Print

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

[werothegreat]

One way to think of [+2 Cards; +2 Actions] is Border Village/Lab. That's more or less a Lost City without the on-gain penalty, and it costs $6. [+1 Card; +1 Action; +$2] would have to cost more than that, I bet.

This is false; by your argument, [+1 card, +1 action, +$2] is Ball (taking two Peddlers), which costs $5 + -$1 token, which is by any reasonable metirc less than $6.

Peddler doesn't cost $4. Poacher does, but it has a penalty.

I think Donald X. himself said that Peddler could cost $4, which is which he chose the effect for Poacher because it had to be priced for a situation where no piles run out.

Well we're discussing my opinion, I'm pretty sure, and how internally consistent it is. I think Peddler would be too strong at $4 (but too weak at $5).

As it is, I routinely open with Poacher, and it very rarely hurts me.

[Awaclus]

I think it's rare that a single average $5 is better than two average $4s. Like, really rare. I would rather have two Caravans over a Lab almost always.

Well, two Caravans are almost exactly one Lab, so I'd rather say that one $5 vs. two $4s is pretty well balanced. Which is why Ball is a thing.

[LastFootnote]

This is false; by your argument, [+1 card, +1 action, +$2] is Ball (taking two Peddlers), which costs $5 + -$1 token, which is by any reasonable metirc less than $6.

Whoa, I just read this more closely. No, man, $5 plus your –$1 token is not less than $6 "by any reasonable metric". By the metric of not having your next turn made worse, it's costlier than $6. If Ball cost $5 and 1 Debt, I'd agree with you.

[LastFootnote]

I think it's rare that a single average $5 is better than two average $4s. Like, really rare. I would rather have two Caravans over a Lab almost always.

Well, two Caravans are almost exactly one Lab, so I'd rather say that one $5 vs. two $4s is pretty well balanced. Which is why Ball is a thing.

Two Caravans are almost exactly one Lab in a deck you draw every turn. In most other decks, it's better.

[Awaclus]

I think it's rare that a single average $5 is better than two average $4s. Like, really rare. I would rather have two Caravans over a Lab almost always.

Well, two Caravans are almost exactly one Lab, so I'd rather say that one $5 vs. two $4s is pretty well balanced. Which is why Ball is a thing.

Two Caravans are almost exactly one Lab in a deck you draw every turn. In most other decks, it's better.

In most other decks, it's also worse than having two Silvers.

[werothegreat]

I think it's rare that a single average $5 is better than two average $4s. Like, really rare. I would rather have two Caravans over a Lab almost always.

Well, two Caravans are almost exactly one Lab, so I'd rather say that one $5 vs. two $4s is pretty well balanced. Which is why Ball is a thing.

Two Caravans are almost exactly one Lab in a deck you draw every turn. In most other decks, it's better.

In most other decks, it's also worse than having two Silvers.

It's possible to have an engine-y deck that draws a lot, but not everything.  And it is a general rule that +Card is better than +.

[Awaclus]

It's possible to have an engine-y deck that draws a lot, but not everything.  And it is a general rule that +Card is better than +.

Technically possible, but not very common, and it's still not very much better than one Lab in that deck since the Caravans will still be missing the shuffle a lot. And it is a general rule that Treasure is better than Action.

[LastFootnote]

It's possible to have an engine-y deck that draws a lot, but not everything.  And it is a general rule that +Card is better than +.

Technically possible, but not very common, and it's still not very much better than one Lab in that deck since the Caravans will still be missing the shuffle a lot. And it is a general rule that Treasure is better than Action.

The thing is, even decks that draw themselves don't start out as decks that draw themselves. And probably you're buying Caravans and/or Labs in an attempt to get to the point where you're drawing your deck. And during that period, two Caravans are better than a Lab unless they miss the shuffle every time.

[aku_chi]

In a draw-yo-deck engine, two Caravans are like a Schemed Lab or an Alchemist (without needing to play a Potion) - which is better.

[trivialknot]

A Lost City is better than a Double Peddler in a deck that has lots of terminals.

A deck with lots of Vassals is a deck with lots of terminals.

[Awaclus]

It's possible to have an engine-y deck that draws a lot, but not everything.  And it is a general rule that +Card is better than +.

Technically possible, but not very common, and it's still not very much better than one Lab in that deck since the Caravans will still be missing the shuffle a lot. And it is a general rule that Treasure is better than Action.

