(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/1/1c/Harvest.jpg/200px-Harvest.jpg) | #96 ▼1 Harvest (Cornucopia) Weighted Average: 5.2% ▼2.4pp / Unweighted Average: 6.1% / Median: 2.4% ▼2.2pp / Standard Deviation: 9.8% Counting House was last every time, but Harvest ousts it from the last rank. Harvest was voted last 15 times and has a very low deviation as it was never voted above average. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/66/Cache.jpg/200px-Cache.jpg) | #95 ▼1 Cache (Hinterlands) Weighted Average: 6.9% ▼1.0pp / Unweighted Average: 8.3% / Median: 4.2% ▼0.7pp / Standard Deviation: 12.1% Cache also loses one rank and is now second to last. It was voted last 6 times and has only one vote above average. It is 2 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/60/Saboteur.jpg/200px-Saboteur.jpg) | #94 ▼2 Saboteur (Intrigue) Weighted Average: 7.2% ▼2.2pp / Unweighted Average: 8.0% / Median: 5.1% ▼2.2pp / Standard Deviation: 10.7% Saboteur was second to last 2 times and lost 2 ranks this year to be close to that, third to last. It was voted last 9 times with only one outlier way higher than 26%. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/5/5d/Counting_House.jpg/200px-Counting_House.jpg) | #93 ▲3 Counting House (Prosperity) Weighted Average: 7.6% ▲0.2pp / Unweighted Average: 7.4% / Median: 4.2% ▼1.9pp / Standard Deviation: 8.0% Couting House is not last anymore, no it went up 3 ranks, but still with around the same average. It was voted last 4 times and has a really low deviation with no votes above average and only 1 vote above 27%. It is 2 ranks lower in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/23/Stash.jpg/200px-Stash.jpg) | #92 ▲1 Stash (Promo) Weighted Average: 9.1% ▲0.1pp / Unweighted Average: 9.9% / Median: 4.2% ▼3.1pp / Standard Deviation: 13.9% Stash is the second $5 treasure card at the bottom, but won one rank with basically the same average. It was voted last 5 times with one outlier above 41%. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/5/58/Contraband.jpg/200px-Contraband.jpg) | #91 =0 Contraband (Prosperity) Weighted Average: 9.6% ▼2.7pp / Unweighted Average: 12.1% / Median: 6.9% ▲2.9pp / Standard Deviation: 16.7% Contraband is the third $5 treasure card and stays on the same rank, but with a lower average. It was voted last 3 times and has a pretty high deviation for a low ranked card as it got 5 votes way above 22%. It is 2 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/68/Mandarin.jpg/200px-Mandarin.jpg) | #90 =0 Mandarin (Hinterlands) Weighted Average: 10.4% ▼2.5pp / Unweighted Average: 12.0% / Median: 8.1% ▼2.9pp / Standard Deviation: 11.7% Mandarin stays on the same rank as well with a lower average. It's the first card with no votes on the last rank. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/8/8e/Mine.jpg/200px-Mine.jpg) | #89 ▼2 Mine (Base) Weighted Average: 11.6% ▼4.0pp / Unweighted Average: 13.5% / Median: 9.5% ▼4.4pp / Standard Deviation: 12.3% Mine lost 2 ranks, the 2 ranks it went up last year. It was voted last twice and has one big outlier above 41%. It is one rank higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/d/dd/Royal_Seal.jpg/200px-Royal_Seal.jpg) | #88 ▲1 Royal Seal (Prosperity) Weighted Average: 11.7% ▼2.5pp / Unweighted Average: 13.8% / Median: 9.8% ▼1.2pp / Standard Deviation: 10.7% Royal Seal is the fourth $5 treasure card in the bottom 10, but is one rank better with a worse average. It is one rank higher in the unweighted ranking. It has only a small lead over Mine of 0.08pp. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/3/3a/Explorer.jpg/200px-Explorer.jpg) | #87 ▲1 Explorer (Seaside) Weighted Average: 12.0% ▼2.7pp / Unweighted Average: 11.7% / Median: 9.8% ▼1.2pp / Standard Deviation: 7.2% Explorer is one rank better with a lower average just like Royal Seal. It was voted last once, has the second lowest deviation in this list with no vote above 36%. It is 4 ranks lower in the unweighted ranking, so underappreciated by newer players. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/0/00/Tribute.jpg/200px-Tribute.jpg) | #86 =0 Tribute (Intrigue) Weighted Average: 12.0% ▼5.0pp / Unweighted Average: 13.7% / Median: 8.5% ▼6.1pp / Standard Deviation: 14.4% Tribute stays on the same rank, but lost 5pp. It has a small lead over Explorer of 0.04pp. It was voted last once and is one rank lower in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/8/89/Raid.jpg/320px-Raid.jpg) | #85 =0 Raid (Adventures) Weighted Average: 16.2% ▼3.1pp / Unweighted Average: 17.1% / Median: 12.6% ▼3.3pp / Standard Deviation: 16.3% Raid is in between the bottom tier and the next tier with a 4pp gap in front and behind it. It stays on the same rank, but lost 3pp. It was voted last 3 times. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f6/Rogue.jpg/200px-Rogue.jpg) | #84 =0 Rogue (Dark Ages) Weighted Average: 20.1% ▼3.1pp / Unweighted Average: 20.1% / Median: 15.9% ▼3.9pp / Standard Deviation: 13.0% And Rogue is the next card that stays on the same rank and also with a worse average. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/7/74/Pillage.jpg/200px-Pillage.jpg) | #83 =0 Pillage (Dark Ages) Weighted Average: 21.4% ▼3.1pp / Unweighted Average: 23.9% / Median: 17.9% ▼3.1pp / Standard Deviation: 19.2% And the fourth card in a row which is on the same rank but lost in its average. It is one rank higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/9/92/Merchant_Ship.jpg/200px-Merchant_Ship.jpg) | #82 ▼2 Merchant Ship (Seaside) Weighted Average: 22.4% ▼5.8pp / Unweighted Average: 22.9% / Median: 17.1% ▼8.5pp / Standard Deviation: 16.1% Merchant Ship continues to fall, this year 2 ranks and nearly 6pp. It is one rank lower in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/e/ef/Venture.jpg/200px-Venture.jpg) | #81 ▼4 Venture (Prosperity) Weighted Average: 22.9% ▼8.1pp / Unweighted Average: 26.2% / Median: 17.9% ▼13.8pp / Standard Deviation: 19.9% Venture continues to fall as well, this year 4 more ranks and over 8pp. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/b/bc/Mint.jpg/200px-Mint.jpg) | #80 ▼1 Mint (Prosperity) Weighted Average: 27.0% ▼2.4pp / Unweighted Average: 27.9% / Median: 21.7% ▼3.3pp / Standard Deviation: 17.3% Mint loses one rank and therefore continues to be at around the same rank. It has a solid lead of over 4pp over Venture. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/fd/Treasury.jpg/200px-Treasury.jpg) | #79 ▼3 Treasury (Seaside) Weighted Average: 28.2% ▼3.5pp / Unweighted Average: 30.9% / Median: 25.6% ▼6.5pp / Standard Deviation: 16.8% Treasury loses 3 ranks and over 3pp. It is one rank higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/1/13/Graverobber.jpg/200px-Graverobber.jpg) | #78 ▼5 Graverobber (Dark Ages) Weighted Average: 29.0% ▼6.0pp / Unweighted Average: 33.0% / Median: 25.9% ▼6.2pp/ Standard Deviation: 18.4% Graverobber lost quite a bit, 5 ranks and 6pp, the 5 ranks it went up last year. It is one rank higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/3/37/Mystic.jpg/200px-Mystic.jpg) | #77 ▼3 Mystic (Dark Ages) Weighted Average: 32.3% ▼2.3pp / Unweighted Average: 33.5% / Median: 26.3% ▼5.4pp / Standard Deviation: 19.8% Having a lead of 3.3pp over Graverobber, Mystic is next on the list losing 3 ranks. It is 3 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/fe/Emporium.jpg/200px-Emporium.jpg) | #76 Emporium (Empires) Weighted Average: 33.2% / Unweighted Average: 33.7% / Median: 31.6% / Standard Deviation: 17.5% Emporium is the worst of the 13 new entries in this list, the second worst Peddler variant in this list. It is 3 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f8/Windfall.jpg/320px-Windfall.jpg) | #75 Windfall (Empires) Weighted Average: 33.2% / Unweighted Average: 29.3% / Median: 24.2% / Standard Deviation: 22.4% Windfall is the second new Empires card in a row and has only a lead of 0.04pp over Emporium. Windfall is 4 ranks lower in the unweighted ranking and has even a worse median. It was voted last twice and has the highest deviation in this list so far. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/d/d6/Cartographer.jpg/200px-Cartographer.jpg) | #74 ▼17 Cartographer (Hinterlands) Weighted Average: 34.8% ▼12.9pp / Unweighted Average: 38.1% / Median: 31.6% ▼14.4pp / Standard Deviation: 21.1% Cartographer is a big loser in this list, it loses 17 ranks and nearly 13pp and is therefore lower than ever before. It is still 6 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/d/df/Ball.jpg/320px-Ball.jpg) | #73 ▼5 Ball (Adventures) Weighted Average: 35.0% ▼1.6pp / Unweighted Average: 33.3% / Median: 31.6% ▼1.3pp / Standard Deviation: 21.1% Ball lost a quite a bit as well, 5 ranks. It was voted last once and is even 3 more ranks lower in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/4/4c/Giant.jpg/200px-Giant.jpg) | #72 ▼10 Giant (Adventures) Weighted Average: 36.0% ▼7.9pp / Unweighted Average: 37.2% / Median: 34.7% ▼8.5pp / Standard Deviation: 19.7% Giant is another loser, 10 ranks and nearly 8pp. It is 2 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/d/df/Seaway.jpg/320px-Seaway.jpg) | #71 ▲2 Seaway (Adventures) Weighted Average: 36.2% ▲4.2pp / Unweighted Average: 33.5% / Median: 29.5% ▲0.7pp / Standard Deviation: 21.1% Seaway is the first card in a long while that went up a few ranks, 2 to be exact. But it is 4 ranks lower in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/9/98/Library.jpg/200px-Library.jpg) | #70 ▼3 Library (Base) Weighted Average: 37.1% ▼1.3pp / Unweighted Average: 36.9% / Median: 33.7% ▼3.2pp / Standard Deviation: 16.7% Library lost 3 ranks and is basically on the same rank as 2 years ago. It is one more rank lower in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/7/7e/Market.jpg/200px-Market.jpg) | #69 ▼6 Market (Base) Weighted Average: 37.6% ▼6.1pp / Unweighted Average: 40.6% / Median: 35.8% ▼6.9pp / Standard Deviation: 18.3% Market is the third worst Peddler variant and lost quite a bit, 6 ranks and around 6pp. It is 5 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/b/b2/Wine_Merchant.jpg/200px-Wine_Merchant.jpg) | #68 ▲11 Wine Merchant (Adventures) Weighted Average: 37.9% ▲10.4pp / Unweighted Average: 39.1% / Median: 41.1% ▲16.7pp / Standard Deviation: 19.8% Wine Merchant is still on exactly the same rank, but that it means it's 11 ranks better, that's quite a