
  • Respect: +412
    • View Profile
Re: Hard counters vs. soft counters
« Reply #6 on: October 17, 2012, 01:57:52 pm »
0

I think you guys are talking about different things. The first post is mostly about countering specific instances of attacks, i.e. if I have card C in my hand then attack A does nothing (if not less). Some of you are looking at strategies countering other strategies, in which case of course most counters are going to be soft.
Logged

Brando Commando

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 255
  • Respect: +112
    • View Profile
Re: Hard counters vs. soft counters
« Reply #7 on: October 17, 2012, 02:00:07 pm »
0

A few points I think you ought to cover:

1. These are v. good points:
But most counters are at least slightly soft.
I absolutely don't consider Moat a hard counter as suggested in the original article.

I think a better scale than "hard vs. soft" is "relative power against attack...relative to opportunity cost."

This is the metric by which Moat fails. Even at $2, there are definitely situations where you want to skip it because you don't want to overload with terminals. Sure it totally blocks an attack, but relative to opportunity cost, it will often lose.

2. You know what would be great? If you listed attacks and listed what are usually decent counters, so we can look for those combinations of cards in particular.

3. Also, I'm surprised you barely mention Trader, which seems to me the hardest of hard counters in most situations. It will make your deck outright better than before if someone tries to junk up your deck with a curser or looter. It's hard to think of another card that turns so many attacks into a net benefit, except for maybe Library against discarding attacks.

But Library really wants plus actions and then probably plus buys, and it already costs $5, which means you might have to endure a couple of Militia'd turns early on. Trader, on the other hand, is almost it's own BM strategy. It won't be as effective against Militia as Watchtower, for example, but against straght cursers it's just great.
Logged

WheresMyElephant

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 135
  • Respect: +63
    • View Profile
Re: Hard counters vs. soft counters
« Reply #8 on: October 17, 2012, 02:17:13 pm »
0

I think you guys are talking about different things. The first post is mostly about countering specific instances of attacks, i.e. if I have card C in my hand then attack A does nothing (if not less). Some of you are looking at strategies countering other strategies, in which case of course most counters are going to be soft.

But the second viewpoint seems like it's clearly the more important one. When you decide to buy a Moat, you're not just judging it based on the strength of the Reaction effect: you're judging its effectiveness in the big picture. Obviously the strength of the Reaction is part of how you evaluate the latter, but it's just one factor.

The other problem is that many "counters" simply don't work by countering individual plays of the Attack card at all. So if indeed this is the basis for the article's definition of "hard" or "soft" counters, the article seems incomplete as an introduction to the basic vocabulary of counters in Dominion: it's leaving out whole classes of counters.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2012, 05:55:08 pm by WheresMyElephant »
Logged

TWoos

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 149
  • Respect: +89
    • View Profile
Re: Hard counters vs. soft counters
« Reply #9 on: October 17, 2012, 05:48:07 pm »
0

I've been thinking about this issue for a bit, and this is what I came up with.

There are three types of defenses against an attack.  (By attack, I am not necessarily limiting myself to cards of the attack type, but instead any action (which is not necessarily a limitation to cards of the action type) that creates an effect I do not want.)

Mitigating: Reducing the negative aspects of an attack.
Nullifying: Canceling the effects of an attack.
Benefiting: Creating a benefit.

As an example: Versus a Pirate Ship or Thief, Secret Chamber mitigates the attack.  You might be able to save a gold/silver/plat from being lost, but in a treasure heavy hand, you might still lose something.  Moat, on the other hand, nullifies the attack; you will not lose anything.

Cards like Watchtower nullify attacks via gaining cards.  Trader does more, and can turn a attack by Witch/Sea Hag into a benefit.

I know anyone here can come up with dozens more examples.  My point is that a hard counter versus soft counter is not well defined, but these three categories of defense, IMHO, are.

Logged

ftl

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2056
  • Shuffle iT Username: ftl
  • Respect: +1345
    • View Profile
Re: Hard counters vs. soft counters
« Reply #10 on: October 17, 2012, 05:56:01 pm »
0

Even those aren't always well-defined, IMO. Like, Secret chamber can turn a Pirate Ship or a Thief into a benefit - but your bad cards on top and have them be discarded, or have your coppers be trashed (which is a benefit!). Library and Watchtower can turn discard attacks into a benefit, giving you a little bit of extra cycling. But in both cases, whether it's just mitigating or whether it's nullifying or benefiting depends not only on the attack and the reaction, but on what else is in your hand and deck.
Logged

TWoos

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 149
  • Respect: +89
    • View Profile
Re: Hard counters vs. soft counters
« Reply #11 on: October 17, 2012, 06:07:11 pm »
0

Fair enough.  There's going to be a fuzzy line in any of these.

