What I think is I haven't even played with this card
verdict: i will start a thread each day starting july 17th that has some group of empires paraphernalia. hopefully by then many of us will have played about one game with most of them. we will probably discuss them again later.
see you then, everybody
Simulator suggests that for a treasure based deck, buying wedding instead of silvers will give you a 70-30 advantage over someone who doesn't. Longer games (like purely treasures) will give a bigger advantage for weddings and faster games will give less advantage.That seems about right. I think in general I'd rather have 1 Gold added to my deck instead of 2 Silvers.
Simulator suggests that for a treasure based deck, buying wedding instead of silvers will give you a 70-30 advantage over someone who doesn't. Longer games (like purely treasures) will give a bigger advantage for weddings and faster games will give less advantage.That seems about right. I think in general I'd rather have 1 Gold added to my deck instead of 2 Silvers.
Two Silvers is better than 1 Gold for money density.
Thanks for the write-up FishingVillage, altough I heavily disagree with your conclusions ;)Gold nothing I'd probably better in a engine with little to no trashing than silver silver.
To me it seems you are just overrating Gold in general, maybe you played with the Base set a long time? That's usually the reason when people think Gold is so strong.
For example, it's pretty rare I would want to open with Gold, certainly Gold/nothing is terrible on a large majority of boards. Maybe it's sometimes ok to buy on turn2? Time will tell.
Otherwise, I don't think the Event will change the game much. Sure, it's a bit easier to pick up golds in money games, but I doubt one would throw out many engines in favour of a Wedding strategy. The VP is neat, let's you build a little more in money games but that's about it in my opinion
That also makes it much easier to spike higher costs early. I think you (drsteelhammer) are severely underestimating WeddingThanks for the write-up FishingVillage, altough I heavily disagree with your conclusions ;)Gold nothing I'd probably better in a engine with little to no trashing than silver silver.
To me it seems you are just overrating Gold in general, maybe you played with the Base set a long time? That's usually the reason when people think Gold is so strong.
For example, it's pretty rare I would want to open with Gold, certainly Gold/nothing is terrible on a large majority of boards. Maybe it's sometimes ok to buy on turn2? Time will tell.
Otherwise, I don't think the Event will change the game much. Sure, it's a bit easier to pick up golds in money games, but I doubt one would throw out many engines in favour of a Wedding strategy. The VP is neat, let's you build a little more in money games but that's about it in my opinion
Gold gets progressively worse as the game goes on.That also makes it much easier to spike higher costs early. I think you (drsteelhammer) are severely underestimating WeddingThanks for the write-up FishingVillage, altough I heavily disagree with your conclusions ;)Gold nothing I'd probably better in a engine with little to no trashing than silver silver.
To me it seems you are just overrating Gold in general, maybe you played with the Base set a long time? That's usually the reason when people think Gold is so strong.
For example, it's pretty rare I would want to open with Gold, certainly Gold/nothing is terrible on a large majority of boards. Maybe it's sometimes ok to buy on turn2? Time will tell.
Otherwise, I don't think the Event will change the game much. Sure, it's a bit easier to pick up golds in money games, but I doubt one would throw out many engines in favour of a Wedding strategy. The VP is neat, let's you build a little more in money games but that's about it in my opinion
Simulator suggests that buying a turn 1 wedding increase your win rate by 10% when playing a witch + big money mirror. Even a turn 2 wedding is better than silver.
Two Silvers is better than 1 Gold for money density.
Two Silvers is better than 1 Gold for money density.
if only there were some event that could take a deck with high money density and give it a bunch of silvers
Golds are good for spiking Provinces.Simulator suggests that for a treasure based deck, buying wedding instead of silvers will give you a 70-30 advantage over someone who doesn't. Longer games (like purely treasures) will give a bigger advantage for weddings and faster games will give less advantage.That seems about right. I think in general I'd rather have 1 Gold added to my deck instead of 2 Silvers.
Two Silvers is better than 1 Gold for money density.
i think that it is way more appealing on turn 2 than turn 1
i think that it is way more appealing on turn 2 than turn 1
Use your Baker token to get Legionary turn 1, then Borrow to get Wedding turn 2
Would depend on what I want to buy and how frequent, no? And the other cards ib my deck, etc.Obviously, but a single card giving a bigger amount of $ is usually pretty good (for instance: Platinum).