lot. It's one rank higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/b/b4/Outpost.jpg/200px-Outpost.jpg) | #67 ▲9 Outpost (Seaside) Weighted Average: 38.0% ▲7.7pp / Unweighted Average: 36.3% / Median: 31.7% ▲6.1pp / Standard Deviation: 21.0% Outpost went up nearly as much as Wine Merchant, 9 ranks and 8pp. It has also a very small lead of 0.04pp over Wine Merchant. It's still 5 ranks lower in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/5/51/Band_of_Misfits.jpg/200px-Band_of_Misfits.jpg) | #66 ▼1 Band of Misfits (Dark Ages) Weighted Average: 38.2% ▼4.4pp / Unweighted Average: 41.0% / Median: 36.8% ▼5.9pp / Standard Deviation: 18.6% Band of Misfits continues to stay at the around the same rank, but lost over 4pp. It's 3 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/1/1f/Inn.jpg/200px-Inn.jpg) | #65 ▼1 Inn (Hinterlands) Weighted Average: 38.3% ▼4.6pp / Unweighted Average: 37.6% / Median: 34.8% ▼7.2pp / Standard Deviation: 16.3% Inn also loses one rank and over 4pp, just like Band of Misfits. It has only a small lead of 0.05pp over it. It is 4 ranks lower in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/e/eb/Capital.jpg/200px-Capital.jpg) | #64 Capital (Empires) Weighted Average: 40.3% / Unweighted Average: 42.0% / Median: 41.1% / Standard Deviation: 20.5% Capital is the third Empires card in this list. It's 2 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/d/da/Plunder.jpg/200px-Plunder.jpg) | #63 Plunder (Empires) Weighted Average: 41.4% / Unweighted Average: 44.5% / Median: 41.1% / Standard Deviation: 20.0% Again there are 2 Empires cards in a row. Plunder is 2 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking as well. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/9/9d/Trade.jpg/320px-Trade.jpg) | #62 ▲16 Trade (Adventures) Weighted Average: 42.5% ▲16.0pp / Unweighted Average: 40.6% / Median: 35.8% ▲11.8pp / Standard Deviation: 20.8% Trade is a big winner, making a huge jump of 16 ranks and 16pp. It is 3 ranks lower in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/62/Vault.jpg/200px-Vault.jpg) | #61 ▼13 Vault (Prosperity) Weighted Average: 43.5% ▼9.6pp / Unweighted Average: 45.8% / Median: 43.2% ▼12.2pp / Standard Deviation: 20.6% After a big winner, there is another big loser. Vault lost 13 ranks, even more than the 12 ranks it lost 2 years ago. It is 2 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/3/36/Trading_Post.jpg/200px-Trading_Post.jpg) | #60 ▲7 Trading Post (Intrigue) Weighted Average: 43.7% ▲8.5pp / Unweighted Average: 40.6% / Median: 33.7% ▼0.1pp / Standard Deviation: 19.8% Trading Post won a lot of ranks just like its namesake Trade, but not quite as much: 7 ranks. It is 6 ranks lower in the unweighted ranking. And its median is way worse than its average. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/d/de/Charm.jpg/200px-Charm.jpg) | #59 Charm (Empires) Weighted Average: 47.0% / Unweighted Average: 47.7% / Median: 45.3% / Standard Deviation: 19.9% Charm is the 5th Empires card and 3 cards higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/e/ec/Festival.jpg/200px-Festival.jpg) | #58 ▼1 Festival (Base) Weighted Average: 46.6% ▲0.7pp / Unweighted Average: 48.8% / Median: 46.2% ▼1.5pp / Standard Deviation: 17.5% Festival stays at around the same, loses one rank, but has a slightly better average. It is 6 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking and therefore overrated by newer players. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/1/15/Forum.jpg/200px-Forum.jpg) | #57 Forum (Empires) Weighted Average: 47.5% / Unweighted Average: 46.5% / Median: 46.3% / Standard Deviation: 18.6% Forum is the 6th Empires card and one rank lower in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/1/10/Duke.jpg/200px-Duke.jpg) | #56 ▼8 Duke (Intrigue) Weighted Average: 48.0% ▼4.4pp / Unweighted Average: 47.7% / Median: 45.3% ▼7.8pp / Standard Deviation: 23.1% Just like last year, Duke continues to drastically fall. It lost 8 ranks this year. It is one rank higher in the unweighted ranking. It has the highest deviation in this list so far. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/a/af/Merchant_Guild.jpg/200px-Merchant_Guild.jpg) | #55 =0 Merchant Guild (Guilds) Weighted Average: 48.3% ▲1.4pp / Unweighted Average: 48.3% / Median: 46.3% ▲1.2pp / Standard Deviation: 18.0% Merchant Guild stays on the same rank, but has a slightly better average. It is 2 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/0/01/Artificer.jpg/200px-Artificer.jpg) | #54 ▼2 Artificer (Adventures) Weighted Average: 48.3% ▼0.1pp / Unweighted Average: 49.3% / Median: 48.4% ▼1.0pp / Standard Deviation: 18.4% Artificer has a small lead over Merchant Guild of 0.02pp. It lost 2 ranks but has around the same average. It is 4 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/22/Treasure_Trove.jpg/200px-Treasure_Trove.jpg) | #53 ▲13 Treasure Trove (Adventures) Weighted Average: 48.5% ▲13.4pp / Unweighted Average: 47.5% / Median: 43.2% ▲13.9pp / Standard Deviation: 25.6% Treasure Trove is a big winner. It's 13 ranks and 13pp better. It is 4 ranks lower in the unweighted ranking. It has the highest deviation in this list. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/3/33/Groundskeeper.jpg/200px-Groundskeeper.jpg) | #52 Groundskeeper (Empires) Weighted Average: 49.0% / Unweighted Average: 49.0% / Median: 47.4% / Standard Deviation: 23.5% Groundskeeper is the 7th Empires card and therefore the middle one. It is one rank higher in the unweighted ranking and has a high deviation. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/e/e0/Council_Room.jpg/200px-Council_Room.jpg) | #51 ▲5 Council Room (Base) Weighted Average: 49.3% ▲4.9pp / Unweighted Average: 47.8% / Median: 48.4% ▲3.8pp / Standard Deviation: 18.8% Council Room is 5 ranks and 5pp better than last year and therefore continues to rise. It is 3 ranks lower in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/26/Archive.jpg/200px-Archive.jpg) | #50 Archive (Empires) Weighted Average: 50.0% / Unweighted Average: 53.2% / Median: 51.6% / Standard Deviation: 21.9% Archive is the 6th best Empires card in this list and 7 ranks higher in the unweighted list, so overrated by newer players. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/8/82/Journeyman.jpg/200px-Journeyman.jpg) | #49 ▼2 Journeyman (Guilds) Weighted Average: 50.3% ▼0.5pp / Unweighted Average: 51.1% / Median: 50.5% ▲4.2pp / Standard Deviation: 18.3% Journeyman lost 2 ranks but has around the same average. It is 2 ranks better in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6a/Storyteller.jpg/200px-Storyteller.jpg) | #48 ▲4 Storyteller (Adventures) Weighted Average: 50.9% ▲3.3pp / Unweighted Average: 50.1% / Median: 50.0% ▲3.7pp / Standard Deviation: 19.9% Storyteller is 4 ranks and over 3pp better and the first card in the upper half of this list. It is one rank lower in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/4/43/Bandit_Camp.jpg/200px-Bandit_Camp.jpg) | #47 ▼8 Bandit Camp (Dark Ages) Weighted Average: 51.4% ▼5.9pp / Unweighted Average: 52.5% / Median: 54.7% ▼2.1pp / Standard Deviation: 19.1% Bandit Camp lost quite a bit: 8 ranks and nearly 6pp. It is still 3 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/c/c9/Triumph.jpg/320px-Triumph.jpg) | #46 Triumph (Empires) Weighted Average: 51.5% / Unweighted Average: 45.4% / Median: 43.2% / Standard Deviation: 23.9% Triumph is the 5th best Empires card and unbelievable 14 ranks lower in the unweighted ranking, so terribly underrated by newer players. It has the third highest deviation in this list. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/b/b9/Baker.jpg/200px-Baker.jpg) | #45 ▼1 Baker (Guilds) Weighted Average: 51.9% ▼0.8pp / Unweighted Average: 53.4% / Median: 51.9% ▼4.2pp / Standard Deviation: 22.0% Baker hardly changed, it's one rank and less than 1pp worse. It's 3 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/9/91/Ill-Gotten_Gains.jpg/200px-Ill-Gotten_Gains.jpg) | #44 ▼10 Ill-Gotten Gains (Hinterlands) Weighted Average: 51.9% ▼8.5pp / Unweighted Average: 55.0% / Median: 53.7% ▼9.7pp / Standard Deviation: 23.0% Ill-Gotten Gains continues its losing trend. It lost 10 more ranks. It is still 5 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. It has only a small lead of 0.02pp over Baker. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/2f/Embassy.jpg/200px-Embassy.jpg) | #43 ▼7 Embassy (Hinterlands) Weighted Average: 52.2% ▼6.0pp / Unweighted Average: 51.6% / Median: 48.4% ▼10.1pp / Standard Deviation: 18.5% Embassy lost nearly as much as Ill-Gotten Gains, 7 ranks and 6pp and is therefore on its losing trend as well. It is even 2 more ranks worse in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/1/1b/Jester.jpg/200px-Jester.jpg) | #42 ▲5 Jester (Cornucopia) Weighted Average: 52.3% ▲1.7pp / Unweighted Average: 53.7% / Median: 49.5% ▲1.9pp / Standard Deviation: 20.5% For the first time ever Jester went up a few ranks, 5 ranks to be exact. It has a small lead over Embassy of 0.06pp. It is one rank better in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/d/d3/Relic.jpg/200px-Relic.jpg) | #41 ▲18 Relic (Adventures) Weighted Average: 53.7% ▲14.3pp / Unweighted Average: 51.0% / Median: 53.7% ▲18.3pp / Standard Deviation: 18.8% Relic is a big winner, amazing 18 ranks and over 14pp better. It is 7 ranks lower in the unweighted ranking, so newer players didn't quite follow the trend. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f1/Rabble.jpg/200px-Rabble.jpg) | #40 =0 Rabble (Prosperity) Weighted Average: 55.1% ▲1.2pp / Unweighted Average: 56.9% / Median: 57.9% ▲7.9pp / Standard Deviation: 19.8% Rabble stays on the same rank and its average is similar as well. It is 6 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/e/ee/Summon.jpg/320px-Summon.jpg) | #39 ▼2 Summon (Promo) Weighted Average: 55.2% ▼2.5pp / Unweighted Average: 51.2% / Median: 53.7% ▼3.6pp / Standard Deviation: 25.4% Summon lost 2 ranks and has a small lead over Rabble of 0.15pp. It has the second highest deviation in this list with newer player voting it lower, ranking it 7 ranks lower in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/c/cd/Catacombs.jpg/200px-Catacombs.jpg) | #38 ▲3 Catacombs (Dark Ages) Weighted Average: 55.4% ▲1.5pp / Unweighted Average: 54.0% / Median: 54.7% ▲2.4pp / Standard Deviation: 17.0% Losing 9 ranks 2 years ago, Catacombs slowly went up last year and this year. It is 2 ranks lower in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/3/30/City.jpg/200px-City.jpg) | #37 ▲5 City (Prosperity) Weighted Average: 55.6% ▲2.1pp / Unweighted Average: 56.6% / Median: 56.1% ▲1.2pp / Standard Deviation: 18.0% City is just like last year 5 ranks better than the year before. It is 2 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/3/3e/Distant_Lands.jpg/200px-Distant_Lands.jpg) | #36 ▲12 Distant Lands (Adventures) Weighted Average: 56.9% ▲6.4pp / Unweighted Average: 56.3% / Median: 53.7% ▲2.5pp / Standard Deviation: 20.2% Distant Lands is another big winner. It is 12 ranks and over 6pp better than last year. It is 2 ranks worse in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/d/db/Swamp_Hag.jpg/200px-Swamp_Hag.jpg) | #35 ▼12 Swamp Hag (Adventures) Weighted Average: 58.0% ▼10.9pp / Unweighted Average: 59.3% / Median: 60.5% ▼10.2pp / Standard Deviation: 21.1% While Distant Lands is 12 ranks better, Swamp Hag lost those 12 ranks and 11pp. It is 3 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/0/01/Soothsayer.jpg/200px-Soothsayer.jpg) | #34 ▲1 Soothsayer (Guilds) Weighted Average: 58.9% ▼0.3pp / Unweighted Average: 59.0% / Median: 66.3% ▲3.2pp / Standard Deviation: 22.7% Soothsayer stayed around the same. It has a pretty high deviation and is one rank higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/c/c6/Bustling_Village.jpg/200px-Bustling_Village.jpg) | #33 Bustling Village (Empires) Weighted Average: 59.5% / Unweighted Average: 56.6% / Median: 51.6% / Standard Deviation: 23.5% Bustling Village is the 4th best Empires card. It is 3 ranks lower in the unweighted ranking and it has a really high deviation. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Bazaar.jpg/200px-Bazaar.jpg) | #32 ▲6 Bazaar (Seaside) Weighted Average: 59.7% ▲2.9pp / Unweighted Average: 56.5% / Median: 56.8% ▼0.1pp / Standard Deviation: 16.1% Bazaar is 6 ranks and 3pp better than last year. It is 5 ranks lower in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/64/Legionary.jpg/200px-Legionary.jpg) | #31 Legionary (Empires) Weighted Average: 61.0% / Unweighted Average: 60.1% / Median: 61.1% / Standard Deviation: 20.4% Legionary is the 3rd best Empires card. It is one rank higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/9/9a/Knights.jpg/200px-Knights.jpg) | #30 ▼6 Knights (Dark Ages) Weighted Average: 61.2% ▼5.0pp / Unweighted Average: 59.6% / Median: 63.0% ▼1.6pp / Standard Deviation: 19.1% The Knights have lost 6 ranks and 5pp. They are even one more rank lower in the unweighted ranking. They were voted first once. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/3/35/Stables.jpg/200px-Stables.jpg) | #29 ▲1 Stables (Hinterlands) Weighted Average: 62.5% ▼0.3pp / Unweighted Average: 61.8% / Median: 62.1% ▼3.5pp / Standard Deviation: 15.1% Stables stayed pretty much where it was. It is one rank higher in the unweighted ranking and has a pretty low deviation. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/20/Horn_of_Plenty.jpg/200px-Horn_of_Plenty.jpg) | #28 =0 Horn of Plenty (Cornucopia) Weighted Average: 63.9% =0pp / Unweighted Average: 61.1% / Median: 65.2% ▲5.4pp / Standard Deviation: 22.1% What are the chances? Horn of Plenty didn't change a bit, but its median is way higher. It is one rank lower in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/e/ed/Tactician.jpg/200px-Tactician.jpg) | #27 ▼7 Tactician (Seaside) Weighted Average: 64.5% ▼5.2pp / Unweighted Average: 65.7% / Median: 69.5% ▼2.5pp / Standard Deviation: 20.8% Tactician lost 7 ranks and over 5pp. It is 2 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/5/54/Haunted_Woods.jpg/200px-Haunted_Woods.jpg) | #26 ▼7 Haunted Woods (Adventures) Weighted Average: 65.3% ▼5.4pp / Unweighted Average: 64.9% / Median: 68.4% ▼3.6pp / Standard Deviation: 20.1% Haunted Woods lost just like Tactician 7 ranks and over 5pp as well. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/9/91/Crown.jpg/200px-Crown.jpg) | #25 Crown (Empires) Weighted Average: 66.5% / Unweighted Average: 68.5% / Median: 67.4% / Standard Deviation: 17.5% Crown is the second best Empires card. It is 3 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/4/48/Wild_Hunt.jpg/200px-Wild_Hunt.jpg) | #24 Wild Hunt (Empires) Weighted Average: 66.6% / Unweighted Average: 63.6% / Median: 70.5% / Standard Deviation: 23.5% Wild Hunt is the best Empires card in this list, but it was close as it was voted only 0.08pp better than Crown. It is 3 ranks lower in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/0/0c/Laboratory.jpg/200px-Laboratory.jpg) | #23 ▲4 Laboratory (Base) Weighted Average: 67.0% ▲3.5pp / Unweighted Average: 68.7% / Median: 71.6% ▲4.9pp / Standard Deviation: 16.7% Laboratory is 4 ranks better than last year and 2 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/9/96/Haggler.jpg/200px-Haggler.jpg) | #22 ▲2 Haggler (Hinterlands) Weighted Average: 67.6% ▲1.8pp / Unweighted Average: 67.2% / Median: 68.4% ▼0.8pp / Standard Deviation: 15.5% Haggler is also slightly better than last year, 2 ranks and nearly 2pp. But in the unweighted ranking it's still those 2 ranks worse. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/20/Apprentice.jpg/200px-Apprentice.jpg) | #21 ▲2 Apprentice (Alchemy) Weighted Average: 70.0% ▲3.9pp / Unweighted Average: 68.3% / Median: 69.5% ▲1.2pp / Standard Deviation: 16.8% Apprentice is just like Haggler 2 ranks higher, but with a way better average, nearly 4pp better, crossing the 70% mark. It's 2 ranks worse in the unweighted ranking as well. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/a/a1/Count.jpg/200px-Count.jpg) | #20 ▲5 Count (Dark Ages) Weighted Average: 70.1% ▲4.7pp / Unweighted Average: 70.7% / Median: 72.6% ▲7.2pp / Standard Deviation: 16.3% After rising 11 ranks last year, Count is another 5 ranks better. It has a small lead over Apprentice of 0.12pp and was voted first once. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/c/cf/Royal_Carriage.jpg/200px-Royal_Carriage.jpg) | #19 ▲10 Royal Carriage (Adventures) Weighted Average: 70.6% ▲7.9pp / Unweighted Average: 71.0% / Median: 71.6% ▲7.0pp / Standard Deviation: 16.6% Royal Carriage is a big winner, being 10 ranks and nearly 8pp better than last year. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/29/Highway.jpg/200px-Highway.jpg) | #18 ▲2 Highway (Hinterlands) Weighted Average: 74.2% ▲6.3pp / Unweighted Average: 75.4% / Median: 77.9% ▲3.8pp / Standard Deviation: 15.2% Highway continues to go up and is higher than ever before. It climbed only 2 ranks this year, but over 6pp is still a lot. It was also voted first once. It is 3 ranks higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/7/77/Bridge_Troll.jpg/200px-Bridge_Troll.jpg) | #17 ▲4 Bridge Troll (Adventures) Weighted Average: 75.4% ▲7.7pp / Unweighted Average: 74.0% / Median: 76.6% ▲4.1pp / Standard Deviation: 16.0% Bridge Troll is 4 ranks better, but even more impressive is that it's nearly 8pp better. It is one rank lower in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/e/ed/Butcher.jpg/200px-Butcher.jpg) | #16 ▼3 Butcher (Guilds) Weighted Average: 73.2% ▲3.7pp / Unweighted Average: 74.4% / Median: 79.0% ▲6.7pp / Standard Deviation: 17.9% Butcher lost 3 ranks, but still has won quite a bit in its average. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/28/Counterfeit.jpg/200px-Counterfeit.jpg) | #15 ▼3 Counterfeit (Dark Ages) Weighted Average: 77.5% ▲1.7pp / Unweighted Average: 75.7% / Median: 82.1% ▲3.6pp / Standard Deviation: 20.3% Just like Butcher, Counterfeit loses 3 ranks but goes up in its average. It is one rank higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/0/0a/Ghost_Ship.jpg/200px-Ghost_Ship.jpg) | #14 ▲1 Ghost Ship (Seaside) Weighted Average: 77.9% ▲5.9pp / Unweighted Average: 74.3% / Median: 80.5% ▲1.2pp / Standard Deviation: 18.6% Ghost Ship is only one rank better, but being nearly 6pp better is quite a lot. It is 3 ranks lower in the unweighted ranking though. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/9/9a/Lost_City.jpg/200px-Lost_City.jpg) | #13 ▲3 Lost City (Adventures) Weighted Average: 78.0% ▲7.2pp / Unweighted Average: 76.5% / Median: 81.1% ▲4.3pp / Standard Deviation: 17.5% Lost City is 3 ranks and over 7pp better, not bad. It has a small lead over Ghost Ship of 0.06pp. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/0/06/Margrave.jpg/200px-Margrave.jpg) | #12 ▲2 Margrave (Hinterlands) Weighted Average: 78.9% ▲6.0pp / Unweighted Average: 79.7% / Median: 83.9% ▲7.1pp / Standard Deviation: 13.7% Margrave is 2 ranks better and now just as high as 4 years ago, but now with way more cards. It has also a 6pp better average which is quite a bit. It was voted first once and is even one more rank higher in the unweighted ranking. |
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/a/ab/Hunting_Party.jpg/200px-Hunting_Party.jpg) | #11 ▼3 Hunting Party (Cornucopia) Weighted Average: 79.8% ▼2.8pp / Unweighted Average: 79.8% / Median: 84.2% ▼2.4pp / Standard Deviation: 16.4% For the first time ever Hunting Party isn't in the Top 10 anymore. It is 3 ranks and nearly 3pp worse than last year. It is one rank higher in the unweighted ranking. |
Well, I think contraband is way too low.Yeah! For some reason it's been the dominant card in most of my SuffleIT games.
Well, I think contraband is way too low.Yeah! For some reason it's been the dominant card in most of my SuffleIT games.
Yeah, I'm probably the outlying high vote for Mine. :-[
Well, I think contraband is way too low.
Well, I think contraband is way too low.
Are there spammable events that would allow you to ignore the downside of Contraband?
Well, I think contraband is way too low.
Are there spammable events that would allow you to ignore the downside of Contraband?
Yes! Dominate, Triumph, Annex, Ball, Pilgrimage, Alms, Summon, Seaway, Banquet, Windfall, Wedding, Conquest, Raid, Delve, Advance, and Quest are all ways to work around Contraband. And Events can't be blacklisted with Contrband, so even if they don't gain cards, Events give the Contraband player more options. Contraband is at its best in the presence of Events, alternative VP, and lots of useful cards. Adventures, Empires, and the second edition cards help out Contraband a lot. Contraband still isn't an amazing card, but it doesn't belong in the bottom 10 anymore, IMO.
