Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 31  All

Author Topic: WW's Power Rankings  (Read 234689 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Mic Qsenoch

  • 2015 DS Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1709
  • Respect: +4329
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #150 on: July 03, 2013, 10:20:58 pm »
+1

It had better be Courtyard.
Logged

jonts26

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2746
  • Shuffle iT Username: jonts
  • Respect: +3668
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #151 on: July 03, 2013, 10:29:44 pm »
+2

All aboard the courtyard train. Woo Wooooo.
Logged

Powerman

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 766
  • Respect: +605
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #152 on: July 03, 2013, 11:16:53 pm »
0

Courtyard was named?  Oh... yeah, I'll switch from NB to that.
Logged
A man on a mission.

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2644
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3388
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #153 on: July 03, 2013, 11:29:09 pm »
0

Oh I thought it was implicit that we were only talking about the cards in the first group. Yeah, definitely Courtyard if we are counting the second bunch, too.
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.

Piemaster

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 260
  • Respect: +170
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #154 on: July 04, 2013, 03:53:06 am »
+3

181. Haven:
This one I agree with you, but I decided to write something anyway just to clarify the argument. Haven has 2 uses, in my mind: (1) if you can overdraw your deck, you can save a Scrying Pool or Village or whatever for next turn to add reliability, and (2) it lets you play cards that need to line up with other cards (like Coppersmith or Baron) in a non-engine deck.

There is a very common third use, which is smoothing out money in the late game.  Play Haven, realise you now have 10 money, stash a Silver, almost certainly buying a Province next turn as well.  Or a slightly different scenario, play Haven, find you've hit the dreaded 7, stash a Silver and buy either a Duchy or (if it seems a shrewder move) a different 5-cost card.  This has got me out of trouble plenty of times and makes it very worthy for something that only costs 2.  I think it's pretty incredible that Haven is listed below Vagrant.
« Last Edit: July 04, 2013, 03:56:49 am by Piemaster »
Logged

SCSN

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2227
  • Respect: +7140
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #155 on: July 04, 2013, 06:41:46 am »
+1

Quote
Would I rather have Alchemist in my deck or any of those cards? Alchemist, 9 times out of 10. But it costs SO much (and those are cheap! Many also have uses other than 'card-drawer in an engine'). The issue is, if there's a halfway reasonable village on the board, it's just so much easier to get lots of the village plus that card.

I get that you take into account the costs, I just disagree with your conclusions. I do think Alchemist is worse than Lab, Smithy and all Smithy-like 5s for exactly the reasons you state, but it's better than those $2-$3 cards. In my experience it's just so much harder to set up reliable drawing with those cheap cards than with Alchemist. Alchemist is slower, sure, but I'd rather spend a few more minutes assembling things than speeding ahead and see my engine blow up in the middle of the race. Those cheap cards can work out great, but they can also fail miserably.

Quote
If there isn't, then Alchemist is probably not all that hot anyway, and it goes to big money. In big money, Alchemist might be worth it on a colony board, definitely not on a province board.

I agree that it sucks with BM, but BM itself is pretty bad most of the time, so that shouldn't have an enormous impact.

Quote
Of course this is an oversimplification, but well, that cost is a lot.

Okay, then what about Hunting Grounds? That card is even more expensive and not too reliable (you curse yourself to death when you fail to line it up with a Village), yet I still love it in most engines.

And why is Alchemist < Possession? Alchemist only sucks on Province-BM/Slog/Rush boards and is at least decent on all others, Possession is completely useless most of the time and is much more expensive. Sure, it can be absolutely dominating sometimes, but so can Poor House:

SheCantSayNo   cards: 4 Village, 3 Poor House, 2 Pawn, 1 Chapel, 5 Province
SheCantSayNo   total victory points: 30
SheCantSayNo   turns: 12

which is even lower on your list than Alchemist.

Quote
Incidentally, in your post, you name a card I have in my top 10(!)

