Print

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

[werothegreat]

My articles have gotten mixed reviews so far, but I figure I'll keep trying.  I feel I know more about this than Death Cart, anyway.

(in progress)

Shelters are the most drastic change made to Dominion by the Dark Ages expansion.  They were saved for last in the previews before release, after we saw the trash-gainer, the $1 cost card, the Ruins and their Looters, the upgrading cards, and Spoils.  While each of those do change the game in their own ways, ranging from the subtle to the not-so-subtle, they certainly more or less fit into the game space of Dominion as we know it - at the end of the day, they are simply Kingdom cards with cool, new effects.  But Shelters change how we play Dominion at a fundamental level.

As we've known since our first game, our deck in Dominion starts off with seven Coppers and three Estates - we're so used to this concept that we plan our entire strategies around knowing this.  We think about the risk of opening with two terminals, we consider whether trashing Estates is worth losing the points they give, we see the power of Ambassador and Baron as opening buys, and we rest easy knowing our first Silk Road will be worth at least 1 point.  Shelters throw all those concepts out the window, and give us some new ones.

First, they all cost $1, which means that you can no longer Remodel a starting card into a Smithy or Militia, and Bishop has been gypped 3 victory points, among other things.  Next, they all do something - you are now starting the game with cards that have text on them - get out those reading glasses.  Third, you no longer start off with 3 Victory points, so strategies that trash into engines no longer have to worry about a tie-breaking Estate.  Finally, only one of them is a Victory card, which has ramifications to be discussed in time.

Let's look at each Shelter one by one.

Necropolis is easily the most useful of the Shelters, and, at first glance, would seem to be the only reason why anyone would ever want to use Shelters.  Having a card give +2 Actions from the beginning of the game is immensely helpful.  I often catch myself disparaging at the lack of Village on a board with good terminals, before remembering several turns in that I have Necropolis.  It's not all that much of a help, but every little bit counts.  Necropolis is very useful on engine boards, as you already have a Village in your deck from the beginning, allowing you to start your engine sooner.

Hovel, at first glance, seems to be the least useful.  It is probably the closest we will ever come to a Dominion card that is just a Reaction and nothing else.  Being able to trash a card upon buying a Victory card is not completely new - Farmland introduced us to this concept in Hinterlands.  But Hovel allows you to do this when buying any Victory card, so long as the card you're trashing is Hovel.  So what is the point of this?  It allows that Province buy to be just a little bit less harmful to your carefully crafted engine, as instead of adding to your deck, it is replacing a card.  Perhaps the only time you'll want to save Hovel from trashing is in a Gardens game, where every extra card counts.  Now, some of you may be tempted to buy an Estate during a 5/2 open on a board with no good $2s.  This would be a mistake.  Hovel's power comes in using it on a Victory card you would have bought anyway.  If you trash Hovel to an opening Estate, your deck is not hurt, and you're 1 point ahead, but now that Province buy is once again adding to your deck instead of replacing a card, and that extra junk card may cost you the win.  The player who saves his Hovel has just as much junk as you do until that Province buy - then he has less.  Now, if you can think you can make a really quick three-pile ending before your opponent has a chance to pick up any Provinces, then Hoveling an Estate might be a good idea, as winning 1-0 is still winning.  But, how often will such situations arise?  More realistically, the edge case where you'd want to trash Hovel to an Estate on a 5/2 opening would be with Bishop on the board; since you'll be trashing the Hovel/Estate anyway, might as well replace the Hovel with Estate, since you'll get more points out of trashing it to Bishop.  Hovel is also good for Kingdom Victory card strategies (excepting Gardens) since you want those cards earlier than you do Provinces, so you can win the split.  Being able to trash away an otherwise useless starting card is very helpful.  Of course, if you have the opportunity to trash away Hovel before this, such as to a trasher of your own, or someone else's Bishop, you might as well.

Overgrown Estate has a cute little on-trash bonus, but not much else going for it.  It means that Scout is not completely useless in Shelters games, but it really doesn't do anything else.  A cute trick is Hermiting an Overgrown Estate from your discard to let you draw a card.  But +1 card one time is cute, and not much else more.  Perhaps the best use of Overgrown Estate is when your opponent plays a Bishop, so you can swap it out for a hopefully better card in your hand.

Now let's discuss the drawbacks of no longer having Estates in your deck.  Ambassador has no idea what to do with Shelters, since they're not from the Supply, turning him into a Copper giving card.  Baron is completely neutered, unless you have a desire to gain free Estates.  Hunting Party trips over them, Silk Road is now initially worth .5 points (rounded down), and Rebuild has a lot more extra work to do - funny, for a Kingdom card that comes packaged in the same set as Shelters.  Oh, and Remake and Upgrade can't give you Silvers anymore.

Now, what are the benefits?  Menagerie is now conceivable as an opener, and becomes much easier to trigger.  Fairgrounds becomes much easier to bring to 6 VP without buying Curses, and Harvest yields $4 much more consistently.  Fortune Teller reacts interestingly - it now effectively discards your opponent's entire deck in the beginning - this can prove very annoying if it prevents them from playing or lining up key cards - one IRL game I played had me frustrated for a few turns as a Fortune Teller prevented me from lining up my Urchin with my Marauder to get a Mercenary.  Death Cart has an extra Action to trash from the get-go.  And, as mentioned earlier, since everyone starts with 0 VP, you no longer have to worry if trashing your opening Estates will cost you the win.

So, in general, cards that interact with Victory cards are weakened in Shelters games, but most cards that deal with trashing, engines or hand/deck variety are bolstered.

Bear in mind, though, that Shelters are, according to the rules, only supposed to show up in majority Dark Ages games, just like Colony and Platinum are only supposed to show up in majority Prosperity games.  So Shelters, while game-changing, has not upset the entire Dominion paradigm, and you can choose not to play with them if you wish.  But personally, I feel that, other than making Baron a sad panda, Shelters make for a more interesting, enjoyable Dominion experience.

