Print

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

[BadAssMutha]

So I've recently had some unlucky games where my opening terminal action winds up at the bottom of my deck and misses the reshuffle. In these cases, I've tried "doubling up" on my terminal on turn 4, so that I can hopefully get 2 plays in on the next shuffle, and not fall too far behind (especially important for card-givers like Sea Hag or Maurader). Let's assume an easy case where there's no extra actions in the kingdom, I open Silver/Terminal, and the terminal in question doesn't give +Cards. I don't draw the terminal on turn 3, and buy a coin or a nonterminal. Then don't draw my terminal on turn 4. Should I buy another, or stick with what my plan would otherwise have been?

As I figure it, there's only a 25% of collision between the two terminals on the second reshuffle - draw the last 2 cards in the deck (one of which is terminal), then there's a 3/12 shot of getting the other terminal at the top of the shuffle. Seems having the second terminal might be the way to go, even if I normally wouldn't have gotten that terminal until my deck got a little bigger. Obviously, this depends on the kingdom and all, but I just wanted some thoughts. I got burned by this a few times in a row, so I'm forced to wonder if I'm thinking about this wrong somehow, or just got unlucky.

[eHalcyon]

Really depends.  There are some cards where it's even good to open terminal/terminal.  Swindler stands out, as does Steward when you are looking to trash down quickly.

[HiveMindEmulator]

I usually have 2 terminals in my deck by the second shuffle anyway...

[ftl]

Sea hag, ambassador - also a good reason to get double terminals.

2 terminals in a 14-card deck is reasonable if they're reasonably good.

[LastFootnote]

Sea hag, ambassador - also a good reason to get double terminals.

Doesn't Ambassador/Ambassador beat Sea Hag/Ambassador?

EDIT: Or did you mean that those are just two cards that you often want two of early?

[dondon151]

I am not sure that I would open double Sea Hag if given the chance.

[LastFootnote]

I am not sure that I would open double Sea Hag if given the chance.

There are definitely boards where I would. It's possible that I have on a Baker board.

[HiveMindEmulator]

I am not sure that I would open double Sea Hag if given the chance.

There are definitely boards where I would. It's possible that I have on a Baker board.

Such a board would be exceedingly rare. Usually you want some sort of economy.

[DG]

Two good terminals in a treasure deck is usually ok. You sometimes need to watch out when buying a +2 coin action, thinking it's like a silver, but then never getting those 2 coins when the actions clash. If you need coins to spend your way out of a hole then silver is much safer.

Islands, feasts, and embargoes are cards that suit your turn 4 dilemma. If you bought one on turn 1 or 2 then you typically want it out of your deck before you buy a second on turn 4. If they stay in your deck too long they are ineffective and a blockage to development.

[Piemaster]

There are plenty of times that you want a second terminal in on the second reshuffle.  However, in most cases, the fact it missed the first reshuffle shouldn't be a relevant factor in your decision making.  Either your deck will benefit from the second (Sea Hag) or it won't.  Don't send good money after bad.

[ftl]

EDIT: Or did you mean that those are just two cards that you often want two of early?

Yes, that's what I meant. Sea Hag less often than ambassador though.

[meandering mercury]

YES, YOU SHOULD BUY A SECOND TERMINAL.*

Here's two reasons why:

(1) The chance of collision is reduced. Let me approximate your 14-card deck with a 15-card deck. In this case you'll see all your cards on t5, t6, and t7. If the terminal misses the shuffle, then the chance of collision is 3/13 = 23% (with the approximation). If it doesn't miss the shuffle, the chance of collision is

(3/13)^2 + 2*(5/13)^2 = 59/169 = 35%

(Someone correct me if I'm wrong?) The downside of getting two terminals is the chance of collision, but now you've cut the probability of collision down by a third.

(2) You're already behind. Missing your terminal is not good news, and you might need to rely on some luck to get your back. -Stef- has pointed this out previously with his Borinion analogy.

* obviously it depends on the kingdom and all. There are plenty of kingdoms where a second terminal doesn't make sense. There are plenty of kingdoms where you'd buy a second terminal anyway. Guys, guys, that wasn't really the point of this thread.

[Drab Emordnilap]

I've opened Scheme/Sage/Warehouse with Sea Hag reasonably often; that's similarly bad for economy, but I think it's right to do sometimes.

[Warfreak2]

Scheme is strictly better than a second Hag, so it seems reasonable. Sage has the advantage of skipping over the Curse that just got put on your deck, and also finds Silvers, so it doesn't seem harmful to your economy.

[Witherweaver]

You could also open Scout and move that Curse from the top of your deck to the fourth card down.  All the while smirking at your opponent.

[eHalcyon]

Scheme is strictly better than a second Hag, so it seems reasonable. Sage has the advantage of skipping over the Curse that just got put on your deck, and also finds Silvers, so it doesn't seem harmful to your economy.

It is not strictly better.  Easy counter example - when Villages are available.

[Warfreak2]

Even if you get a lucky hand of Village/Sea Hag/Sea Hag, that means you didn't have a Sea Hag in one of the turns either before or after it, unless you are drawing your deck, which is impossible so early in a Sea Hag game. Playing both of your Sea Hags in the same turn is also less efficient for the handsize attack effect.