I hope it's Doctor, because you're clearly insane :D

Joking aside, I assume it's Courtyard and you put it there mainly because of Courtyard-BM. I don't think Alchemist should be above Courtyard overall, but I do think Alchemist is the better drawer for most engines, even taking into account its costs.
« Last Edit: July 04, 2013, 06:43:17 am by SheCantSayNo »
Logged

brokoli

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1119
  • Respect: +786
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #156 on: July 04, 2013, 07:41:14 am »
0

Alchemist below Workshop, Moat, Woodcutter, Pawn, Shanty Town, Trading Post, Embargo, Native Village, Lookout, Smugglers, Outpost, Horse Traders, Crossroads, Oracle, Noble Brigand, Farmland, Beggar, Vagrant, Sage, Armory, Death Cart, Scavenger, Count, Rogue, Doctor, Advisor... really?
You seriously think that Alchemist is better than Oracle and Scavenger ?
I disagree on the rest too, but these two are so good.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12848
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #157 on: July 04, 2013, 09:15:47 am »
0

Alchemist below Workshop, Moat, Woodcutter, Pawn, Shanty Town, Trading Post, Embargo, Native Village, Lookout, Smugglers, Outpost, Horse Traders, Crossroads, Oracle, Noble Brigand, Farmland, Beggar, Vagrant, Sage, Armory, Death Cart, Scavenger, Count, Rogue, Doctor, Advisor... really?
You seriously think that Alchemist is better than Oracle and Scavenger ?
I disagree on the rest too, but these two are so good.
Better than Scavenger, worse than Oracle, I would say.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4381
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #158 on: July 04, 2013, 11:29:45 am »
0

160.   Vagrant
This high, really? Yes. While it may seem not so good to have to draw your bad cards (it doesn't do anything for me anyway), while it isn't good now, it helps your next turn substantially - you were going to draw those bad cards at some point anyway. When it works,it's as good as lab. And worst case it's still a cantrip. Okay, it's no world-beater, but this cheap, it's reasonably often worth a go.

159.   Woodcutter
It's a source of +buy in a pinch, and this is probably its main purpose. Also virtual coin if you need it (KC-type cards, draw-to-X). A solid if unspectacular card.

158.   Loan
An early trasher which not only is non-terminal, but also can't be drawn dead. The issue is that you usually have some other treasure you don't want to hit (of course you don't have to trash it, but you must skip it, and moreover it reduces loan's effectiveness), and more importantly you are effectively adding another copper to get the trashing, which is supposed to get rid of coppers anyway!

157.   Farmland
By far the main use for this card is to be two points while sacrificing your deck quality just at the end of the game. It can also be used to trash curses or get lots of green cards, but these are fairly ancillary.

156.   Mint
The main use of this is to trash a bunch of coppers in one go, but this is hard to manage at an effective point in the game. The extra treasures can also be good, but it tends to be relatively slow. For sure can be really good, but often is only decent.

155.   Outpost
This card is usually terrible. Three card hands are just much weaker than 5, particularly when you can't choose the three out of a larger quantity. And you have to spend a terminal on it? Well, it still gets a decent ranking because it can be really really good when it is good, almost always in big engines (though you have to be able to get going from a three card hand) which can overdraw the deck anyway, where you are just doubling your turns. Really helped by other duration cards, or occasionally with draw-to-X.

154.   Rogue
If you could choose between the options, this would be one of the top power cards. But as it is, you often are forced to gain things you don't really want that much, the attack isn't reliable, and it's often just okay, sometimes even bad..

153.   Graverobber
Expanding actions can be nice, but very often those $5 actions are really premium cards in your deck. Still can be good if you have a strong engine up and going, and definitely helped because you can gain those actions back. But 2 5-cost terminal plays to gain a province is... actually not that great as it turns out, in comparison. Definitely a late-game card.

152.   Trading Post
This is a card which is pretty good early on, but later on really diminishes in value. Not a lot to say.

151.   Market Square
I feel that this is a huge trap card, at least how it's used a lot. Using one card to trash another and discard yet another, just to gain a gold. Well, gold is good but not the absolute best, and you are losing a lot of cards from your hand now. But cantrip +buy isn't that bad in-and-of-itself, though not all that hot either.

150.   Island
This is a tricky card to use. Not the worst early, and not at all bad in the midgame for engines which can store green cards as soon as you get them; disappointingly often, though, it's just 2-VP for 4. That isn't terrible, but realize that it is just a VP card on your next shuffle, like any other, and you need to wait another shuffle to get the thinning benefit.