I will now explain my joke to make it funnier: The bots only name Copper to Contraband.Well, I think contraband is way too low.Yeah! For some reason it's been the dominant card in most of my SuffleIT games.
It's a great card in 'I want to buy everything' kingdoms, which, with the new edition cards and the addition of empires just happens more frequently.
Also, Counting House may also have gotten a bump from Royal Blacksmith.Was the Travelling Fair combo found before or after the last list? Because that one strong combo could be enough to keep it out of the bottom 3 (since, hey, at least there's some times when you really want it).
I will now explain my joke to make it funnier: The bots only name Copper to Contraband.Well, I think contraband is way too low.Yeah! For some reason it's been the dominant card in most of my SuffleIT games.
It's a great card in 'I want to buy everything' kingdoms, which, with the new edition cards and the addition of empires just happens more frequently.
Also, Counting House may also have gotten a bump from Royal Blacksmith.Was the Travelling Fair combo found before or after the last list? Because that one strong combo could be enough to keep it out of the bottom 3 (since, hey, at least there's some times when you really want it).
Wow, is Treasury that bad? I thought it was still pretty good.
Royal Seal and Contraband are better than some of these.
Royal Seal and Contraband are better than some of these.
And Mine is better than both of those.
Remodel into Province.
Remodel into Province.
But in order to Graverob Remodel into Province, you also need 5 Highways in play.
Remodel into Province.
But in order to Graverob Remodel into Province, you also need 5 Highways in play.
"Remodel" as a general term, just as "village" can be used as a general term, we've been over this Awaclus.
Surprised how far Graverobber fell. It's a totally workable card, and has an important niche as a card that can Remodel into Province.
Harvest used to look like a respectable card before Legionary and Courtier came into existence and nobody was sure about the value of terminal Gold (in fact IIRC the prevailing opinion was "too good for $5, not good enough for $6").
Now it definitely looks like it should cost $4. In order for it to produce more than $2 before you start greening, it probably discarded a good card. Once you start greening, the cycling itself is a penalty. I expect it to linger at the bottom of the list for a long time now.
Harvest used to look like a respectable card before Legionary and Courtier came into existence and nobody was sure about the value of terminal Gold (in fact IIRC the prevailing opinion was "too good for $5, not good enough for $6").
Now it definitely looks like it should cost $4. In order for it to produce more than $2 before you start greening, it probably discarded a good card. Once you start greening, the cycling itself is a penalty. I expect it to linger at the bottom of the list for a long time now.
Not to toot my own horn, but I always thought it terminal Gold was pretty clearly not too strong for $5. Although I would have pegged [+1 Buy; +$3] at a reasonable $5 card, and I think Legionary and Courtier are pretty clearly stronger than that.
Mandarin, man. That card should cost $2 without its on-gain ability. Even with that ability, it's pretty eyebrow-raising at $5.
Treasury is pretty great with Empires. You can top deck Treasuries after buying Dominate, for one. I expect it to rise up the list again.
I don't see how it's so much worse than the other $5 peddlers, except Junk Dealer (which is quite different IMO)
Walled Village/Alchemist/Treasury are weird cards. They're clearly strictly better (ignoring cost and card-name effects) than Village/Laboratory/Peddler, but how much better?
Treasury is not that much better than Peddler, effect-wise. In cases where you draw your deck, the ability is useless. In cases where you don't, you generally start greening fairly early and the ability doesn't work. Sometimes you just want a $5 Peddler, but the special ability is rarely all that useful.
Alchemist/Laboratory is the biggest difference, because Labs are REALLY good if you can topdeck them.
Wow. I disagree with everything on part 3. Most of these should be higher, except Windfall, which is about right.
Market is a +Buy peddler. That's not that strong, is it?
Market is a +Buy peddler. That's not that strong, is it?
It's pretty strong. +Buy is useful in a lot of cases, and it's important in almost every engine. When you're building an engine, you'd often get a Market over a lot of other +Buy cards, since it doesn't take up any space in your deck and gives some virtual money to boot. If Peddler is a strong $4 card, I'd say Market is a pretty strong $5 card - not top-tier, but somewhere in the middle of the (rather strong) $5 pack.
Market is a +Buy peddler. That's not that strong, is it?
It's pretty strong. +Buy is useful in a lot of cases, and it's important in almost every engine. When you're building an engine, you'd often get a Market over a lot of other +Buy cards, since it doesn't take up any space in your deck and gives some virtual money to boot. If Peddler is a strong $4 card, I'd say Market is a pretty strong $5 card - not top-tier, but somewhere in the middle of the (rather strong) $5 pack.
I guess the main thing is Peddler variants are good to spam, but you don't need a bunch of +buys.
The problem is that you don't want to spam $5 Peddlers. $5 is a lot of money to be spent on something that only gives you $1. You only want as many Markets as you want extra buys.
Market is a +Buy peddler. That's not that strong, is it?
It's pretty strong. +Buy is useful in a lot of cases, and it's important in almost every engine. When you're building an engine, you'd often get a Market over a lot of other +Buy cards, since it doesn't take up any space in your deck and gives some virtual money to boot. If Peddler is a strong $4 card, I'd say Market is a pretty strong $5 card - not top-tier, but somewhere in the middle of the (rather strong) $5 pack.
Market is a +Buy peddler. That's not that strong, is it?
It's pretty strong. +Buy is useful in a lot of cases, and it's important in almost every engine. When you're building an engine, you'd often get a Market over a lot of other +Buy cards, since it doesn't take up any space in your deck and gives some virtual money to boot. If Peddler is a strong $4 card, I'd say Market is a pretty strong $5 card - not top-tier, but somewhere in the middle of the (rather strong) $5 pack.
So I actually had Market on exactly the rank it got on this list, but there's one thing I don't understand. What makes Market better on average than Seaway? If there is a cantrip that costs $4 or less that you want, which happens often, wouldn't you rather buy a Seaway? In the cases where you want a lot of +Buy, you can get it cheaper this way, since you only have to buy Seaway once, then you can buy (or gain) the cheaper card at its usual price. Of course you may then not get the +$1, but you get whatever the card provides, maybe something you need more, like +Actions or draw. Even if there's not a good target cantrip, if there's any $4 card you want to play every turn (and don't have all the copies of it you want yet), buying Seaway is basically a $1 Market Square that doesn't even cost a Buy (but competes with other $5s). Maybe I way overrated it, I had it around rank 40, but is it really that bad? And its combo with Highway is too good! (That says more about Highway, true, but still.)
To be fair to Market, remove the +Buy on it and you got peddler, which is a strong 4-cost card (see Poacher). How many cantrip 4-cost cards are better than peddler and will show up with Seaway is the question.
I suppose the +buy in Market makes it easier to buy multiple Markets (ie makes it more spammable even though the +buy isn't useful when spammed).
"Windfall is way better than Treasure Map" (paraphrased from video)
I think Windfall really suffers from this comparison. Windfall is only useful when you draw your deck. Treasure map is useful when you draw your deck OR when you sift through your deck OR when you can rearrange your deck OR when you draw a significant fraction of your deck OR when you can get extra copies OR when you're just willing to chance it. I think the additional flexibility of Treasure Map is more valuable than the (somewhat) cheaper cost of Windfall. And Treasure Map is a bottom card, so Windfall should be too.
--
I think Emporium is underrated. The Emporium pile nearly always runs out in my play group.
My big disagreements:
I had...
...
Capital at 38.
I think Capital is way underestimated, Groundkeeper is way overestimated, and I don't understand why Vault went down as much as it did. I thought we would've seen Crown by now.
I mean, if Capital is only helping you buy cards 1 turn early, arguably another way to get all your cards a turn early is to have not spent a turn buying Capital.My big disagreements:
I had...
...
Capital at 38.
I think Capital is way underestimated, Groundkeeper is way overestimated, and I don't understand why Vault went down as much as it did. I thought we would've seen Crown by now.
I think you might be right about Capital. My thinking with it is that the cards you buy on the turn you play Capital can help pay off the debt. It can also be pretty good payload on the final turn. Excess coins from Capital help pay the debt, so that's nice.
I mean, if Capital is only helping you buy cards 1 turn early, arguably another way to get all your cards a turn early is to have not spent a turn buying Capital.My big disagreements:
I had...
...
Capital at 38.
I think Capital is way underestimated, Groundkeeper is way overestimated, and I don't understand why Vault went down as much as it did. I thought we would've seen Crown by now.
I think you might be right about Capital. My thinking with it is that the cards you buy on the turn you play Capital can help pay off the debt. It can also be pretty good payload on the final turn. Excess coins from Capital help pay the debt, so that's nice.
I mean, if Capital is only helping you buy cards 1 turn early, arguably another way to get all your cards a turn early is to have not spent a turn buying Capital.My big disagreements:
I had...
...
Capital at 38.
I think Capital is way underestimated, Groundkeeper is way overestimated, and I don't understand why Vault went down as much as it did. I thought we would've seen Crown by now.
I think you might be right about Capital. My thinking with it is that the cards you buy on the turn you play Capital can help pay off the debt. It can also be pretty good payload on the final turn. Excess coins from Capital help pay the debt, so that's nice.
True. The thing is you can play Capital more than once per game, and each time you play it it's like gaining an expensive card a turn early.
True. The thing is you can play Capital more than once per game, and each time you play it it's like gaining an expensive card a turn early.
I mean, if Capital is only helping you buy cards 1 turn early, arguably another way to get all your cards a turn early is to have not spent a turn buying Capital.My big disagreements:
I had...
...
Capital at 38.
I think Capital is way underestimated, Groundkeeper is way overestimated, and I don't understand why Vault went down as much as it did. I thought we would've seen Crown by now.
I think you might be right about Capital. My thinking with it is that the cards you buy on the turn you play Capital can help pay off the debt. It can also be pretty good payload on the final turn. Excess coins from Capital help pay the debt, so that's nice.
True. The thing is you can play Capital more than once per game, and each time you play it it's like gaining an expensive card a turn early.
That doesn't change trivialknot's point: You could buy the second expensive card without Capital at the turn you buy the first expensive card with Capital, and so on. Actually, if you don't draw your deck each turn, buying Capital before lets you draw your gained cards later (by 1 shuffle minus 1 turn). It's similar to Royal Seal in this respect.
So the point of Capital is not to gain $5 cards earlier, but to gain $6+ cards you couldn't gain without it.
Capital also has a number of ways to ignore the (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/8/81/Debt.png/18px-Debt.png), or at least produce more (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6d/Coin.png/16px-Coin.png) than (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/8/81/Debt.png/18px-Debt.png).
Even a treasure that does nothing but give +buy is situationally very useful.
Capital is good if you really know what you want (ie you know when to buy the $11 Herbalist).
Even a treasure that does nothing but give +buy is situationally very useful.
Capital is good if you really know what you want (ie you know when to buy the $11 Herbalist).
Except you shouldn't need an $11 Herbalist, because Capital gives +buy.