[dondon151]

Swindlers trash opponent Shelters for free (unless Poor House is in the kingdom or other edge cases), Remodel is just a little less good as an opener (especially if you want $4s), and Salvager and Apprentice in the early game are significantly worse because OGE is the only decent target. Obviously TfB is just worse to varying degrees with Shelters, although Bishop doesn't mind it too much.

You should probably mention for Fairgrounds that Shelters allow for 8 VP Fairgrounds in any normal game without Ruins, Colony, Potion, Young Witch, Black Market, Tournament, etc.

[Beyond Awesome]

Swindlers trash opponent Shelters for free (unless Poor House is in the kingdom or other edge cases), Remodel is just a little less good as an opener (especially if you want $4s), and Salvager and Apprentice in the early game are significantly worse because OGE is the only decent target. Obviously TfB is just worse to varying degrees with Shelters, although Bishop doesn't mind it too much.

You should probably mention for Fairgrounds that Shelters allow for 8 VP Fairgrounds in any normal game without Ruins, Colony, Potion, Young Witch, Black Market, Tournament, etc.

I just played a Sheltes game where I got Fairgrounds up to 8. For me, the biggest change is Ambassador. Forget Baron getting screwed. Ambassador is now almost always the wrong opening card except maybe as a deterrent in curse giving games. I do agree, OGE is not usually that great and even trashing it, often that 1 extra card doesn't do much for you.

[ftl]

Ambassador switches from being a premier trasher to being a sort of bad copper-trasher.

There are games in which you want a bad copper-trasher still, I'm sure. But it's far different.

Really, in most cases, the shelters will push things slightly towards engine-ness. All of them favor engine play; OGE gives you a minor on-trash benefit, Necropolis can save you from an early collision or so, hovel... well, hovel at least doesn't give the BM player a  free point like an estate would.

But it's a minor push. I'd think most games would play out roughly the same way regardless of the presence of shelters, plus a cute trick or two.

[timchen]

I tend to think the functions of the shelters are not terribly carefully thought out before publication. When they are still all new and shiny it is quite fine and interesting, but probably after ~100 games or so with them the functions of Hovel and overgrown estate kind of pale out.

[ftl]

Their function is to enable a few cute tricks and otherwise not change very much, except give you a chance to do one cute trick per game or so. What's the problem with that?

[timchen]

Well, sure it's not a game breaking problem or even any kind of serious problem, but if you think about the contrast between their colorful appearance and how often they (except the necropolis) are functionally identical to an estate...

One psychological thing is that their functionality only takes effect when they are removed from the deck. And that can only happen once per game. The rest of time when you draw a hand, you will just spend effort on looking at the colorful pictures, recognizing them, and then realizing that they will do nothing to you.

[Davio]

I tend to think the functions of the shelters are not terribly carefully thought out before publication. When they are still all new and shiny it is quite fine and interesting, but probably after ~100 games or so with them the functions of Hovel and overgrown estate kind of pale out.

I agree with this sentiment.

Sure, there are all kinds of tricks that they enable or disable you to do, but again, in a majority of kingdoms, they will be pretty similar to Estates in the way they feel or play. The availability of Necropolis wouldn't sway me to open double terminal if it wasn't a good plan to begin with. I mean, the chances of drawing exactly Necro+Term1+Term2 are pretty slim. And Hovel wouldn't want to make me buy a Duchy sooner than I'd normally would.

But of course they can't be too powerful, otherwise they would make the game even more swingy than opening 5/2 vs 4/3 already does. So they're kind of a novelty if nothing else.

[Donald X.]

I tend to think the functions of the shelters are not terribly carefully thought out before publication. When they are still all new and shiny it is quite fine and interesting, but probably after ~100 games or so with them the functions of Hovel and overgrown estate kind of pale out.

I remain satisfied with them after 100+ games with them! Perhaps you just want something different from them than I did.

[ftl]

in a majority of kingdoms, they will be pretty similar to Estates in the way they feel or play.

Well yeah. They replace estates. They play pretty much like them except for some bonus cute trucks.

[ipofanes]

The player who saves his Hovel has just as much junk as you do until that first Province buy - then he has less.

You would have to have that Hovel in hand when you gain your first Province to do that. As Hovel doesn't really contribute much towards that first Province, chances are Hovel is not in your hand.

I think if I had to burn $2 and a buy, and a Hovel sits in my hand, I would by that Estate. Maybe not in Turn 1/2.
 

[ftl]

If you're building an engine, chances are that to buy your first province you've drawn a lot of your deck, including the hovel. You can buy your first Province without junking your engine at all.

[ipofanes]

That's fair enough, for some reason I omitted to mention engines as an exception.

[ftl]

I guess in big money-ish you'd want to buy it earlier since it'll be harder to get in the right hand... but in big money-ish, buying silver is probably going to be better most of the time. And are you really going to draw a mid-game $2 ?

[ipofanes]

I guess in big money-ish you'd want to buy it earlier since it'll be harder to get in the right hand... but in big money-ish, buying silver is probably going to be better most of the time. And are you really going to draw a mid-game $2 ?

In the greening stage, or with BM + Margrave or Woodcutter. WRT buying Silver: of course, everything else yould mean to buy Great Hall over Silver in Big Money. It would have to be $2, not $3, to burn. I am talking about this incidental buy you possibly wouldn't make without Hovel in hand, not, some long-term strategy.

[Beyond Awesome]

Personally, I think Hovel is underestimated from reading some of your posts. It doesn't give an immediate benefit, but it still gives a benefit, and personally, I do feel Necropolis is pretty game changing at times. Being able to add a couple more terminals on a board with no +Actions can make the game feel very different.

