Print

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

[philosophyguy]

What are your thoughts on Cache, after some initial playing time with Hinterlands? If you have a Trader or Watchtower in hand to mitigate the on-gain penalty, it seems like a no-brainer. I can imagine it being useful in a Gardens deck but don't know if it would slow down your rush too much to compensate. Obviously it's much stronger if there are Apothecaries around. I don't know if strong trashing (e.g., Chapel or perhaps Remake) is enough to mitigate the penalty. What have you discovered?

[mathguy]

I like cache in a thin deck that started out with two early spice traders. Cache helps feed those spice traders later in the game while providing some cash. This is what I use cache for most often.

[ehunt]

I think that cache is probably not worth buying a watchtower for, since if the watchtower were a copper (or better), you could just buy a gold instead. But if you have a watchtower anyway, and exactly five in hand, then I agree that it's a no-brainer to top-deck a gold-equivalent instead of blind-drawing to 6.

[DG]

Although there are tricks that you can do with a cache, I don't think that you should ignore the basic impact of adding treasure to a deck that will eventually be big and low quality anyway. I ran a quick test with the simulator and it suggested that cache+treasure (with a responsive buying strategy) had a slight edge over an ill-gotten-gains opponent rushing duchies. Good luck to anyone who wants to try that out in a competitive game.

[Davio]

I don't know whether it's good or bad, but I sometimes buy Cache if I'm going BMU+ anyway. I find that the Cache itself helps my deck more than the Coppers hurt it in those cases. Something like 2 Wharves + Cache (if $5), otherwise Silver or Gold is possible.

Browsing through my game history I find that I have combined Cache with Jack of all Trades quite a few times and won almost every one of them...
Embassy also seems a good enabler, since it works lovely with BMU anyway.

[Fangz]

I like cache in a thin deck that started out with two early spice traders. Cache helps feed those spice traders later in the game while providing some cash. This is what I use cache for most often.

Feeding spice traders is a losing proposition. Copper + Spice trader, using the lab effect, is exactly the same as not having those two cards at all! Using the woodcutter effect is making the spice trader into a terminal copper (and okay, a buy, but still.)

[LastFootnote]

I like cache in a thin deck that started out with two early spice traders. Cache helps feed those spice traders later in the game while providing some cash. This is what I use cache for most often.

Feeding spice traders is a losing proposition. Copper + Spice trader, using the lab effect, is exactly the same as not having those two cards at all! Using the woodcutter effect is making the spice trader into a terminal copper (and okay, a buy, but still.)

Although buying Copper simply to 'feed' a Moneylender or Spice Merchant is a bad idea, the fact that you have one in your deck should make you more willing to buy Cache if you have exactly $5 to spend. So while gaining the Copper doesn't 'help' your Spice Merchant, the Spice Merchant makes you more able to deal with having the Copper. There does seem to be some synergy between Spice Merchant and Cache.

Also, it's Spice MERCHANT, not 'Spice Traders'.

[popsofctown]

I think that cache is probably not worth buying a watchtower for, since if the watchtower were a copper (or better), you could just buy a gold instead. But if you have a watchtower anyway, and exactly five in hand, then I agree that it's a no-brainer to top-deck a gold-equivalent instead of blind-drawing to 6.

Could you buy a gold to the top of your deck with a copper?  That is the question sir.

I tried cache in a gardens deck.  It didn't work.  That might have been one of the games I tried to play gardens against colonies though, something I'm beginning to suspect is a bad idea..

[WanderingWinder]

I think that cache is probably not worth buying a watchtower for, since if the watchtower were a copper (or better), you could just buy a gold instead. But if you have a watchtower anyway, and exactly five in hand, then I agree that it's a no-brainer to top-deck a gold-equivalent instead of blind-drawing to 6.

Could you buy a gold to the top of your deck with a copper?  That is the question sir.

I tried cache in a gardens deck.  It didn't work.  That might have been one of the games I tried to play gardens against colonies though, something I'm beginning to suspect is a bad idea..

Well, Cache/Gardens is more of a mid- to long-game strategy, and that kind of gardens is going to do badly against colonies. But Gardens rushes work practically as well against colonies as they do against provinces.

[HiveMindEmulator]

I think it's good in big money situations (particularly in the early game) where there are no really good 5s and/or you can't spare another terminal action. In those situations, copper is not really bad and cache, which is basically gold often translates straight into more gold or provinces.

In a way, buying cache is similar to using steward for +$2 to get an early gold. You accept that you have 2 "extra" coppers (since with steward you would have trashed 2) to get that early gold. Of course, buying cache is a little worse, since you're also passing up to opportunity to buy an alternative good card.