[SCSN]

Scheme is obviously not strictly better. The most important difference is that when your Scheme and Sea Hag don't immediately collide, Scheme delays the 2nd Sea Hag play by 1-3 turns (possibly more if your Hag gets Hagged), whereas a 2nd Sea Hag would have attacked right away.

[eHalcyon]

Even if you get a lucky hand of Village/Sea Hag/Sea Hag, that means you didn't have a Sea Hag in one of the turns either before or after it, unless you are drawing your deck, which is impossible so early in a Sea Hag game. Playing both of your Sea Hags in the same turn is also less efficient for the handsize attack effect.

If you play double Sea Hag right before their reshuffle, it's better than if you played Scheme and Sea Hag because the Curse on the next turn won't get shuffled into their deck.

I'm not saying that double Sea Hag is better.  Scheme is almost always better.  It's just that Scheme is not strictly better, and people should be more strict about using the term "strictly".

[Drab Emordnilap]

There's also the case where you draw one opener each on turns 3 and 4. If one was a Scheme, you only play Sea Hag once this shuffle. If both were Sea Hag, you get two plays.

[Warfreak2]

If "strictly better" means "there is no edge case" then I think this forum is proof enough that no card is ever strictly better than any other. I think even with the Baker coin token actually giving you the direct choice between a Scheme and a second Hag, it is never right to get the Hag. If it's Scheme/Hag vs Hag/Hag, but only counting the games where the double-Hag player never collides Hags without a village, I doubt there is much difference in win rate. Remember, the Scheme player gets to keep the coin token!

[eHalcyon]

If "strictly better" means "there is no edge case" then I think this forum is proof enough that no card is ever strictly better than any other. I think even with the Baker coin token actually giving you the direct choice between a Scheme and a second Hag, it is never right to get the Hag. If it's Scheme/Hag vs Hag/Hag, but only counting the games where the double-Hag player never collides Hags without a village, I doubt there is much difference in win rate. Remember, the Scheme player gets to keep the coin token!

"Strictly" is strict, by definition.  If you want to be completely strict about it, no card is strictly better if they have different costs due to Forge.  Usually we talk about strictly better effects, in which case you can allow for the edgiest of edge cases, e.g. Hunting Grounds has a strictly better effect than Smithy (except in crazy reshuffle cases).

The cases where a second Sea Hag is better than Scheme are not that edgy.

Edit:

To clarify, "strictly better [effect]" should be reserved for when a card actually does everything another card does and more.  Hunting Grounds draws as much as Smithy, plus one extra card.  Worker's Village does everything Village does, plus one extra Buy.  These are examples of strictly better effects.

Scheme is not strictly better than Sea Hag because Scheme does not curse.  It does something entirely different.  It enables you to play Sea Hag more often, and since it is cantrip and only costs $3 it is almost always better than getting a second Sea Hag.  But it is not strictly better.

[LastFootnote]

To clarify, "strictly better [effect]" should be reserved for when a card actually does everything another card does and more.  Hunting Grounds draws as much as Smithy, plus one extra card.

To be extra, super picky, +4 Cards is not strictly better than +3 Cards, since there are times when you'd rather not draw that 4th card. If the effect were "+3 Cards. You may draw another card," then it would be strictly better than +3 Cards.

EDIT: With the existing cards, Festival's effect is strictly better than Woodcutter's effect because you're never obligated to use the extra Actions, nor are you ever obligated to spend the extra Coins that Diadem would produce due to you having those extra actions.

[Witherweaver]

Even if you get a lucky hand of Village/Sea Hag/Sea Hag, that means you didn't have a Sea Hag in one of the turns either before or after it, unless you are drawing your deck, which is impossible so early in a Sea Hag game. Playing both of your Sea Hags in the same turn is also less efficient for the handsize attack effect.

If you play double Sea Hag right before their reshuffle, it's better than if you played Scheme and Sea Hag because the Curse on the next turn won't get shuffled into their deck.

I'm not saying that double Sea Hag is better.  Scheme is almost always better.  It's just that Scheme is not strictly better, and people should be more strict about using the term "strictly".

Using "strictly better" to mean "always better" is strictly better than using "strictly better" to mean "almost always better".

[LastFootnote]

Even if you get a lucky hand of Village/Sea Hag/Sea Hag, that means you didn't have a Sea Hag in one of the turns either before or after it, unless you are drawing your deck, which is impossible so early in a Sea Hag game. Playing both of your Sea Hags in the same turn is also less efficient for the handsize attack effect.

If you play double Sea Hag right before their reshuffle, it's better than if you played Scheme and Sea Hag because the Curse on the next turn won't get shuffled into their deck.

I'm not saying that double Sea Hag is better.  Scheme is almost always better.  It's just that Scheme is not strictly better, and people should be more strict about using the term "strictly".

Using "strictly better" to mean "always better" is strictly better than using "strictly better" to mean "almost always better".

Not using the term "strictly better" is probably best.