Anyway, as the saying goes, depends on the board.

Also, the only really good reason I can see to trash your Hovel for an estate is either for Rebuild or Silk Road. On a two, I never buy estate to trash Hovel. That's usually a pretty silly thing to do.

[Davio]

Well, the increased cost of Estate and the 1 VP it provides could be nice for tiebreaker situations.

If you don't have anything else to buy, you're just replacing a worthless card with a bit less worthless card.

[SirPeebles]

I think that Necropolis is generally a bigger boon in engines games, letting you start out ahead by a village.  I'm rather skeptical of buying more terminals than usual on a village-less board;  it just doesn't seem like it would line up often enough.  It's nice in games where you do overload on terminals, like workshop/gardens, but this is a case where you'd pile on the workshops regardless.

[Davio]

I think that Necropolis is generally a bigger boon in engines games, letting you start out ahead by a village.  I'm rather skeptical of buying more terminals than usual on a village-less board;  it just doesn't seem like it would line up often enough.  It's nice in games where you do overload on terminals, like workshop/gardens, but this is a case where you'd pile on the workshops regardless.

Well, that's kind of my point. If you're going to go with an engine, sure it's nice to have Necropolis. But if you would start with Estates, you would often just go for the engine anyway.

It's not like Necropolis will ever be a major tipping point defining your strategy and it shouldn't, it would make uneven starts even worse.

To me Shelters are an unnecessary novelty. Some people may like them and the variety they provide and if you are one of them, no problem man, enjoy them, play with them every game. It's just that instead of 18 Shelters there could also have been another fun card in there.

[WanderingWinder]

timchen, Davio: you're saying you expect the coolness and newness of them to wear off after about 100 games. But how many games have you played with them?

[Davio]

timchen, Davio: you're saying you expect the coolness and newness of them to wear off after about 100 games. But how many games have you played with them?

Zero! Or maybe a couple, but < 10.

My point of view is purely based on expectation and speculation, not experience.
That said, I am entitled to my point of view of course.

I will admit that the reason I was drawn into Dominion initially was because of its symmetry. I knew about MTG and in my head it was a sinking hole for money where the player with the best deck and the most money would always win. So Dominion was a fresh experience because it allowed equal access to everything.

Of course, there was still asymmetry in shuffling and a 5/2 vs 4/3 start can be pretty brutal or devastating, depending on the kingdom. I also didn't know about first turn advantage back then and didn't think much about the way the first player would get a Curse after the shuffle and the second would get it before the shuffle.

With new expansions, a lot of cards came out that messed with this equal opportunity. Tournament is a key example.
Now we have Dark Ages which has a lot of added asymmetry in Knights, Ruins and Shelters. For me this takes away from the original concept which I thought Dominion was all about. Even though perfect symmetry is a myth, I still thought it would be a core principal. And yes, you could say that there are still many kingdoms which don't have any of these cards and that's of course very true. Still, it's something which I care about.

Back to Shelters, the point I'm trying to make is that in my view they don't anything significant. I'm not disputing that they can sometimes offer funny little tactics, I just don't think that in the grand scheme of things it's such a significant change. Notice how I'm contradicting myself by first saying that these cards add to asymmetry and now claiming they don't make much of a difference. The asymmetry thing is more of a moral issue than a de facto one.

In conclusion I would have preferred another kingdom card instead of the Shelters, but I don't mind at all that they exist and don't really mind playing with them as well.

[ipofanes]

Well, the increased cost of Estate and the 1 VP it provides could be nice for tiebreaker situations.

Which means kingdoms without +buy?

[SirPeebles]

The shelters don't behave much differently on many boards, but then a lot of kingdom cards are dead space on most boards.  But sometimes they're not dead cards, and that is often the sign of an interesting game.  Library, for instance, is usually nothing special, but sometimes a key card that impacts the strategy.  Shelters seem rather similar to me.  They are not Colony/Platinum.  But man, there are a LOT of kingdom cards these days.  I'm OK with passing on one to let Shelters exist.

[Davio]

The shelters don't behave much differently on many boards, but then a lot of kingdom cards are dead space on most boards.  But sometimes they're not dead cards, and that is often the sign of an interesting game.  Library, for instance, is usually nothing special, but sometimes a key card that impacts the strategy.  Shelters seem rather similar to me.  They are not Colony/Platinum.  But man, there are a LOT of kingdom cards these days.  I'm OK with passing on one to let Shelters exist.

Well, I'd rather have Shelters than another Scout, so, that's that at least.

[Powerman]

The interesting thing about Necropolis is (while giving +2 actions) it actually disincentives opening double terminal.  Why?  Think about the terminals you normally open with.  Swindler (worse), Ambassador (worse), Baron (worse), etc.   Sure you can open Woodcutter / Navigator, but you don't want to.  I suppose it makes Black Market / Black Market viable on certain boards, and helps some Chapel openings, but there are very few double terminals I think I'd want.

[Drab Emordnilap]

The interesting thing about Necropolis is (while giving +2 actions) it actually disincentives opening double terminal.  Why?  Think about the terminals you normally open with.  Swindler (worse), Ambassador (worse), Baron (worse), etc.   Sure you can open Woodcutter / Navigator, but you don't want to.  I suppose it makes Black Market / Black Market viable on certain boards, and helps some Chapel openings, but there are very few double terminals I think I'd want.

Double Masquerade! Woo!

[SirPeebles]

By the way, the conditional probability that you have necropolis in hand given that your terminals have collided during your first reshuffle is 1 - 9*8*7/10^3 = 49.6%.  Those are some pretty good odds, particularly when you consider that there is already a good chance that the terminals won't collide.