To mention my example again, against Pirate Ship, even losing a Copper you are happy to lose isn't a real benefit.  The player with the Pirate Ship got a +1 counter on his Pirate Ship.

How does one define Masquerade against Witch?  You might get to pass that Curse right back... so, benefit?  I'd say so.  Someone else might not.


I'll assert that trying to define hard & soft is too controversial.  Another classification is needed.
Logged

ftl

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2056
  • Shuffle iT Username: ftl
  • Respect: +1345
    • View Profile
Re: Hard counters vs. soft counters
« Reply #12 on: October 17, 2012, 06:11:27 pm »
0

To mention my example again, against Pirate Ship, even losing a Copper you are happy to lose isn't a real benefit.  The player with the Pirate Ship got a +1 counter on his Pirate Ship.

Well, it's mixed. Your opponent gets a benefit (+1 token) and you get a benefit (trashing 1 copper). Both are real benefits, one to you and one to your opponent. Which of the benefits is bigger depends on what you're doing with your deck. Maybe you're building some engine and need to get rid of copper.
Logged

Taco Lobster

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 288
  • Respect: +74
    • View Profile
Re: Hard counters vs. soft counters
« Reply #13 on: October 17, 2012, 06:15:56 pm »
0

Heh.  Who'd'a thunk this would turn into a semantics debate?

My usage of hard and soft counters is similar, but not identical, to that set forth in the OP - a hard counter completely stops the attack (Moat, Lighthouse, Horse Traders in the case of Minion or other attacks that require more than 4 cards); a soft counter mitigates an attack (Tunnel or Menagerie v. discard attacks).

As usual, Magic is my reference point for the concept.  A hard counter (or a hard lock) in Magic is one that counters the opponent's spell (or prevents them from taking any meaningful action).  A soft counter (or a soft lock) is inherently conditional - e.g., counter the opponent's spell if they can't pay extra, or, in the case of a soft lock, the ability to force an opponent to discard every turn on your own turn.

I'm not claiming these are the correct definitions.  I just like to toss a hat into a semantics debate from time to time.
Logged

zporiri

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 198
  • Shuffle iT Username: zporiri
  • Go, and do likewise.
  • Respect: +130
    • View Profile
Re: Hard counters vs. soft counters
« Reply #14 on: October 17, 2012, 06:53:02 pm »
+1

while the original post was great, the main reason i gave it +1 was because of the time it was posted
Logged
Go, and do likewise.

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1856
    • View Profile
Re: Hard counters vs. soft counters
« Reply #15 on: October 17, 2012, 07:18:31 pm »
0

More semantics:

My personal definition of what constitutes a hard counter is a card whose mere presence in the kingdom can cause the countered card to be safely ignored. So, for example, a card like Moat is not really a hard counter to anything. Or, more objectively speaking, if a given strategy with the hard counter will on average win more games than the optimal strategy with the countered card.
Logged

verikt

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 272
  • Respect: +65
    • View Profile
Re: Hard counters vs. soft counters
« Reply #16 on: October 18, 2012, 07:12:32 am »
0

I played a game today where we both had a few lighthouses. Goons, minion, scrying pool and not one turn for either of us without lighthouse.
scheme- Golem or apoth-wishing well, if you have enough of them can totally ignore ghost ship. Horse traders can turn minion to a benefit, if you can have it in hand every turn. Multiple schemes or a small deck.
I've played a game with chapel bishop pirate ship where by turn 11 or so I had a hand of 2 plats bishop colony and  my opponents pirate ship was still at 2. Admittedly drawing chapel 4 coppers on turn 3 was luck but after that his p-ship was useless. I'd say ambassador is a hard counter to most cursing attacks.
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3603
  • Respect: +6125
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Hard counters vs. soft counters
« Reply #17 on: October 18, 2012, 03:02:38 pm »
+2

Perhaps we should redefine hard/soft/etc. counters as:

"Absolute counter": Something so strong that you would never go for the attack

"Hard counter": Something that shuts down the point of the attack, but which won't deter you from going for the attack

"Soft counter": Something that doesn't stop the point of the attack, but mitigates it in some good way.

I use "absolute" counter because there are so few absolute counters that it is more practical to define hard counter as something that won't deter you, but still present a formidable obstacle.

By this classification:

Library/Menagerie is a soft counter to Militia.
Trader/Moat is a hard counter to Mountebank.
Ambassador/Lighthouse is an absolute counter to Sea Hag.
Logged
Pages: [1]
 

Page created in 0.083 seconds with 20 queries.