149.   Death Cart
A card which can sling you up to lots of money, but only a few times. The ruins aren't always a drawback, but they limit the card's ability to be useful in a lot of cases. Usually you either want to be able to ensure you have it with a ruins (via strong engine) or only need it the one time, with future plas more like bonuses.

ipofanes

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1439
  • Shuffle iT Username: ipofanes
  • Respect: +776
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #159 on: July 04, 2013, 11:33:49 am »
+1

171.   Band of Misfits
Another one that's hard to evaluate. But the best 4-or-cheaper on the board, even when you get to pick the situation, often loses out to another 5-cost. That it can't be any really key cheap cards for long really really hurts this. But it has so much versatility that it can't be *that* bad. Probably it's best where there's lots of mediocre 3s-4s and at least some cantrip, or where you can use at as *either* smithy or village for an engine.

I think a Throne Room deck kingdom deserves special mention. A card you can choose to be a Throne Room or a Bureaucrat (deliberately not picking any of the more powerful $4) can't be that bad.
« Last Edit: July 04, 2013, 01:21:04 pm by ipofanes »
Logged
Lord Rattington denies my undo requests

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7861
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #160 on: July 04, 2013, 11:50:24 am »
+1

171.   Band of Misfits
Another one that's hard to evaluate. But the best 4-or-cheaper on the board, even when you get to pick the situation, often loses out to another 5-cost. That it can't be any really key cheap cards for long really really hurts this. But it has so much versatility that it can't be *that* bad. Probably it's best where there's lots of mediocre 3s-4s and at least some cantrip, or where you can use at as *either* smithy or village for an engine.

I think a Throne Room deck deserves special mention. A card you can choose to be a Throne Room or a Bureaucrat (deliberately not picking any of the more powerful $4) can't be that bad.

I think the large variance in its use depending on the board probably affects the rank, too.  Sometimes it feels like a trap card.   When it's on the board, that means there is one less card on the board that could have been a Throne Room or something else.  And how many games do you want a lot of different $4 or less cards?  A decent amount, sure, but it's probably not the dominant situation.  I guess on average half the kingdom would be $4 or less, and of those five cards, how likely is it that you'll need three or more of them? (Not to mention, some of those are alternate Treasures and VP.)  And if there is a pile that will be emptied, then Band of Misfits won't be able to target it once it's gone, so you'd need to get that card anyway.  An ideal situation would be to use it for a card that is good in the beginning but becomes dead later (curers, moneylender, chapel, etc.), but since it costs $5 you can't use it the same way as those cards.

Every card depends on the board, of course, but this seems to be a major one. 
Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3249
  • Respect: +5459
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #161 on: July 04, 2013, 12:57:03 pm »
0

This made me wonder about Outpost.  Why is it terminal?  They don't stack at all, so it doesn't seem like anything would really break.
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2849
  • Respect: +1559
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #162 on: July 04, 2013, 02:26:47 pm »
+2

This made me wonder about Outpost.  Why is it terminal?  They don't stack at all, so it doesn't seem like anything would really break.
Donald X's philosophy seems to be to put as little text on a card as is necessary. The question you should be asking is: does Outpost need "+1 action"? It doesn't, so that's why it doesn't have it.
Logged

Qvist

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2400
  • Shuffle iT Username: Qvist
  • Respect: +4085
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #163 on: July 04, 2013, 05:31:18 pm »
0

While Graverobber is no power card, it's much better than the much too high ranked Rogue.
The games where Rogue is decent to good is the gain-from-the-trash ability. I rarely had a game where the attack was crucial.
Rogue gives you +2$, but being able to expand Action cards is a huge bonus over Rogue most of the times.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4381
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #164 on: July 04, 2013, 05:55:26 pm »
+1

While Graverobber is no power card, it's much better than the much too high ranked Rogue.
The games where Rogue is decent to good is the gain-from-the-trash ability. I rarely had a game where the attack was crucial.
Rogue gives you +2$, but being able to expand Action cards is a huge bonus over Rogue most of the times.
I can't find myself agreeing with this evaluation. If it's gaining, it's usually at least an explorer, though not much better very often. When it's attacking, it's Dame Sylvia. Okay, she's maybe not the best knight, but knights are pretty good, generally much better than the explorer-esque card. So I don't see how it's way overrated, and I don't *think* the main bit of the value is the gaining...

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3249
  • Respect: +5459
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #165 on: July 04, 2013, 06:05:52 pm »
0

But Rogue so rarely attacks.

Edit:  Right, these are two player games.  In that case, Rogue can attack a bit more often if there aren't many other forms of trashing.  Still not very reliable as Knight.  I doubt I would get it unless I was intending to profit off of the gaining (or really need a terminal Silver).
« Last Edit: July 04, 2013, 06:26:36 pm by SirPeebles »
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4381
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #166 on: July 04, 2013, 09:39:43 pm »
+1

But Rogue so rarely attacks.