In any case, the strength of Capital is roughly the same as the strength of the concept of "Debt" in the particular kingdom. I think it's underrated somewhat, because Debt is pretty strong.
Capital also has a number of ways to ignore the (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/8/81/Debt.png/18px-Debt.png), or at least produce more (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6d/Coin.png/16px-Coin.png) than (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/8/81/Debt.png/18px-Debt.png).
Yes. That number is 7:
Counterfeit (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Counterfeit)
Crown (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Crown)
Fortune (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Fortune)
Herbalist (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Herbalist)
Mandarin (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Mandarin) (situational)
Mint (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Mint) (even more situational)
Bonfire (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Bonfire) (extremely situational)
In a kingdom with Capital, there is a ~78% likelihood that none of those cards are present (and an ~87% chance that none of the top 4 synergies are present). So, it is important to understand how good Capital is in kingdoms where none of those cards are present. And I don't have a good feel for that.
Capital also has a number of ways to ignore the (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/8/81/Debt.png/18px-Debt.png), or at least produce more (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6d/Coin.png/16px-Coin.png) than (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/8/81/Debt.png/18px-Debt.png).
Yes. That number is 7:
Counterfeit (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Counterfeit)
Crown (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Crown)
Fortune (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Fortune)
Herbalist (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Herbalist)
Mandarin (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Mandarin) (situational)
Mint (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Mint) (even more situational)
Bonfire (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Bonfire) (extremely situational)
In a kingdom with Capital, there is a ~78% likelihood that none of those cards are present (and an ~87% chance that none of the top 4 synergies are present). So, it is important to understand how good Capital is in kingdoms where none of those cards are present. And I don't have a good feel for that.
Mandarin+Capital sounds actually pretty ligit. If you manage to draw multiple Capitals, then you can buy one Mandarin to ensure you draw all those Capital again next turn, without getting Debt. If you manage to do that for a hand full of Capitals...
Duke is overrated. Artificer and Charm are both better than Treasure Trove.
I feel new to post here, but I think this is cool.
Most of these seem more or less intuitive to me. Harvest certainly seems like one of the most useless cards ever. Maybe it sees use w/ ruins...except that means a looter a.k.a. a better card. Something like Gardens maybe? idk, not a good card. Cache also seems really bad.
While it's pretty obvious Treasure Trove is way past Cache in usefulness, it's one of the cards that seems high to me. I guess you usually can trash Copper though, and it's still low-ish so it isn't really weird.
I like Graverobber a lot, and think it's better than Mystic. Some others don't seem very obvious, like Royal Seal, Plunder, Inn, Ball, Outpost, and Wine Merchant being low. But these kinds of things can never be perfect, they're just a guideline and completely board dependent. Still really cool how much work goes into these. Dominion is awesome.
I feel new to post here, but I think this is cool.
Most of these seem more or less intuitive to me. Harvest certainly seems like one of the most useless cards ever. Maybe it sees use w/ ruins...except that means a looter a.k.a. a better card. Something like Gardens maybe? idk, not a good card. Cache also seems really bad.
While it's pretty obvious Treasure Trove is way past Cache in usefulness, it's one of the cards that seems high to me. I guess you usually can trash Copper though, and it's still low-ish so it isn't really weird.
I like Graverobber a lot, and think it's better than Mystic. Some others don't seem very obvious, like Royal Seal, Plunder, Inn, Ball, Outpost, and Wine Merchant being low. But these kinds of things can never be perfect, they're just a guideline and completely board dependent. Still really cool how much work goes into these. Dominion is awesome.
I agree with a lot of your points. Harvest is crap. Compare it to Poor House. They are very similar but PH cost $1. I agree about Wine Merchant being low as well. It's usually very good engine payload. Outpost is also good in a lot of engines.
Council Room above Festival also seems really weird to me. Maybe it's because of the Making Fun campaigns, where Council Room-BM was often the solution?
As long as terminal draw is on the board Festival is good.
Festival and Smithy is equivalent to a Lab, a Market and a Peddler.As long as terminal draw is on the board Festival is good.
I disagree. Without trashing, Festival just isn't reliable enough. If there's no trashing or weak trashing, I will prefer any drawing village over Festival. I might still get a Festival if it's the only +Buy, but I'm not going to use it as my main village.
Building engines with Festival for splitting is almost as awkward as building engines with Ranger for draw. Council Room, on the other hand, makes it super easy to build engines.Makes engines super easy for the opponent too. Ok I know this is obvious.
Building engines with Festival for splitting is almost as awkward as building engines with Ranger for draw. Council Room, on the other hand, makes it super easy to build engines.Makes engines super easy for the opponent too. Ok I know this is obvious.
Still for me that benefit for the opponent is so huge for me. Even with discard attacks, you are still giving to your opponent some kind of sifting. So overall that drawback of cr is a bigger weakness than the lack of +cards in festival, which is quite important too but can be mitigatened by some cute combos (menagerie-watchtower), non-terminal draw (advisor, lab, opponent's council room lol), or sifters / deck inspection. Really all you need on a village is +2 actions, the usual +1 card is just a a bonus that makes things easier.
Building engines with Festival for splitting is almost as awkward as building engines with Ranger for draw. Council Room, on the other hand, makes it super easy to build engines.Makes engines super easy for the opponent too. Ok I know this is obvious.
Still for me that benefit for the opponent is so huge for me. Even with discard attacks, you are still giving to your opponent some kind of sifting. So overall that drawback of cr is a bigger weakness than the lack of +cards in festival, which is quite important too but can be mitigatened by some cute combos (menagerie-watchtower), non-terminal draw (advisor, lab, opponent's council room lol), or sifters / deck inspection. Really all you need on a village is +2 actions, the usual +1 card is just a a bonus that makes things easier.
Festival and Smithy is equivalent to a Lab, a Market and a Peddler.
Village and Smithy is equivalent to two Labs.
So the former is better unless the average card in your deck provides more than "+2 Coins, +1 Buy". Which is unlikely if there is no trashing.
Two Labs are super better than a Lab, a Market and a Peddler.Lab might be sometimes better than GM but on average it is clearly worse so the claim that Lab is "super better" than Grand Market is about as truthful as the world is flat.
Two Labs are super better than a Lab, a Market and a Peddler.Lab might be sometimes better than GM but on average it is clearly worse so the claim that Lab is "super better" than Grand Market is about as truthful as the world is flat.
There are very few cases where I would voluntarily buy Lab over Grand Market if I had $6 and 1 buy (and no Copper in play), just as there are very few cases where I would buy Village over Festival if I had $5 and 1 buy.
Two Labs are super better than a Lab, a Market and a Peddler.Lab might be sometimes better than GM but on average it is clearly worse so the claim that Lab is "super better" than Grand Market is about as truthful as the world is flat.
GM might be sometimes better than Lab but on average it is clearly worse so the claim that Grand Market is "super better" than Lab is about as truthful as the world is flat.Sure, that's why Lab costs more than Lab and has a no-Copper buy restriction. Oh no wait, it is the other way around.
GM might be sometimes better than Lab but on average it is clearly worse so the claim that Grand Market is "super better" than Lab is about as truthful as the world is flat.Sure, that's why Lab costs more than Lab and has a no-Copper buy restriction. Oh no wait, it is the other way around.
Man, that Donald X. must be pretty bad at that game designing thing if he prices his cards so badly. Or some random guy on the internet is wrong. I wonder what's more likely.
Chapel is an exception. As you rarely want more than one Chapel it is not game breaking that it is very powerful.GM might be sometimes better than Lab but on average it is clearly worse so the claim that Grand Market is "super better" than Lab is about as truthful as the world is flat.Sure, that's why Lab costs more than Lab and has a no-Copper buy restriction. Oh no wait, it is the other way around.
Man, that Donald X. must be pretty bad at that game designing thing if he prices his cards so badly. Or some random guy on the internet is wrong. I wonder what's more likely.
Yeah and Chapel probably sucks too because it only costs $2, right?
At least this preposterous discussions shows that mirror universes in which fair is foul and foul is fair do exist and that communication between our world and topsy-turvy land is possible.
Chapel is an exception. In virtually all other cases price and power are highly correlated. There is definitely no card in Dominion which costs 5 and is "super better" than a card which is priced at 6 (and would be priced at 7 or 8 without the copper clause). There are of course situations in which a Lab is better than Expand or Prince but Lab is in general worse than either of those cards.GM might be sometimes better than Lab but on average it is clearly worse so the claim that Grand Market is "super better" than Lab is about as truthful as the world is flat.Sure, that's why Lab costs more than Lab and has a no-Copper buy restriction. Oh no wait, it is the other way around.
Man, that Donald X. must be pretty bad at that game designing thing if he prices his cards so badly. Or some random guy on the internet is wrong. I wonder what's more likely.
Yeah and Chapel probably sucks too because it only costs $2, right?
That Grand Market is generally better than Lab is an obvious fact. At least this preposterous discussions shows that mirror universes in which fair is foul and foul is fair do exist and that communication between our world and topsy-turvy land is possible.
Anyhow, you have an interesting definition of "obvious" and "fact" here. It's kind of douchey to conflate your own opinion with objective truth, tristan.You can claim that I am another poster if you wish but I am new here. Given that you obviously hold some sort of grudge against me or the guy you confuse me with it is not surprising that it is not possible to rationally discuss Dominion with you. Not that such a discussion is possible with flat-eathers in the first place.
You can claim that I am another poster if you wish but I am new here.
A weird variation of argument from authority: "I have been here longer than you so I am smarter". Shall we call it argument from tradition? You soldier, police officer or just ordinary reactionary dude?You can claim that I am another poster if you wish but I am new here.
And yet your opinion is apparently more valid than the opinion of those who are not new here.
A weird variation of argument from authority: "I have been here longer than you so I am smarter". Shall we call it argument from tradition? You soldier, police officer or just ordinary reactionary dude?You can claim that I am another poster if you wish but I am new here.
And yet your opinion is apparently more valid than the opinion of those who are not new here.
At least this nonsense is moderately entertaining. ;D
Anyway, argument from authority is not a logical fallacy when we're talking about people who actually are experts on the field in question.Like you. As opposed to the game designer who priced the cards totally horribly. Which is why the game is broken and why you are so interested in it.
Cost not correlating with power isn't just "well chapel is an exception". Cost controls a few things: 1. perception of power 2. accessibility.
The classic example isn't Chapel, but Courtyard. [...]
We can also consider 3 cost cards, where the top 5 3 costs are certainly better than the vast majority of 4's, and the primary difference in costing 3 is that these cards can be opened with twice.
Anyhow, you have an interesting definition of "obvious" and "fact" here. It's kind of douchey to conflate your own opinion with objective truth, tristan. I think Lab is ultimately "better" in the sense that is more often a more important card. Why? Because while GM provides a lot of valuable resources, the only *scarce* resource it provides is +Buy. You can get coins from any number of sources, and while GM is a strong source of coin, it is somewhat frequently not fast enough to justify going out of your way for it. Lab is one of, what, maybe five nonterminal draw cards in the game? This is huge! Even terminal draw is a scarce resource, and Lab is one of the very, very few cards that gives you a solid chance of building an engine without any real +Action. That's amazing.