By the way, here I'm assuming that your terminals didn't collide in turn 5; you're in bad shape in that instance any how.  I'm also avoiding any funny business like opening Death Cart, being hit by a turn 3 Sea Hag, an opponent opening IGG, etc.

Edit:  I mathed wrong.  It's only a 30% chance, not 49.6%

[SirPeebles]

Steward/Sea Hag could be a nice double terminal opener.  Or even Steward/Steward.  Maybe Young Witch/Bane (Steward, Woodcutter, Masq, or even Amb if it's Bane)

[LastFootnote]

Davio, you're entitled to your uninformed opinion, but I don't see why anybody should take you seriously when you've played a negligible number of games with Shelters. You really have no idea what you're talking about.

[jomini]

You are quite wrong about Rebuild/Oge in my experience. When you hit Rebuild, you are already getting to 5 coin hands and the game is about buying/gaining duchies to Rebuild into Provinces. It takes two plays of Rebuild to bump Oge up to duchy, which is a bit faster than than the three required to turn the Estates into Duchies, better the +1 card off the first hit make it easier to buy something useful (like a duchy).

Some more general shelter points:
Limiting the number of estates hurts all the VP based attacks - B-crat is even weaker in the opening. It takes a LOT longer for Rabble to really hurt (barring curses); Fortune Teller is actually weaker against Shelters - in the early game it has good odds of reshuffling and getting your new better cards into circulation faster. Jester also loses some oomf as you have 2 immune cards.

Tribute and Xroads also play slightly differently as the initial card types have changed a bit. Xroads in particular is rarely useful for draw even in the mid game without estates; however with Necro, a Xroads or two can let you play a 4 or 5 terminal mini-engine deck. Transmute, already weak, gets even crappier without estates to target.

All of the scaling Tfbs get weaker (Bishop being, perhaps the lone exception). Even something like Trader takes a beating as an opener with Shelters out.

A few other big things about Necropolis:
1. You can much more confidently open double terminal. Odds are already against non-drawing terminals colliding in the first shuffle, but with Necro out the possibility is even more remote. Necro also makes it much strong to open trashing/terminal as you will be able to play both even after your deck gets thinned down - even if you buy some silvers for a bit.
2. It makes village denial harder. Take the obvious example of a Goons engine. The number of Goons you can play is often determined by how many villages you can buy. Winning the Goons split 6:4 is nearly useless if you lose the village split 4:6. With Necropolis you can play 5 Goons to your opponent's 4 and that is a win in the long term. Necropolis means that it is harder to deny +action to some engine that relies on lots of terminal action plays for draw, payload, or both.
3. Necro boosts limited draw like Jack, Watchtower, and Lib out of the gate. In like manner, Necro is quite nice for Peddler, Horn of Plenty, and Conspirator.
4. Necro does mean you can reliably dump a second terminal into non-terminal draw engines. This can be quite spectacular (e.g. militia/masq), but more commonly let's you do something like have a +buy and an attack or an attack and a light trasher both running.

[flies]

You are quite wrong about Rebuild/Oge in my experience. When you hit Rebuild, you are already getting to 5 coin hands and the game is about buying/gaining duchies to Rebuild into Provinces. It takes two plays of Rebuild to bump Oge up to duchy, which is a bit faster than than the three required to turn the Estates into Duchies, better the +1 card off the first hit make it easier to buy something useful (like a duchy).

At first I misunderstood you.  If your goal is to rebuild duchies into provinces, then 3 starting estates will slow you down more than one OGE.  OTOH, in the case of estates, at the end of your 3 rebuild plays, you've got 3 duchies (or, more likely, E/D/P) instead of one province.  This means you have more opportunities to buy rebuilds instead of duchies, so it seems to me that shelters hurt Rebuild more than they help.

[LastFootnote]

You are quite wrong about Rebuild/Oge in my experience. When you hit Rebuild, you are already getting to 5 coin hands and the game is about buying/gaining duchies to Rebuild into Provinces. It takes two plays of Rebuild to bump Oge up to duchy, which is a bit faster than than the three required to turn the Estates into Duchies, better the +1 card off the first hit make it easier to buy something useful (like a duchy).

At first I misunderstood you.  If your goal is to rebuild duchies into provinces, then 3 starting estates will slow you down more than one OGE.  OTOH, in the case of estates, at the end of your 3 rebuild plays, you've got 3 duchies (or, more likely, E/D/P) instead of one province.  This means you have more opportunities to buy rebuilds instead of duchies, so it seems to me that shelters hurt Rebuild more than they help.

I'm not a perfect Rebuild player, but in my experience I rarely want more than 2 Rebuilds anyway before I only buy Duchies.

[GendoIkari]

  The player who saves his Hovel has just as much junk as you do until that first Province buy - then he has less.  Now, if you can think you can make a really quick three-pile ending before your opponent has a chance to pick up any Provinces, then Hoveling an Estate might be a good idea, as winning 1-0 is still winning.  But, how often will such situations arise?

This if faulty logic... it makes the assumption that you will always have Hovel in hand when you buy your first Province. That's not very likely, unless you are building a deck-drawing engine. In a game without much drawing, to buy a Province with Hovel in hand means you got to $8 using only 4 cards... it's much more likely that you can get to $8 with 5 cards than it is with just 4 cards.

I'm definitely not saying that I know for sure that buying an Estate on 5/2 isn't usually the wrong move... it very well might be. But you definitely can't assume that you'll have the chance to trash it on a Province buy later on. I remember this being discussed at great length in another thread, and I thought that there was still no consensus; with a lot of people making good arguments on both sides.

[GendoIkari]

The interesting thing about Necropolis is (while giving +2 actions) it actually disincentives opening double terminal.  Why?  Think about the terminals you normally open with.  Swindler (worse), Ambassador (worse), Baron (worse), etc.   Sure you can open Woodcutter / Navigator, but you don't want to.  I suppose it makes Black Market / Black Market viable on certain boards, and helps some Chapel openings, but there are very few double terminals I think I'd want.