Edit:  Right, these are two player games.  In that case, Rogue can attack a bit more often if there aren't many other forms of trashing.  Still not very reliable as Knight.  I doubt I would get it unless I was intending to profit off of the gaining (or really need a terminal Silver).
Well, right. But this is (spoiler alert) well below where the knights are on my list, and not *that* far above Explorer.

kn1tt3r

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 585
  • Respect: +278
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #167 on: July 05, 2013, 02:31:59 am »
0

158.   Loan
An early trasher which not only is non-terminal, but also can't be drawn dead. The issue is that you usually have some other treasure you don't want to hit (of course you don't have to trash it, but you must skip it, and moreover it reduces loan's effectiveness), and more importantly you are effectively adding another copper to get the trashing, which is supposed to get rid of coppers anyway!

In my oppinion the biggest drawback of Loan is the risk of skipping your key cards. Say, Mountebank. In theory Loan is a nice addition on a Mountebank board to trash all those Coppers, but accidentially discarding this one Mountebank you would have drawn next turn is a huge deal. Well, maybe deck tracking can prevent this to some extend, but probably only towards the end of a shuffle.
Logged

Piemaster

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 260
  • Respect: +170
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #168 on: July 05, 2013, 02:47:21 am »
+1

158.   Loan
An early trasher which not only is non-terminal, but also can't be drawn dead. The issue is that you usually have some other treasure you don't want to hit (of course you don't have to trash it, but you must skip it, and moreover it reduces loan's effectiveness), and more importantly you are effectively adding another copper to get the trashing, which is supposed to get rid of coppers anyway!

In my opinion the biggest drawback of Loan is the risk of skipping your key cards. Say, Mountebank. In theory Loan is a nice addition on a Mountebank board to trash all those Coppers, but accidentially discarding this one Mountebank you would have drawn next turn is a huge deal. Well, maybe deck tracking can prevent this to some extend, but probably only towards the end of a shuffle.

I don't think that's a big deal at all.  Sure, a Loan might cause you to skip your key card, but it also might skip a lot of the junk allowing you to play your key card more often.  And good deck tracking can make it more likely to do the latter than the former.
Logged

kn1tt3r

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 585
  • Respect: +278
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #169 on: July 05, 2013, 02:51:18 am »
0

158.   Loan
An early trasher which not only is non-terminal, but also can't be drawn dead. The issue is that you usually have some other treasure you don't want to hit (of course you don't have to trash it, but you must skip it, and moreover it reduces loan's effectiveness), and more importantly you are effectively adding another copper to get the trashing, which is supposed to get rid of coppers anyway!

In my opinion the biggest drawback of Loan is the risk of skipping your key cards. Say, Mountebank. In theory Loan is a nice addition on a Mountebank board to trash all those Coppers, but accidentially discarding this one Mountebank you would have drawn next turn is a huge deal. Well, maybe deck tracking can prevent this to some extend, but probably only towards the end of a shuffle.

I don't think that's a big deal at all.  Sure, a Loan might cause you to skip your key card, but it also might skip a lot of the junk allowing you to play your key card more often.  And good deck tracking can make it more likely to do the latter than the former.

Let's say you open Sea Hag/Loan for some reason. In Turn 3 you draw Loan but no Hag. Do you play it? Probably yes, it WILL hit a Copper, and the risk of hitting the Hag is quite small after all. But if you do, it's awful, and maybe even a reason to not open Loan.
Logged

Piemaster

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 260
  • Respect: +170
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #170 on: July 05, 2013, 03:12:34 am »
+3

158.   Loan
An early trasher which not only is non-terminal, but also can't be drawn dead. The issue is that you usually have some other treasure you don't want to hit (of course you don't have to trash it, but you must skip it, and moreover it reduces loan's effectiveness), and more importantly you are effectively adding another copper to get the trashing, which is supposed to get rid of coppers anyway!

In my opinion the biggest drawback of Loan is the risk of skipping your key cards. Say, Mountebank. In theory Loan is a nice addition on a Mountebank board to trash all those Coppers, but accidentially discarding this one Mountebank you would have drawn next turn is a huge deal. Well, maybe deck tracking can prevent this to some extend, but probably only towards the end of a shuffle.

I don't think that's a big deal at all.  Sure, a Loan might cause you to skip your key card, but it also might skip a lot of the junk allowing you to play your key card more often.  And good deck tracking can make it more likely to do the latter than the former.