Grand Market is stronger than Lab in the early game, when your average card is still quite weak. As the game progresses the extra card from Lab will gain more and more value as your deck improves. The power level of different effects change throughout the different stages of a game so the argument that Card A is better than Card B because it costs more doesn't really work.
Was the point of this post something else than to insult a forum member that sometimes voices opinions that differ from your own?At least this preposterous discussions shows that mirror universes in which fair is foul and foul is fair do exist and that communication between our world and topsy-turvy land is possible.
Awaclus is pretty much the Donald Trump of Dominion.
Not necessarily. Overdrawing allows you to do a number of things such as adding green and retaining the ability to draw everything or using gainers to gain and play cards on the same turn, both of which can be much more important than the money and buy from Grand Market.Grand Market is stronger than Lab in the early game, when your average card is still quite weak. As the game progresses the extra card from Lab will gain more and more value as your deck improves. The power level of different effects change throughout the different stages of a game so the argument that Card A is better than Card B because it costs more doesn't really work.
Grand Market is also of more use in the late (engine) game when you draw your deck anyway, and Lab would just get you extra cards from an empty deck.
There is definitely no card in Dominion which costs 5 and is "super better" than a card which is priced at 6.Because we all know that Mountebank is worse than Gold.
It's not "super better". It's not ignorable but I won't like to have more than two in most decks while I gladly would buy a fourth Gold for $6.There is definitely no card in Dominion which costs 5 and is "super better" than a card which is priced at 6.Because we all know that Mountebank is worse than Gold.
I would also add 9 Pearl Divers to my deck but not usually more than 1 Chapel. Chapel is still super better than Pearl Diver.It's not "super better". It's not ignorable but I won't like to have more than two in most decks while I gladly would buy a fourth Gold for $6.There is definitely no card in Dominion which costs 5 and is "super better" than a card which is priced at 6.Because we all know that Mountebank is worse than Gold.
Festival and Smithy is equivalent to a Lab, a Market and a Peddler.As long as terminal draw is on the board Festival is good.
I disagree. Without trashing, Festival just isn't reliable enough. If there's no trashing or weak trashing, I will prefer any drawing village over Festival. I might still get a Festival if it's the only +Buy, but I'm not going to use it as my main village.
Village and Smithy is equivalent to two Labs.
So the former is better unless the average card in your deck provides more than "+2 Coins, +1 Buy". Which is unlikely if there is no trashing.
Was the point of this post something else than to insult a forum member that sometimes voices opinions that differ from your own?At least this preposterous discussions shows that mirror universes in which fair is foul and foul is fair do exist and that communication between our world and topsy-turvy land is possible.
Awaclus is pretty much the Donald Trump of Dominion.
Anyway, argument from authority is not a logical fallacy when we're talking about people who actually are experts on the field in question.Like you. As opposed to the game designer who priced the cards totally horribly. Which is why the game is broken and why you are so interested in it.
Man, at least arguing like in topsy-turvy land is fun. 8)
Grand Market is stronger than Lab in the early game, when your average card is still quite weak. As the game progresses the extra card from Lab will gain more and more value as your deck improves. The power level of different effects change throughout the different stages of a game so the argument that Card A is better than Card B because it costs more doesn't really work.
And so you thought "I will work on making the tone less annoying and/or nasty... what could I possibly write to achieve that... oh right, I know: 'Awaclus is pretty much the Donald Trump of Dominion.'!"Was the point of this post something else than to insult a forum member that sometimes voices opinions that differ from your own?At least this preposterous discussions shows that mirror universes in which fair is foul and foul is fair do exist and that communication between our world and topsy-turvy land is possible.
Awaclus is pretty much the Donald Trump of Dominion.
I don't care if people disagree with me; I might actually be wrong. It happens. Maybe Grand Market sucks and Laboratory is the best card in the universe. Whatever.
What I care about is the tone of the discussion, and somehow it always turns highly annoying and/or nasty with Awaclus in it.
What you're calling the early game here sounds like what I would call the mid game. No way I'm getting to $8 average or drawing my deck in the early game. Given the opportunity to open with either GM or Lab I would open GM on the vast majority of boards before moving onto the Labs. You need to add some economy first before you can afford those Labs right?Grand Market is stronger than Lab in the early game, when your average card is still quite weak. As the game progresses the extra card from Lab will gain more and more value as your deck improves. The power level of different effects change throughout the different stages of a game so the argument that Card A is better than Card B because it costs more doesn't really work.
That's what you might think, but the exact opposite is true. Lab is stronger than Grand Market in the early game, when you're not drawing your deck yet. A deck that draws itself and produces $5 is a way stronger deck than a deck that produces $8 on average, but takes 3 turns to draw itself, because of how much faster it is to add new components to the former deck. That's why you always build your engine first and then add payload. On the other hand, when you're already drawing your deck, it doesn't help much to add more cards that draw, because there's nothing more to draw, and that's when you want payload, such as Grand Market.
What you're calling the early game here sounds like what I would call the mid game. No way I'm getting to $8 average or drawing my deck in the early game. Given the opportunity to open with either GM or Lab I would open GM on the vast majority of boards before moving onto the Labs. You need to add some economy first before you can afford those Labs right?Grand Market is stronger than Lab in the early game, when your average card is still quite weak. As the game progresses the extra card from Lab will gain more and more value as your deck improves. The power level of different effects change throughout the different stages of a game so the argument that Card A is better than Card B because it costs more doesn't really work.
That's what you might think, but the exact opposite is true. Lab is stronger than Grand Market in the early game, when you're not drawing your deck yet. A deck that draws itself and produces $5 is a way stronger deck than a deck that produces $8 on average, but takes 3 turns to draw itself, because of how much faster it is to add new components to the former deck. That's why you always build your engine first and then add payload. On the other hand, when you're already drawing your deck, it doesn't help much to add more cards that draw, because there's nothing more to draw, and that's when you want payload, such as Grand Market.
Anyhow, you have an interesting definition of "obvious" and "fact" here. It's kind of douchey to conflate your own opinion with objective truth, tristan.You can claim that I am another poster if you wish but I am new here. Given that you obviously hold some sort of grudge against me or the guy you confuse me with it is not surprising that it is not possible to rationally discuss Dominion with you. Not that such a discussion is possible with flat-eathers in the first place.
Whether you like it or not, it is a fact that Grand Market is generally better than Lab. If it isn't, feel free to explain why the game designer made GMs much harder to get than Labs.
For the same reason Festival is better than Village; combined with a Smithy the combo is 2 Labs vs. Lab+GM. Unsurprisingly
the average card in a deck is worse than Charm.
At least this preposterous discussions shows that mirror universes in which fair is foul and foul is fair do exist and that communication between our world and topsy-turvy land is possible.
Awaclus is pretty much the Donald Trump of Dominion.
Come on guys, stop it please
I think Festival is most accurately equated to a Vassal that hits a Necropolis plus a Market Square.How does Vassal hit 2 cards?
I think Festival is most accurately equated to a Vassal that hits a Necropolis plus a Market Square.How does Vassal hit 2 cards?
I think Festival is most accurately equated to a Vassal that hits a Necropolis plus a Market Square.How does Vassal hit 2 cards?
You Vassal a Vassal apparently with Lost Arts on it so it functions like Necropolis, sort of.
Your Vassal hits a Seaway-d Necropolis that puts a random card back on top of your deck
Your Vassal hits a Seaway-d Necropolis that puts a random card back on top of your deck
How do you Seaway a Necropolis when it is a non-supply Card?
Looks like I my initial impression was correct, you do indeed belong to the Awaclus fanclub and always popping up to defend him.And so you thought "I will work on making the tone less annoying and/or nasty... what could I possibly write to achieve that... oh right, I know: 'Awaclus is pretty much the Donald Trump of Dominion.'!"Was the point of this post something else than to insult a forum member that sometimes voices opinions that differ from your own?At least this preposterous discussions shows that mirror universes in which fair is foul and foul is fair do exist and that communication between our world and topsy-turvy land is possible.
Awaclus is pretty much the Donald Trump of Dominion.
I don't care if people disagree with me; I might actually be wrong. It happens. Maybe Grand Market sucks and Laboratory is the best card in the universe. Whatever.
What I care about is the tone of the discussion, and somehow it always turns highly annoying and/or nasty with Awaclus in it.
So the core strategy is Village + Smithy to draw your deck every turn. Festival helps supplement that strategy because all of its pieces are useful additions to a Village + Smithy deck. You're just never* going to want to run a Festival + Smithy deck when Village is also available.Yes you do, with good trashing. If Chapel, Festival and Smithy are present going for Festival and Smithy is pretty much a dominant strategy. I totally agree though that in thicker decks draw power matters relatively more. But even then the non-terminal payload of Grand Market is in general better than the extra card from Lab.
Looks like I my initial impression was correct, you do indeed belong to the Awaclus fanclub and always popping up to defend him.
I wonder how many ranks Relic will go up
I thought we'd see Bustling Village by now. You guys really like +3 Actions!Well, it's pretty clear to me that Bustling Village is better than Bandit Camp, which we just saw now, and it's probably also better than Bazaar, which we have yet to see.
anyway, the biggest misrank is now behind us. that feels nice.
I rated Triumph lower, but it should be higher. I played several games where Triumph was just the dominant strategy. Common mistake is to imagine gaining a bunch of cards, capped off with a Triumph. NOPE. Buy lots of Triumphs. Common line at end of turn: "And... I'll buy 3 Triumphs, gaining 6, 7, and 8 VP." Give Dominate a run for its money.
Any updates on the rest of the list?
Interesting that Bazaar and Bustling Village are so close to each other.
Bazaar: +1 card, +2 actions, +1$
Bustling village (worst case): +1 cards, +3 actions
Bustling village (best case): +2 cards, +3 actions, +1$
Even in the worst case it's better than Bazaar, so I thought it would be obvious that Bustling Village was better.
Then I remembered it's a split pile.
Now I'm not sure.
How big of a drawback is that split pile? With Settlers being #24/39 of the 0-2 cost cards...
Pretty sure Bazaar is better than a simple +1 cards, +3 actions. The latter is simply playing 2 Villages; the former is a Village and a Peddler.
I think both Bazaar and Bustling Village are overrated here. They are not really worth getting with other (cheaper) splitters around, and that's a significant portion of games (too lazy to calculate).
Uh how the hell is Legionary below Wild Hunt and Crown
Wild Hunt is crazy strong, quite likely the strongest Smithy+ variant, or at least a very close second to Torturer. If you, say, win the split 7-3, that probably means your opponent has to use all of his Wild Hunts for draw, and then you can use 6 of yours for draw and the 7th to gain an Estate and 9 VP tokens for free every turn, which is nuts especially since your opponent can't do the same. Even if your opponent is also able to use his last Wild Hunt for points every turn, with a 6-4 split that still makes a difference of 2 VP per turn, which is quite substantial. What this means is that you absolutely have to not lose the Wild Hunt split as long as there's decent splitting on the board, which makes it a pretty damn strong card.
But if you're playing against a non-engine, then they probably don't want Bustling Villages
and opponents might even contest you.
But then Settlers would frequently only come into play once most of the Copper has been trashed, rendering them worse than Pearl Diver.