Double Masquerade! Woo!

I especially like this because Masquerade is the only way to ever have multiple copies of a Shelter in your deck.

[timchen]

timchen, Davio: you're saying you expect the coolness and newness of them to wear off after about 100 games. But how many games have you played with them?

I want to say 100, but it's probably less, which is even worse. If it's on isotropic it might be better though;  that way I won't be so distracted by their appearance. ..

[eHalcyon]

Fortune Teller reacts interestingly - it now effectively discards your opponent's entire deck in the beginning - this can prove very annoying if it prevents them from playing or lining up key cards - one IRL game I played had me frustrated for a few turns as a Fortune Teller prevented me from lining up my Urchin with my Marauder to get a Mercenary.

This isn't quite true.  FT does not effectively discard the opponent's entire deck, because OGE is still a victory card.  It makes FT more likely to discard the opponent's entire deck, but it's still no guarantee.  Similarly, without shelters, FT can still discard the opponent's entire deck if all 3 Estates are in their hand or otherwise not in the deck/discard.

Moreover, the increased cycling that FT gives the opponent is not necessarily a bad thing.  It's often a good thing.  In your one experience, FT made it more difficult to play a certain card because it caused you to keep skipping past it.  But FT can also help.  Say you have a terminal you want to play often.  FT increasing your cycling means that you may very well see that card more often.

[Davio]

Davio, you're entitled to your uninformed opinion, but I don't see why anybody should take you seriously when you've played a negligible number of games with Shelters. You really have no idea what you're talking about.

I don't think this is entirely true. Although I agree that my opinion isn't worth that much due to my lack of experience, I don't think it's worthless. I am a very experienced Dominion player. I'm not in WW's league, but I have a couple thousand games under my belt. So I think I can oversee the Dominion landscape quite well and am thus entitled to give an opinion that has some value.

If Donald would show a new card to Stef, without letting him play with, I'd still value his opinion on it. Now I'm of course not in the same league, but you get the idea.

Thing is, you can see interactions in your head and how games would play out without actually playing them. And you don't even have to be some kind of rain man.

I'll admit that I'm more than likely not entirely right, that doesn't mean I'm automatically entirely wrong.

Reading this back it looks like all I want to do is brag about my mad skillz, but that's not the case.

[WanderingWinder]

Davio, you're entitled to your uninformed opinion, but I don't see why anybody should take you seriously when you've played a negligible number of games with Shelters. You really have no idea what you're talking about.

I don't think this is entirely true. Although I agree that my opinion isn't worth that much due to my lack of experience, I don't think it's worthless. I am a very experienced Dominion player. I'm not in WW's league, but I have a couple thousand games under my belt. So I think I can oversee the Dominion landscape quite well and am thus entitled to give an opinion that has some value.

If Donald would show a new card to Stef, without letting him play with, I'd still value his opinion on it. Now I'm of course not in the same league, but you get the idea.

Thing is, you can see interactions in your head and how games would play out without actually playing them. And you don't even have to be some kind of rain man.

I'll admit that I'm more than likely not entirely right, that doesn't mean I'm automatically entirely wrong.

Reading this back it looks like all I want to do is brag about my mad skillz, but that's not the case.

Sure, I don't think your opinion is valueless. But I wouldn't put something out based on half a dozen games with them in a very casual setting. I guess my point is that you're saying this about actually published cards, which means they had to get past Donald and the playtesters, and my guess is that they, with a bunch of experience with the cards, are going to have more to say on them than you or I would. And they said enough to get them published.

I didn't get the impression you were bragging, I guess I am just saying I trust Donald more here.

[ftl]

One thing for shelters is that even though their effect might not be that big, it's an effect that can happen IN COMBINATION with other cards. If you add in one more kingdom card, it'll only show up some small fraction of the time and even then will have to replace a card.

Shelters can appear more often than any individual Kingdom card, so even if they have a smaller effect they'll have a smaller effect in more games, and they don't replace any other kingdom card.

[WheresMyElephant]

  The player who saves his Hovel has just as much junk as you do until that first Province buy - then he has less.  Now, if you can think you can make a really quick three-pile ending before your opponent has a chance to pick up any Provinces, then Hoveling an Estate might be a good idea, as winning 1-0 is still winning.  But, how often will such situations arise?

This if faulty logic... it makes the assumption that you will always have Hovel in hand when you buy your first Province. That's not very likely, unless you are building a deck-drawing engine. In a game without much drawing, to buy a Province with Hovel in hand means you got to $8 using only 4 cards... it's much more likely that you can get to $8 with 5 cards than it is with just 4 cards.

I'm definitely not saying that I know for sure that buying an Estate on 5/2 isn't usually the wrong move... it very well might be. But you definitely can't assume that you'll have the chance to trash it on a Province buy later on. I remember this being discussed at great length in another thread, and I thought that there was still no consensus; with a lot of people making good arguments on both sides.

I think wero's logic is an abridged version of what he meant to say. The classic argument (from the old Hovel thread, which I remember as ending in a fairly strong consensus) is that at SOME point you will get to buy a Province or some other victory card and trash the Hovel without really going out of your way. It might not be on your first Province buy; that part is an oversimplification. But experience seems to show that it will usually happen well before the stage of the game when you would welcome a bonus Estate, which is the relevant question.

Also, and this should probably go in the article unless it's considered too obvious, mixed-type Victory cards are great with Hovel as they can be bought much earlier and more reliably than Province even on a Hovel turn. Island, for instance, almost doubles its effectiveness if it trashes a Hovel for free.

[Beyond Awesome]

timchen, Davio: you're saying you expect the coolness and newness of them to wear off after about 100 games. But how many games have you played with them?