Let's say you open Sea Hag/Loan for some reason. In Turn 3 you draw Loan but no Hag. Do you play it? Probably yes, it WILL hit a Copper, and the risk of hitting the Hag is quite small after all. But if you do, it's awful, and maybe even a reason to not open Loan.

Okay, let's say you draw Estate, 3x Copper, Loan.  If you play the Loan, it has an 20% chance to skip your Hag before hitting one of the remaining Coppers.  That sucks.

On the other hand, there is already a 29% chance that your Hag is one of the bottom two cards and will miss the reshuffle.  If that is the case, there is a 66% chance that playing the Loan will cause the Hag to be promoted into your turn 4 hand and make the reshuffle after all.  This makes it essentially an even proposition that the Loan will hurt or help you play your Sea Hag.  Plus it trashes a Copper.

Of course, opening Loan on a Sea Hag board is highly questionable anyway as Copper is more valuable in Curse slogs, but I was just continuing with the example you chose and I hope I illustrated my point well enough.
Logged

kn1tt3r

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 585
  • Respect: +278
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #171 on: July 05, 2013, 03:23:57 am »
0

Okay, let's say you draw Estate, 3x Copper, Loan.  If you play the Loan, it has an 20% chance to skip your Hag before hitting one of the remaining Coppers.  That sucks.

On the other hand, there is already a 29% chance that your Hag is one of the bottom two cards and will miss the reshuffle.  If that is the case, there is a 66% chance that playing the Loan will cause the Hag to be promoted into your turn 4 hand and make the reshuffle after all.  This makes it essentially an even proposition that the Loan will hurt or help you play your Sea Hag.  Plus it trashes a Copper.

Of course, opening Loan on a Sea Hag board is highly questionable anyway as Copper is more valuable in Curse slogs, but I was just continuing with the example you chose and I hope I illustrated my point well enough.

It's certainly questionable, so maybe Young Witch/Loan(bane) is a better example. Of course I get your point and you're probably right that it's more likely to be benefitial than bad, but the point is that it's high variance and can really screw you if you happen to end up on the wrong side of it.
Logged

ipofanes

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1439
  • Shuffle iT Username: ipofanes
  • Respect: +776
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #172 on: July 05, 2013, 03:30:08 am »
+1

Okay, let's say you draw Estate, 3x Copper, Loan.  If you play the Loan, it has an 20% chance to skip your Hag before hitting one of the remaining Coppers.  That sucks.

On the other hand, there is already a 29% chance that your Hag is one of the bottom two cards and will miss the reshuffle.  If that is the case, there is a 66% chance that playing the Loan will cause the Hag to be promoted into your turn 4 hand and make the reshuffle after all.  This makes it essentially an even proposition that the Loan will hurt or help you play your Sea Hag.  Plus it trashes a Copper.

Of course, opening Loan on a Sea Hag board is highly questionable anyway as Copper is more valuable in Curse slogs, but I was just continuing with the example you chose and I hope I illustrated my point well enough.

It's certainly questionable, so maybe Young Witch/Loan(bane) is a better example. Of course I get your point and you're probably right that it's more likely to be benefitial than bad, but the point is that it's high variance and can really screw you if you happen to end up on the wrong side of it.
High variance: bad for the high echelons, good for us bungling morons. On the flipside of your second argument, deck thinning lets you win your curse split so you endup with less copper but also less curses.

« Last Edit: July 05, 2013, 03:31:35 am by ipofanes »
Logged
Lord Rattington denies my undo requests

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1856
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #173 on: July 05, 2013, 04:40:02 am »
0

In my oppinion the biggest drawback of Loan is the risk of skipping your key cards.

I would personally say that hitting non-Copper Treasures is Loan's biggest drawback. Sometimes you have no choice but to get a Silver to reach $5 in kingdoms with Loan, and when your Loan hits your Silver, that's just bad in every way.
Logged

SCSN

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2227
  • Respect: +7140
    • View Profile
Re: WW's Power Rankings
« Reply #174 on: July 05, 2013, 05:01:42 am »
+4

High variance: bad for the high echelons, good for us bungling morons.

Not necessarily. Variance is good whenever you're behind in expectation. If I'm P2 in a game against a similarly skilled opponent who doesn't play a clearly inferior strategy, I much welcome all free variance I can get.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 31  All
 

Page created in 0.139 seconds with 21 queries.