Is Haunted Woods really that much better than Swamp Hag? Obviously, it's attack is better later in the game than Swamp Hag because curses will have run out, but 9 points better?
Also, of the next 14 cards behind it in the list, I would rank at least 1/2 of them ahead of Haunted Woods, including Rabble. I would think Rabble has about as good a chance of hurting your opponent as Haunted Woods, and it gives you the immediate draw rather than waiting. Also, your opponent can just not buy cards that turn and avoid the attack, but unless you have a Moat in hand or have Lighthouse out, Rabble will always at least possibly make you discard a payload card you wanted to draw. If there is something I am not appreciating about it that makes Haunted Woods significantly better, I would appreciate the insight.
Apprentice seems high. Same for Lab. Crown is fine. Throne variants are better than some people realize.
splitters
splitters
Please don't indulge Awaclus
Is Haunted Woods really that much better than Swamp Hag? Obviously, it's attack is better
splitters
Please don't indulge Awaclus
To Swamp Hag's credit, Curses gained due to Swamp Hag are more likely to show up in an opening hand since, and possibly in bursts, because you (generally) have no chance to trash the Curses before you draw up again after cleanup. With a card like Witch you gain the Curses after you have drawn your starting cards and so it is slightly easier for your draw to kick off and find the newly gained Curses to trash.
Second part of reason is that swamp hag was overrated as it isn't that good. Its ignorable for engine with any trasher better than trade route. With duration and missing shuffles its so slow that it doesn't gives many curses early and later opponent could trash gained junk next turn.
That being said, it feels like there's a lot of people who are throwing insults his way for no reason at all lately.
I wonder where Witch will end up. tbh surprised it's above Lab. I'm not sure I disagree with that-just don't really know enough to decide. Certainly I often find cursing to be somewhat irrelevant if there's good trashing and I don't win the split by much. Other strong terminals can really conflict too, and I often draw stuff dead with Witch why I kinda like Lab better. Goons is one of the main ones that conflicts, and you also got stuff like Margrave. Things that can benefit from Curses, even just a little, like Gardens, Fairgrounds, and Quest make me wary of Witch, while Lab is rarely ever a bad investment, mostly only if Hunting Party is on the board too.
Butcher and Count are too low. Hunting Party should have dropped harder. It's no longer the power card it once was.
Butcher and Count are too low. Hunting Party should have dropped harder. It's no longer the power card it once was.
How is Butcher too low?
I'm really curious to see where Cultist and Mountebank end up this time.
I'm really curious to see where Cultist and Mountebank end up this time.
1 and 2, not necessarily respectively.
Butcher should easily be in the top 10.
I just completely don't get how you don't get Butcher.
There is no phase of the game where Butcher is anything but great. Early on, Estates become something else. Mid game, Silvers become components, cheap components become expensive components, etc. Late game, components become Provinces, or you mill Provinces. At any point you can even just play it terminal and hoard tokens, which isn't stellar but it's still pretty decent.
Like Butcher is a card that can singlehandedly make a weak engine worth going for even in the absence of other ways to gain multiple cards per turn. Saying "it doesn't make your deck thinner" is so profoundly missing the point that I just don't get it. Butcher is almost universally good, and almost any deck with the terminal space for it should have a few. It's so rarely skippable.
I just completely don't get how you don't get Butcher.
There is no phase of the game where Butcher is anything but great. Early on, Estates become something else. Mid game, Silvers become components, cheap components become expensive components, etc. Late game, components become Provinces, or you mill Provinces. At any point you can even just play it terminal and hoard tokens, which isn't stellar but it's still pretty decent.
You can use Remodel to do all of those things except for the coin token thing, and Remodel is not a great $4 card.
Like Butcher is a card that can singlehandedly make a weak engine worth going for even in the absence of other ways to gain multiple cards per turn. Saying "it doesn't make your deck thinner" is so profoundly missing the point that I just don't get it. Butcher is almost universally good, and almost any deck with the terminal space for it should have a few. It's so rarely skippable.
It's a card that can singlehandedly make a weak engine worse than Butcher/BM, I'll grant you that. But saying that it doesn't make your deck thinner is, in fact, profoundly getting the point. The point is to get thinner and that's what Butcher doesn't do. Whether or not you have the terminal space for it is one question, but the more important question is: do you have the time for it? It costs a turn to buy a Butcher, and because it doesn't get you thin and it isn't an engine component, it needs to give you one full extra turn worth of benefit during the course of the game to be worth it. And yeah, usually it does that, but it doesn't do all that much more than that.
In games with super good trashing like Chapel or Count, Butcher is a lot better because it helps you out of that weird stage where you don't have any cards but somehow you'd need to turn that into a consistent engine. In other engine games, it doesn't really have a role to play, you just buy it because it's a good card. The fact that it doesn't have a role to play in a regular engine is super important.
I feel like there is some kind of misunderstanding here. Chris acts as though Awaclus claims that Butcher is garbage; which he clearly isn't. (He explicitly says "Butcher is a good card" in his post.) He doesn't say that Butcher isn't much better than Remodel; he's just pointing out that if most the reasons you think Butcher is great also apply to Remodel, maybe you should reconsider your argument.
Thing is that competition at the top of the $5 list is pretty stiff. Surely Butcher is a good card, but Awaclus is correct that it does not usually play a role in engines; i.e. there aren't many boards where Butcher makes an engine viable that otherwise wouldn't be. You will usually still add Butcher to your engine, but it's not a key card. Almost all other cards in that segment of the $5 list are major engines enablers (the exception being Royal Carriage).
Other boards are gain-limited, and by the time you dip into non-Province VP, the guaranteed 3 VP from the Duchy is often more attractive than the potential 4 VP from Distant Lands.
It basically guarantees that whomever can end the game wins.
It basically guarantees that whomever can end the game wins.
Isn't whomever ends the game always the one who wins though?
It basically guarantees that whomever can end the game wins.
Isn't whomever ends the game always the one who wins though?
It is frustrating when I play against a Baker Idiot and lose. I mean it's my own fault when it happens, but still a real kick in the teeth.
I have to agree that Baker is a weak peddler variant. If you spend the coin this turn, it's a Peddler variant that does nothing, which the community has agreed is worth $4. If you don't spend the coin this turn, it's a do-nothing cantrip, like a Pawn with no choices or a Pearl Diver that doesn't peek; the community has proposed that an actual do-nothing cantrip would likely be priced at $1. So Baker is a $5 that can either act like a $4 or a $1.
I have to agree that Baker is a weak peddler variant. If you spend the coin this turn, it's a Peddler variant that does nothing, which the community has agreed is worth $4. If you don't spend the coin this turn, it's a do-nothing cantrip, like a Pawn with no choices or a Pearl Diver that doesn't peek; the community has proposed that an actual do-nothing cantrip would likely be priced at $1. So Baker is a $5 that can either act like a $4 or a $1.
Compare it with Artificer: Even playing a single Artificer, discard 3, play two coppers allows you to gain two $3s. Two Artificers and Copper+Silver allows a gain $3, buy $5 or gain $4 buy $4 (kinda Baker-ish smoothing, no? but two gains per play!) If an engine is feasible, Artificer is much more powerful, not to mention that it happily discards green cards for benefit.
I have to agree that Baker is a weak peddler variant. If you spend the coin this turn, it's a Peddler variant that does nothing, which the community has agreed is worth $4.
If you don't spend the coin this turn, it's a do-nothing cantrip, like a Pawn with no choices or a Pearl Diver that doesn't peek; the community has proposed that an actual do-nothing cantrip would likely be priced at $1. So Baker is a $5 that can either act like a $4 or a $1.
The fact that it gives coin tokens instead of coins is more of an edge case. The thing about coin tokens is that they're only valuable when they smooth out your buys, allowing you to hit $5 and $5 instead of $4 and $6, or possibly even $8 and $16 instead of $12 and $12 if you really want to stretch.
Smoothing out buys over multiple turns is mostly useful in BM when you're trying to hit $8 or $11. With a deck-drawing engine, the difference between coin tokens and coin is almost irrelevant, other than a couple of engine-building buys early. But cantrip-money in general is weak in BM. So Baker's got a built-in anti-synergy.
Sure, there's plenty of "depends on the kingdom" cases, such as $5-gainers, Butcher, etc., and possibly slogs, though I'm not convinced that saving up tokens over multiple turns for VP cards is an efficient use of resources, even in a slog.
Compare it with Artificer: Even playing a single Artificer, discard 3, play two coppers allows you to gain two $3s. Two Artificers and Copper+Silver allows a gain $3, buy $5 or gain $4 buy $4 (kinda Baker-ish smoothing, no? but two gains per play!) If an engine is feasible, Artificer is much more powerful, not to mention that it happily discards green cards for benefit.
According to my knowledge, a Peddler worth $4 is overpowered, and the cost is more like $4.5 or something to the effect. Case in point: Poacher, which has a built in nerfing effect so you cannot simply pile them without consequences.
According to my knowledge, a Peddler worth $4 is overpowered, and the cost is more like $4.5 or something to the effect. Case in point: Poacher, which has a built in nerfing effect so you cannot simply pile them without consequences.5 is a lot more than 4. Also poacher is defiantly on the weaker end of 4s. The time where Poacher is strong is on the opening and when you much rather would open something cool like upgrade or the like than a peddler(which true purpose early is to hit 5.)
I don't think I would use more than one Baker in a BM strategy. Baker is a terrible BM card.Baker is a worse engine card. You would way rather do effective payload rather than 1 coin token per baker per turn.
The difference between coin tokens and coin is not irrelevant. I certainly don't need to explain the virtues of saving up tokens, and holding off on buying sometimes.It mostly is once you are drawing your deck. If you are saving up token than you probably are doing something wrong, Your opponent cay spend that money towards cards that contribute to their deck it will probably pay off in less than 2 turns.
Speaking about something other than Baker,
I feel like Emporium is underrated, but I'm not sure I can justify that feeling. It sounds really bad on paper, just an expensive peddler with 2 VP attached. I wouldn't get Great Halls, so why would I get Emporium? But when it's actually decision time, it looks so good. I can green, but instead of my deck getting junked, it gets slightly more powerful? Sign me up.
There are also a couple things that make Emporium "strictly worse" but really make it stronger. First, the fact that there are only 5 in the supply means you want to get them earlier, before they disappear. Second, the 5-action restriction means that sometimes the VP is accessible to only one of the players. You really want to be that player who gets the 10 VP lead.
QuoteOther boards are gain-limited, and by the time you dip into non-Province VP, the guaranteed 3 VP from the Duchy is often more attractive than the potential 4 VP from Distant Lands.
There's your problem - you're treating Distant Lands like Duchy. You basically never buy Distant Lands when you would buy Duchy - you only buy it when you wouldn't buy Duchy.
You're also treating Distant Lands as a "not a Province consolation prize" that you only get after greening for provinces. Also wrong! You often go hard into Distant Lands before you pick up any Provinces at all. Imagine an engine mirror where you go for Distant Lands when your opponent goes Provinces. You end up not that far behind but with several fewer stop cards, and you can clean up the last few Provinces to take the lead and win.
(absent mid-turn gaining and playing shenanigans)That's a pretty big caveat because there are plenty of boards where you can gain and play one or even multiple Distant Lands in the same turn.