The thing is, even decks that draw themselves don't start out as decks that draw themselves. And probably you're buying Caravans and/or Labs in an attempt to get to the point where you're drawing your deck. And during that period, two Caravans are better than a Lab unless they miss the shuffle every time.

On the other hand, if they both miss the shuffle, that's actually super worse than a Lab, because you're getting the benefit one shuffle later which sucks in the early stages of the game. And if your deck is two Caravans and 10 stop cards (not very unrealistic), there is literally no way to play the Caravans and not have them both miss the shuffle.

[LastFootnote]

It's possible to have an engine-y deck that draws a lot, but not everything.  And it is a general rule that +Card is better than +.

Technically possible, but not very common, and it's still not very much better than one Lab in that deck since the Caravans will still be missing the shuffle a lot. And it is a general rule that Treasure is better than Action.

The thing is, even decks that draw themselves don't start out as decks that draw themselves. And probably you're buying Caravans and/or Labs in an attempt to get to the point where you're drawing your deck. And during that period, two Caravans are better than a Lab unless they miss the shuffle every time.

On the other hand, if they both miss the shuffle, that's actually super worse than a Lab, because you're getting the benefit one shuffle later which sucks in the early stages of the game. And if your deck is two Caravans and 10 stop cards (not very unrealistic), there is literally no way to play the Caravans and not have them both miss the shuffle.

Good thing they won't usually all always miss the shuffle, then.

[Awaclus]

Good thing they won't usually all always miss the shuffle, then.

No, they will usually all miss the shuffle.

[weety4]

A Lost City is better than a Double Peddler in a deck that has lots of terminals.

A deck with lots of Vassals is a deck with lots of terminals.

That's wrong. Let's say that your deck consists of only Vassals. You could always play all of them as Vassal is only terminal if it doesn't trigger another Action card.

Herald is obviously better than Vassal; it costs more and is less risky to play as it is either non-terminal or a village whereas Vassal is terminal or non-terminal.

But it is definitely wrong that you always prefer a Village+Lab over a Double Peddler. For example if you have a thin deck that always draws itself cantrip payload is what you want as those extra Lost Cities would do nothing.

[Watno]

That's wrong. Let's say that your deck consists of only Vassals. You could always play all of them as Vassal is only terminal if it doesn't trigger another Action card.

Except this does'nt work if multiple vassals are in your hand.

[Awaclus]

But it is definitely wrong that you always prefer a Village+Lab over a Double Peddler. For example if you have a thin deck that always draws itself cantrip payload is what you want as those extra Lost Cities would do nothing.

Nobody was saying that you always prefer a Village+Lab over a double Peddler. We were just saying that the former is stronger in general.

[weety4]

But it is definitely wrong that you always prefer a Village+Lab over a Double Peddler. For example if you have a thin deck that always draws itself cantrip payload is what you want as those extra Lost Cities would do nothing.

Nobody was saying that you always prefer a Village+Lab over a double Peddler. We were just saying that the former is stronger in general.

Neither is in general superior to the other. As already pointed out, Grand Market without the extra buy was a 7$. Pretty hard to argue that Lost City without the drawback would have to cost more than 7$.
Double Peddler is roughly similar in strength to Lost City and whether the one or other is superior depends situationally on the Kingdom.

[Awaclus]

Neither is in general superior to the other. As already pointed out, Grand Market without the extra buy was a 7$. Pretty hard to argue that Lost City without the drawback would have to cost more than 7$.
Double Peddler is roughly similar in strength to Lost City and whether the one or other is superior depends situationally on the Kingdom.

As already pointed out, price is not a good way to measure card strength. Double Peddler is not roughly similar in strength to Lost City, because the kingdom in which Lost City is situationally stronger is so much more common.

[weety4]

Neither is in general superior to the other. As already pointed out, Grand Market without the extra buy was a 7$. Pretty hard to argue that Lost City without the drawback would have to cost more than 7$.
Double Peddler is roughly similar in strength to Lost City and whether the one or other is superior depends situationally on the Kingdom.

As already pointed out, price is not a good way to measure card strength. Double Peddler is not roughly similar in strength to Lost City, because the kingdom in which Lost City is situationally stronger is so much more common.