Zero! Or maybe a couple, but < 10.

My point of view is purely based on expectation and speculation, not experience.
That said, I am entitled to my point of view of course.

I will admit that the reason I was drawn into Dominion initially was because of its symmetry. I knew about MTG and in my head it was a sinking hole for money where the player with the best deck and the most money would always win. So Dominion was a fresh experience because it allowed equal access to everything.

Of course, there was still asymmetry in shuffling and a 5/2 vs 4/3 start can be pretty brutal or devastating, depending on the kingdom. I also didn't know about first turn advantage back then and didn't think much about the way the first player would get a Curse after the shuffle and the second would get it before the shuffle.

With new expansions, a lot of cards came out that messed with this equal opportunity. Tournament is a key example.
Now we have Dark Ages which has a lot of added asymmetry in Knights, Ruins and Shelters. For me this takes away from the original concept which I thought Dominion was all about. Even though perfect symmetry is a myth, I still thought it would be a core principal. And yes, you could say that there are still many kingdoms which don't have any of these cards and that's of course very true. Still, it's something which I care about.

Back to Shelters, the point I'm trying to make is that in my view they don't anything significant. I'm not disputing that they can sometimes offer funny little tactics, I just don't think that in the grand scheme of things it's such a significant change. Notice how I'm contradicting myself by first saying that these cards add to asymmetry and now claiming they don't make much of a difference. The asymmetry thing is more of a moral issue than a de facto one.

In conclusion I would have preferred another kingdom card instead of the Shelters, but I don't mind at all that they exist and don't really mind playing with them as well.

I don't agree with your assessment here. Shelters are nothing like Tournament. Each player gets the same Shelters. Also, the Ruins for the most part usually suck so one player getting a certain type of Ruins over another player usually has very little impact on the game. Yah, Ruined Village is the worst to get, but the effect of the other Ruins aren't so hot. The variance they add is very little and getting good or bad shuffle luck will have more of an impact on a game than what Ruins one player gets over another.

And, in regards to Knights. For the most part, I don't feel they add as much variance. They are often being destroyed if contested. I will admit the village Knight and the non-terminal Knight are the strongest and probably give the opponent a slight advantage, but I think how well you play a kingdom has more of an impact on the game than who gets what Knights. But, they do add a bit more variance than Ruins. I still think even with Knights (assuming both players are of similiar skill) whoever gets the better shuffle luck will stand a better chance at winning.

[WheresMyElephant]

One other thing I never see people mention is that sometimes Shelters are actually doing Remake and Upgrade a favor. Fool's Gold is an obvious example but not the only one.

[GendoIkari]

  The player who saves his Hovel has just as much junk as you do until that first Province buy - then he has less.  Now, if you can think you can make a really quick three-pile ending before your opponent has a chance to pick up any Provinces, then Hoveling an Estate might be a good idea, as winning 1-0 is still winning.  But, how often will such situations arise?

This if faulty logic... it makes the assumption that you will always have Hovel in hand when you buy your first Province. That's not very likely, unless you are building a deck-drawing engine. In a game without much drawing, to buy a Province with Hovel in hand means you got to $8 using only 4 cards... it's much more likely that you can get to $8 with 5 cards than it is with just 4 cards.

I'm definitely not saying that I know for sure that buying an Estate on 5/2 isn't usually the wrong move... it very well might be. But you definitely can't assume that you'll have the chance to trash it on a Province buy later on. I remember this being discussed at great length in another thread, and I thought that there was still no consensus; with a lot of people making good arguments on both sides.

I think wero's logic is an abridged version of what he meant to say. The classic argument (from the old Hovel thread, which I remember as ending in a fairly strong consensus) is that at SOME point you will get to buy a Province or some other victory card and trash the Hovel without really going out of your way. It might not be on your first Province buy; that part is an oversimplification. But experience seems to show that it will usually happen well before the stage of the game when you would welcome a bonus Estate, which is the relevant question.

Also, and this should probably go in the article unless it's considered too obvious, mixed-type Victory cards are great with Hovel as they can be bought much earlier and more reliably than Province even on a Hovel turn. Island, for instance, almost doubles its effectiveness if it trashes a Hovel for free.

Maybe I missed the ending of that thread; or I could easily be just forgetting stuff.

As for Island; while it's certainly better to buy with Hovel in hand, it also seems like you would be less likely to want an Island in a game with Shelters instead of Estates. If you have no way to trash, then setting aside an Overgrown Estate or I guess Copper can be good, but not as good as setting aside Estates. Similar to how you might not open double-Amb in a Necropolis game, even though you have less risk of colliding.

[Davio]

One thing for shelters is that even though their effect might not be that big, it's an effect that can happen IN COMBINATION with other cards. If you add in one more kingdom card, it'll only show up some small fraction of the time and even then will have to replace a card.

Shelters can appear more often than any individual Kingdom card, so even if they have a smaller effect they'll have a smaller effect in more games, and they don't replace any other kingdom card.

Okay, this is a statement I hadn't previously considered and my opinion has been revised accordingly.

The example I put forward with Tournament and even Knights was because I had it in my mind that Dominion's principle was about making every card available for every player. Now if you get Sir Martin, I can't get him. If you get Followers, I can't.

Sure, we can both get Tournaments and we both get any random Knight or any random Ruin. It's just the fact that there were different cards in a pile was somewhat surprising to me.

Not that I lost a good night's sleep over it, rest assured guys, but it made me go "huh, so I guess [this non-existing principle] isn't even true for Dominion". I had some weird unfounded MTG worries.

[AJD]

As for Island; while it's certainly better to buy with Hovel in hand, it also seems like you would be less likely to want an Island in a game with Shelters instead of Estates. If you have no way to trash, then setting aside an Overgrown Estate or I guess Copper can be good, but not as good as setting aside Estates. Similar to how you might not open double-Amb in a Necropolis game, even though you have less risk of colliding.