It sounds really bad on paper, just an expensive peddler with 2 VP attached. I wouldn't get Great Halls, so why would I get Emporium?
It sounds really bad on paper, just an expensive peddler with 2 VP attached. I wouldn't get Great Halls, so why would I get Emporium?
...Because Emporium has 1 more VP and 1 more coin than Great Hall?
For (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/3/3d/Coin2.png/16px-Coin2.png) more.
Edit: Playing a Distant Lands cage match with Rabid on Sunday 18:00 UTC.Is there a recording of this?
Edit: Playing a Distant Lands cage match with Rabid on Sunday 18:00 UTC.Is there a recording of this?
something many of the top players have figured out by now, that took me a while to catch up on, is that most non-drawing BM is better than most terminal draw BM. i had always thought it was the other way around, but the simulators have uncovered some pretty shocking results. did you know that dungeon-BM beats embassy-BM if both open 4/3? or that navigator-BM beats smithy-BM? or that swamp hag-BM beats cultist-BM?
In my experience, Artificer really shines in two scenarios. Number one: there are $2 cards you want a bunch of. Number two: cost reduction. I'll sometimes buy Artificer for its Peddler effect on other boards, but it has a hard time competing with other $5 options.
In my experience, Artificer really shines in two scenarios. Number one: there are $2 cards you want a bunch of. Number two: cost reduction. I'll sometimes buy Artificer for its Peddler effect on other boards, but it has a hard time competing with other $5 options.
Number 3: boards where you can overdraw a lot. Menagerie (where it also serves as a helpful discard outlet), Scrying Pool, and City Quarter come to mind.
In my experience, Artificer really shines in two scenarios. Number one: there are $2 cards you want a bunch of. Number two: cost reduction. I'll sometimes buy Artificer for its Peddler effect on other boards, but it has a hard time competing with other $5 options.
Number 3: boards where you can overdraw a lot. Menagerie (where it also serves as a helpful discard outlet), Scrying Pool, and City Quarter come to mind.
Artificer is WAY better than people give it credit for.
Oh yeah, good call. I tend to forget about that because those decks aren't very fun for me. I always feel bad making my opponent(s) wait while I carefully plan the end of an already long turn. I usually play very sub-optimally for sake of speed in those cases.
something many of the top players have figured out by now, that took me a while to catch up on, is that most non-drawing BM is better than most terminal draw BM. i had always thought it was the other way around, but the simulators have uncovered some pretty shocking results. did you know that dungeon-BM beats embassy-BM if both open 4/3? or that navigator-BM beats smithy-BM? or that swamp hag-BM beats cultist-BM?
something many of the top players have figured out by now, that took me a while to catch up on, is that most non-drawing BM is better than most terminal draw BM. i had always thought it was the other way around, but the simulators have uncovered some pretty shocking results. did you know that dungeon-BM beats embassy-BM if both open 4/3? or that navigator-BM beats smithy-BM? or that swamp hag-BM beats cultist-BM?
Can I see the scripts used for Dungeon vs Embassy and Navigator vs Smithy? Dungeon > Embassy, I can see it, free Silver in BM games is no joke and Dungeon filters so well. Navigator > Smithy feels very weird to me. Back when Isotropic was around, I solitaired Navigator-BM out of curiosity, and found it sometimes had dream draws where you discarding all your junk and hit 4 Provinces in 12-13 turns. But it was really inconsistent compared to Smithy-BM.
you don't discard once you start greening though, yes?
well cycling is less good once your deck quality starts getting worse
something many of the top players have figured out by now, that took me a while to catch up on, is that most non-drawing BM is better than most terminal draw BM. i had always thought it was the other way around, but the simulators have uncovered some pretty shocking results. did you know that dungeon-BM beats embassy-BM if both open 4/3? or that navigator-BM beats smithy-BM? or that swamp hag-BM beats cultist-BM?
Can I see the scripts used for Dungeon vs Embassy and Navigator vs Smithy? Dungeon > Embassy, I can see it, free Silver in BM games is no joke and Dungeon filters so well. Navigator > Smithy feels very weird to me. Back when Isotropic was around, I solitaired Navigator-BM out of curiosity, and found it sometimes had dream draws where you discarding all your junk and hit 4 Provinces in 12-13 turns. But it was really inconsistent compared to Smithy-BM.
The key to Navigator BM is to discard, like, almost all the time. Basically unless it's a guaranteed Gold early or a Province mid, discard. It wins on cycling faster, increasing your average hand's value faster.
I currently have other priorities and I'm now at the point where I probably just do a small summary of the remaining lists. I apologize.
I noticed that the 5 cost cards list has been completed in the Qvist ranking matrices. Way to go, Qvist! I know you're a bit burnt out by all this, but I really do hope you will eventually complete the lists for 6+, potions and knights.
Someone has updated the 5's for 2016 on the wiki. Where are they getting that information?
Someone has updated the 5's for 2016 on the wiki. Where are they getting that information?
Maybe they hacked my computer? But they didn't do it correctly because the order is wrong.
I currently have other priorities and I'm now at the point where I probably just do a small summary of the remaining lists. I apologize.
I currently have other priorities and I'm now at the point where I probably just do a small summary of the remaining lists. I apologize.
Yay! Just post the lists like you have been, but skip the video and the stats. Just post 10 cards and their ranking. Let everyone discuss, and then post another 10.
I currently have other priorities and I'm now at the point where I probably just do a small summary of the remaining lists. I apologize.
Yay! Just post the lists like you have been, but skip the video and the stats. Just post 10 cards and their ranking. Let everyone discuss, and then post another 10.
It's just 10 more to go for the 5's anyway. And the 6+'s shouldn't take too long.
Just to finish this off::)
10. ▲1 Upgrade
9. ▲1 Minion
8. ▼1 Junk Dealer
7. ▲2 Torturer
6. ▼4 Rebuild
5. =0 Governor
4. ▲2 Witch
3. =0 Cultist
2. ▲2 Wharf
1. =0 Mountebank
eh, i've been finding more and more that cultist is overrated. empires added at least a couple significant counters to it (city quarter & advance)
eh, i've been finding more and more that cultist is overrated. empires added at least a couple significant counters to it (city quarter & advance), but it likely never was as good as we had thought. witch-BM beats cultist-BM, for instance.
also, minion & torturer should absolutely be replaced with butcher & groundskeeper
Okay, I won't finish this normally anymore. Sorry.
Top 10 here: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16854.msg671125#msg671125
I was thinking about how bad Villa can be w/ little or no draw when there's another village, and the same think applied to Festival in a game I had where Courtyard(and Madman...sorta) was the only draw(don't remember details.) I got Festival over Mining Village twice, once was in the opening, pretty weak 5s.
Anyways, since Festival is just 1 coin more than Villa and doesn't have that killer effect, shouldn't it be lower? It can pretty easily be a stop card of sorts. Took me a while to think of this, earlier I actually felt like it was low.
I was thinking about how bad Villa can be w/ little or no draw when there's another village, and the same think applied to Festival in a game I had where Courtyard(and Madman...sorta) was the only draw(don't remember details.) I got Festival over Mining Village twice, once was in the opening, pretty weak 5s.
Anyways, since Festival is just 1 coin more than Villa and doesn't have that killer effect, shouldn't it be lower? It can pretty easily be a stop card of sorts. Took me a while to think of this, earlier I actually felt like it was low.
"Just $1 more" is huge, though.
It's true that Festival isn't a super awesome, must-buy $5 card. But it's too strong to cost $4.
"Just $1 more" is huge, though.
"Just $1 more" is huge, though.
Yeah. My favorite example of this is Lighthouse (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Lighthouse) vs Merchant Ship (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Merchant_Ship). In order to go from giving (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) now and next turn to giving (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/3/3d/Coin2.png/16px-Coin2.png) now and next turn, you need to lose the +1 action, lose the attack protection, and increase your price from (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/3/3d/Coin2.png/16px-Coin2.png) to (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/7/7d/Coin5.png/16px-Coin5.png).
Drawing an extra card non-terminally is worth a lot more than drawing an extra card terminally.
"Just $1 more" is huge, though.
Yeah. My favorite example of this is Lighthouse (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Lighthouse) vs Merchant Ship (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Merchant_Ship). In order to go from giving (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) now and next turn to giving (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/3/3d/Coin2.png/16px-Coin2.png) now and next turn, you need to lose the +1 action, lose the attack protection, and increase your price from (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/3/3d/Coin2.png/16px-Coin2.png) to (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/7/7d/Coin5.png/16px-Coin5.png).
So a hypothetical "Super-Lab" (+3 Cards, +1 Action) would probably have to cost (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/b/bc/Coin7.png/16px-Coin7.png).I think that would still have to come with a terminal $2 you didn't really want.
So a hypothetical "Super-Lab" (+3 Cards, +1 Action) would probably have to cost (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/b/bc/Coin7.png/16px-Coin7.png).I think that would still have to come with a terminal $2 you didn't really want.
It's Stonemason dude. I have explained the joke etc.So a hypothetical "Super-Lab" (+3 Cards, +1 Action) would probably have to cost (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/b/bc/Coin7.png/16px-Coin7.png).I think that would still have to come with a terminal $2 you didn't really want.
When you gain this, gain aDuchessSuper-Scientist.
So a hypothetical "Super-Lab" (+3 Cards, +1 Action) would probably have to cost (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/b/bc/Coin7.png/16px-Coin7.png).
Menagerie is cheap because it gets worse as your hand gets bigger. If I'm doing the math right, Super Lab would actually be 8 or 9 (the linear progression would be 2->5->8 or 1->5->9, depending on how much you think a vanilla cantrip would cost.)So a hypothetical "Super-Lab" (+3 Cards, +1 Action) would probably have to cost (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/b/bc/Coin7.png/16px-Coin7.png).
"Super Lab" is often just Menagerie(pretty common to have a good way to guarantee the full effect,) and that's 3. So 7 might not be a card that's +3 cards and 1 action. Testing cards for different prices must have been very interesting.
Menagerie is cheap because it gets worse as your hand gets bigger. If I'm doing the math right, Super Lab would actually be 8 or 9 (the linear progression would be 2->5->8 or 1->5->9, depending on how much you think a vanilla cantrip would cost.)So a hypothetical "Super-Lab" (+3 Cards, +1 Action) would probably have to cost (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/b/bc/Coin7.png/16px-Coin7.png).
"Super Lab" is often just Menagerie(pretty common to have a good way to guarantee the full effect,) and that's 3. So 7 might not be a card that's +3 cards and 1 action. Testing cards for different prices must have been very interesting.
The math cannot be done. Many people have tried to come up with formulas for costs for sets of +'s over the years, and it simply doesn't work.
Super Lab was in Empires at the beginning (eventually turning into City Quarter). The initial guess I had for costing it was 10D. I was off.
It was also clearly before the realization of, things that just cost debt shouldn't be things you want early.
It was also clearly before the realization of, things that just cost debt shouldn't be things you want early.
...Not counting Engineer, I guess?
And actually Overlord's not bad as an opener sometimes too.
It was also clearly before the realization of, things that just cost debt shouldn't be things you want early.
...Not counting Engineer, I guess?
And actually Overlord's not bad as an opener sometimes too.