Your argument is based on a mere subjective preference for actions and cards whereas price is the only way to objectively proxy card strength. And based on that method, Double Peddler would be stronger than Village+Lab. Of course it isn't, they are of roughly similar strength but it is definitely no the other way around. Otherwise a Double Peddler would have to cost the same as Lost City without the drawback, 6$ and this isn't the case except in some funky mirror universe.

All this isn't really surprising if one takes a look at basic vanilla cards. A cantrip with an extra card is more valuable than with an extra coin which is more valuable than with an extra action. Thus it is unsurprising that an extra card and an extra action is roughly similar in strength to an extra coin.

[Chris is me]

Price is not a measure of card strength, "objective" or otherwise. The reason it loosely correlates to Card strength is because price regulates access to cards. Awaclus'a point is way, way more valid than "well a similar card costs this much".

[weety4]

Price is not a measure of card strength, "objective" or otherwise. The reason it loosely correlates to Card strength is because price regulates access to cards. Awaclus'a point is way, way more valid than "well a similar card costs this much".

No idea about how you perceive any validity in that claim. Decks that draw themselves don't occur so rarely and in such decks you prefer a double Peddler over a VillageLab. Not that this is the only situation in which Peddler² is superior to Lost City. If you can trash most of your starting hand you will do better with cantrip payload than with LostCity draw and Gold payload.

The cards are simply of similar strength. Otherwise Kingdoms in which Grand Market is present wouldn't be virtually always focused on GM (sure, the extra buy isn't trivial). You might wanna explain how this situation arises if Village&Lab really were "worlds better" than GM without the extra buy.

[AdrianHealey]

Chapel must be weak, it only costs $2.

[Awaclus]

Your argument is based on a mere subjective preference for actions and cards

That subjective preference is based on thousands upon thousands games of observing how I win the game and how my opponents win the game. It's not even a particularly radical notion.

No idea about how you perceive any validity in that claim. Decks that draw themselves don't occur so rarely and in such decks you prefer a double Peddler over a VillageLab. Not that this is the only situation in which Peddler² is superior to Lost City. If you can trash most of your starting hand you will do better with cantrip payload than with LostCity draw and Gold payload.

The cards are simply of similar strength. Otherwise Kingdoms in which Grand Market is present wouldn't be virtually always focused on GM (sure, the extra buy isn't trivial). You might wanna explain how this situation arises if Village&Lab really were "worlds better" than GM without the extra buy.

How do you ever get to the point of having a deck that draws itself if you don't have draw and actions? Sure, Peddlers are pretty convenient in that deck once you've built it, but being able to have that deck in the first place is the important part, and Peddlers don't enable that.

Saying that you'll do better with X than with Lost City draw and Gold payload is like saying that you'll do better with X than with Scout in a deck with no Victory cards. If you have Lost Cities, either you should also be having terminal draw, or your payload should be terminal, both of which are a significant improvement over just having cantrip payload in a thin deck. Of course the +actions you get from Lost City aren't that impressive if you never play any terminal Actions.

And no, the cards are not simply of similar strength. Kingdoms where Grand Market is present aren't virtually always focused on GM, and when they are, it's usually because there's also some actions and draw present.

[aku_chi]

Decks that draw themselves don't occur so rarely and in such decks you prefer a double Peddler over a VillageLab. Not that this is the only situation in which Peddler² is superior to Lost City. If you can trash most of your starting hand you will do better with cantrip payload than with LostCity draw and Gold payload.

Lost City is better than activated Conspirator if there is terminal payload better than $4.  For example, Lost City + Goons is better than two activated Conspirators.  Lost City is also better than activated Conspirator if you need to supplement your draw with terminal draw and there are no other action splitters.  An activated Conspirator is usually better than Lost City if neither of those two conditions hold.  But this is all pretty obvious in context, so I don't think people are disagreeing about anything substantial.

[weety4]

How do you ever get to the point of having a deck that draws itself if you don't have draw and actions?

A Peddler draws a card and provides an Action which is why you can easily build decks with all kind of (double) Peddler variants as long as there is decent trashing.

Contrary to your belief not every Kingdom features villages and terminal draw.

If you have Lost Cities, either you should also be having terminal draw, or your payload should be terminal, both of which are a significant improvement over just having cantrip payload in a thin deck.

Virtually every Grand Market decks disagree with you.
There are ample of reasons why you want virtual coins in engines. Scrying Pool, Herald and all the Herald variants and so on.
Kinda funny that we come back to Herald with which this all started. With Heralds you definitely want Peddler variants in your deck and not Gold as payload.