On the other hand, buying Great Hall with Hovel in hand is roughly comparable to buying Island in an Estate game.

And similarly, of course, having Hovel in hand can help you make your decision between Gold and Harem.

[WheresMyElephant]

As for Island; while it's certainly better to buy with Hovel in hand, it also seems like you would be less likely to want an Island in a game with Shelters instead of Estates. If you have no way to trash, then setting aside an Overgrown Estate or I guess Copper can be good, but not as good as setting aside Estates. Similar to how you might not open double-Amb in a Necropolis game, even though you have less risk of colliding.

On the other hand, buying Great Hall with Hovel in hand is roughly comparable to buying Island in an Estate game.

And similarly, of course, having Hovel in hand can help you make your decision between Gold and Harem.

Fun calculation (which is probably obvious to many if they've considered the issue):

Harem-with-Hovel beats Gold, from a totally naive raw money density perspective, as long as your money density is greater than 1. It's like trashing a Copper: one less coin, one less card.

[jomini]

Fun calculation (which is probably obvious to many if they've considered the issue):

Harem-with-Hovel beats Gold, from a totally naive raw money density perspective, as long as your money density is greater than 1. It's like trashing a Copper: one less coin, one less card.

Let's say you have X total cash and Y cards. Money density with a Gold is (X+3)/(Y+1). Money density with a Harem, sans a Hovel is (X+2)/Y. If money density = 1 then X = Y. (X + 3)/(X+1) != (X+2)/(X)

In reality, the choices are equivalent when X = Y - 2; which is actually a good bit sooner - as in turn 2 if you buy a silver (X = 9, Y = 11). The only time you should not take a Hovel trashing Harem over a Gold if you are just looking at money density is if you've been heavily cursed/ruined.

[eHalcyon]

Fun calculation (which is probably obvious to many if they've considered the issue):

Harem-with-Hovel beats Gold, from a totally naive raw money density perspective, as long as your money density is greater than 1. It's like trashing a Copper: one less coin, one less card.

Let's say you have X total cash and Y cards. Money density with a Gold is (X+3)/(Y+1). Money density with a Harem, sans a Hovel is (X+2)/Y. If money density = 1 then X = Y. (X + 3)/(X+1) != (X+2)/(X)

In reality, the choices are equivalent when X = Y - 2; which is actually a good bit sooner - as in turn 2 if you buy a silver (X = 9, Y = 11). The only time you should not take a Hovel trashing Harem over a Gold if you are just looking at money density is if you've been heavily cursed/ruined.

You might still prefer the Gold if you have good sifting.

[jomini]

You might still prefer the Gold if you have good sifting.

Oh absolutely, but sifting warps things heavily away from money density and towards money distribution. If you only care about money density, which is never quite the case in a real game, take the Harem.

If you have good sifting, or really want to hit the 7 or 9 price points early on a minority of hands, the gold might be worth it. I'm sure there are other cases out there, but from a simplistic point of view Harem + Hovel trash > Gold.

[ftl]

In heavy cursing games/slogs is also when the 2VP from harem might make a bigger difference, if the game piles out on duchies/curses/something before people get to lots of provinces. So it's likely it's good to take harem+hoveltrash there over gold too...

[WheresMyElephant]

Fun calculation (which is probably obvious to many if they've considered the issue):

Harem-with-Hovel beats Gold, from a totally naive raw money density perspective, as long as your money density is greater than 1. It's like trashing a Copper: one less coin, one less card.

Let's say you have X total cash and Y cards. Money density with a Gold is (X+3)/(Y+1). Money density with a Harem, sans a Hovel is (X+2)/Y. If money density = 1 then X = Y. (X + 3)/(X+1) != (X+2)/(X)

In reality, the choices are equivalent when X = Y - 2; which is actually a good bit sooner - as in turn 2 if you buy a silver (X = 9, Y = 11). The only time you should not take a Hovel trashing Harem over a Gold if you are just looking at money density is if you've been heavily cursed/ruined.

Sorry, I meant the money density AFTER the purchase needed to be greater than 1. (After either purchase; it doesn't matter which option you choose.) Post-purchase money density is described by the formulae you gave, (X+3)/(Y+1) and (X+2)/Y, so we seem to agree.

I didn't want to get too nitpicky about the specifics, since in a real game people probably aren't tracking money density closely enough to tell the difference. Even if they were, if it's that close, they are probably going to decide based on the Harem VP or some other factor.

 But I should've known someone would check my math (and thanks for doing so!)

Edit: To everyone else, yeah this does of course overlook a ton of factors. Including the difference between "raw money density," "effective money density," and "this deck doesn't care about money density."Also including the question of how long that Hovel would have been around anyhow. I don't mean to downplay any of this; it's left as an exercise for the reader, since most of the readers here can probably address it better than I can.

[sandstorm]

I've mentioned this before I think but Great Hall/Silver (Trash Hovel) opening is the first opening in dominion history that has a 100% chance of giving you one hand worth at least 5 coins on turns 3 or 4.

[WanderingWinder]

I've mentioned this before I think but Great Hall/Silver (Trash Hovel) opening is the first opening in dominion history that has a 100% chance of giving you one hand worth at least 5 coins on turns 3 or 4.

If you don't count various multiplayer scenarios or silver/nomad camp/potentially-a-nomad-camp-here-on-exactly$4.

[werothegreat]

I found the edge case!  I found the edge case!

Trash Hovel to Estate on a 5/2 opening when Bishop is on the board, because you'll get more points that way.

[Powerman]

I've mentioned this before I think but Great Hall/Silver (Trash Hovel) opening is the first opening in dominion history that has a 100% chance of giving you one hand worth at least 5 coins on turns 3 or 4.