Buying Wedding (and Debt cards in general) is best when you are at the end of your shuffle. That way, you can maximize your purchase by having the Debt card help to pay off the debt.
Buying Wedding (and Debt cards in general) is best when you are at the end of your shuffle. That way, you can maximize your purchase by having the Debt card help to pay off the debt.
I'm not so sure about that. If you want your debt card to give you a spike in power (in this case, the gold leading to an early $6/$7 turn), it can be easier on a blank debt slate. That way you don't draw it at the start of the shuffle and have to use the turn to pay some debt leaving not enough money to do anything great.
That's interesting. As per my limited knowledge, I generally want to be drawing my Gold(s) more often than not in order to maximize the amount of money that my hands can make, and so I'd rather keep my deck as thin as possible, filling it with Gold and VP when I feel like my deck can take the fat. I'm assuming the 3 in the 3/4 split is generally for Silver?
having 3 dept left over pretty much kills any chance of 5+ turn 3.That's interesting. As per my limited knowledge, I generally want to be drawing my Gold(s) more often than not in order to maximize the amount of money that my hands can make, and so I'd rather keep my deck as thin as possible, filling it with Gold and VP when I feel like my deck can take the fat. I'm assuming the 3 in the 3/4 split is generally for Silver?
The idea is, Gold / Nothing isn't a great opening, but decent card / Gold is a pretty good opening. You can only buy Wedding on the turn you hit $4, and you want two cards in that first shuffle.
I'm starting to think people are swallowing the Gold is OP with Wedding kool-aid. I don't think this event is all that good.Well if it's between one gold and two silvers(no attack or points involved) gold is probably better especially when you want to hit biggest price points and you want to be thin.
But wait, Seprix is that guy who hates Raid.
having 3 dept left over pretty much kills any chance of 5+ turn 3.That's interesting. As per my limited knowledge, I generally want to be drawing my Gold(s) more often than not in order to maximize the amount of money that my hands can make, and so I'd rather keep my deck as thin as possible, filling it with Gold and VP when I feel like my deck can take the fat. I'm assuming the 3 in the 3/4 split is generally for Silver?
The idea is, Gold / Nothing isn't a great opening, but decent card / Gold is a pretty good opening. You can only buy Wedding on the turn you hit $4, and you want two cards in that first shuffle.
having 3 dept left over pretty much kills any chance of 5+ turn 3.That's interesting. As per my limited knowledge, I generally want to be drawing my Gold(s) more often than not in order to maximize the amount of money that my hands can make, and so I'd rather keep my deck as thin as possible, filling it with Gold and VP when I feel like my deck can take the fat. I'm assuming the 3 in the 3/4 split is generally for Silver?
The idea is, Gold / Nothing isn't a great opening, but decent card / Gold is a pretty good opening. You can only buy Wedding on the turn you hit $4, and you want two cards in that first shuffle.
Debt isn't that bad. If you got something like Steward or Masquerade, you'll still have a productive second shuffle and you got to skip Silver, plus a point for later. I'm not saying Wedding is stellar, but I'll open it sometimes.
How many % of the board don't have a two or three cost that is better than silver? Especially if your economy is a Gold?
Fun fact: Travelling Fair and Wedding nearly cancel each other out.
If you travelling fair then wedding, you gain a gold putting it on top of your deck for 6, and use the gold next turn to pay off the debt. The only differences are the VP and one less card next turn.Fun fact: Travelling Fair and Wedding nearly cancel each other out.
Explain?
If you travelling fair then wedding, you gain a gold putting it on top of your deck for 6, and use the gold next turn to pay off the debt. The only differences are the VP and one less card next turn.Fun fact: Travelling Fair and Wedding nearly cancel each other out.
Explain?
Wedding is a great way to gain Gold, when Gold is a good gain. It's important to remember though that Gold is often not the best card for your deck, and the fact that you're paying for it over two turns, and the 1 VP, which are great bonuses, do not automatically make the Gold a better card once it's in your deck.