Silver / Nomad Camp.  Turn 3 you'll hit 3, 4, or 5.  If you hit 3, next 5 cards are copper or silver.  If you hit 4, buy a nomad camp and 3 of the next 4 cards are copper or silver.  If you hit 5... well...

[ConMan]

I think the article isn't looking too shabby at the moment. I would like to suggest opening it with a bit more explanation of the bleeding obvious, though, by explicitly describing the four main ways starting Shelters differ from starting Estates:
1. They have a cost of 1, not 2
2. They're not worth VP
3. 2 of them aren't Victory cards
4. They do stuff

Much of the article then goes on to discuss the effects these differences make alone and in combination, so it would be good to have them spelled out at the start.

[WheresMyElephant]

I found the edge case!  I found the edge case!

Trash Hovel to Estate on a 5/2 opening when Bishop is on the board, because you'll get more points that way.

I'm sure there are edge cases involving Crossroads, Baron, Remake etc. Shelters hurt all these cards but they're all still going to be viable SOMETIMES; even Baron is sometimes your only source of +Buy.

[werothegreat]

I think the article isn't looking too shabby at the moment. I would like to suggest opening it with a bit more explanation of the bleeding obvious, though, by explicitly describing the four main ways starting Shelters differ from starting Estates:
1. They have a cost of 1, not 2
2. They're not worth VP
3. 2 of them aren't Victory cards
4. They do stuff

Much of the article then goes on to discuss the effects these differences make alone and in combination, so it would be good to have them spelled out at the start.

Done.

[theory]

Published.  Other than formatting, the main alteration was a longer explanation of the Hovel/Estate problem. 

[Polk5440]

I will admit that the reason I was drawn into Dominion initially was because of its symmetry. I knew about MTG and in my head it was a sinking hole for money where the player with the best deck and the most money would always win. So Dominion was a fresh experience because it allowed equal access to everything.

I second that.

From playing some games with Dark Ages, though, Shelters do not deviate from the symmetry promise. Everyone still starts with the identical deck. I really enjoy playing with them. Ruins even aren't so asymmetric because they are all so bad. Some are just a little worse than others. Knights, on the other hand, I don't like very much (even though they all attack, they are a close third behind Black Market and Tournament as the worst offenders of equal access). Haven't played more than a few games with them, though.

[Awaclus]

I will admit that the reason I was drawn into Dominion initially was because of its symmetry. I knew about MTG and in my head it was a sinking hole for money where the player with the best deck and the most money would always win. So Dominion was a fresh experience because it allowed equal access to everything.

I second that.

From playing some games with Dark Ages, though, Shelters do not deviate from the symmetry promise. Everyone still starts with the identical deck. I really enjoy playing with them. Ruins even aren't so asymmetric because they are all so bad. Some are just a little worse than others. Knights, on the other hand, I don't like very much (even though they all attack, they are a close third behind Black Market and Tournament as the worst offenders of equal access). Haven't played more than a few games with them, though.

The whole point of Dominion games is asymmetry: you usually don't have unlimited VP available (Monument, Goons + Ambassador and Bishop + a few DA cards aside), so the player who gets the most, wins. If you piledrive, say, Cities or Laboratories, you are the only player who has access to them and then you have quite an advantage there. If it wasn't for asymmetry, every Dominion game would end on a draw. Now, I can see why Black Market isn't everyone's favorite card, because getting the only Mountebank in the whole game can be devastating and is completely luck-dependent, and the same is true for Tournament to a lesser extent (because it depends on luck significantly less), but getting to $5 is a matter of luck only when at least one player opens 5/2 and another player does not. Sure, the player going first always has additional advantage from Knights being on the table, but that's also true for attack cards. While Knights aren't bad cards, they are worse than the power 5 cards, and usually getting a specific Knight is more a matter of choice.

In Dominion, every player has equal chances of winning the game before the first player is decided and Knights, Tournament and Black Market do not change that.

[Polk5440]

I will admit that the reason I was drawn into Dominion initially was because of its symmetry. I knew about MTG and in my head it was a sinking hole for money where the player with the best deck and the most money would always win. So Dominion was a fresh experience because it allowed equal access to everything.

I second that.

From playing some games with Dark Ages, though, Shelters do not deviate from the symmetry promise. Everyone still starts with the identical deck. I really enjoy playing with them. Ruins even aren't so asymmetric because they are all so bad. Some are just a little worse than others. Knights, on the other hand, I don't like very much (even though they all attack, they are a close third behind Black Market and Tournament as the worst offenders of equal access). Haven't played more than a few games with them, though.

The whole point of Dominion games is asymmetry: you usually don't have unlimited VP available (Monument, Goons + Ambassador and Bishop + a few DA cards aside), so the player who gets the most, wins. If you piledrive, say, Cities or Laboratories, you are the only player who has access to them and then you have quite an advantage there. If it wasn't for asymmetry, every Dominion game would end on a draw. Now, I can see why Black Market isn't everyone's favorite card, because getting the only Mountebank in the whole game can be devastating and is completely luck-dependent, and the same is true for Tournament to a lesser extent (because it depends on luck significantly less), but getting to $5 is a matter of luck only when at least one player opens 5/2 and another player does not. Sure, the player going first always has additional advantage from Knights being on the table, but that's also true for attack cards. While Knights aren't bad cards, they are worse than the power 5 cards, and usually getting a specific Knight is more a matter of choice.

In Dominion, every player has equal chances of winning the game before the first player is decided and Knights, Tournament and Black Market do not change that.

I am particularly sensitive to symmetry in availability of cards because of Magic/CCGs, and my tastes reflect that. A card where only one copy is available to "buy" reminds me too much of the negative aspect of CCGs ("rare" cards, I am looking at you). That's all I was trying to say. I was just glad to see Davio felt the same way.