Dominion Strategy Forum
Dominion => Dominion Articles => Topic started by: glennC on February 06, 2012, 07:01:10 pm
-
It's a nice combination. Sometimes you will end up with chapel + FG + 3 other cards. You usually want to leave a copper and a FG behind so that you can buy another FG, instead of using chapel on all 3 of those other cards.
I believe that this strategy is faster than smithy/big money.
-
By smithy/big money you mean smithy/FG right?
-
I haven't thought about comparing Smithy/FG versus Smithy/Big money. I suspect that Smithy/big money is faster.
I think a viable fool's gold strategy needs some strong trashing... but maybe only Chapel will do.
Another way may be to have trashing, with some type of +buy and some type of draw your entire deck engine. But even then I feel that this card is going to live up to its name.
-
I haven't thought about comparing Smithy/FG versus Smithy/Big money. I suspect that Smithy/big money is faster.
I think a viable fool's gold strategy needs some strong trashing... but maybe only Chapel will do.
Another way may be to have trashing, with some type of +buy and some type of draw your entire deck engine. But even then I feel that this card is going to live up to its name.
iirc FG beats BM, so it wouldn't surprise me that Smithy/FG beats Smithy/BM.
-
I think Chapel+FG is only good if your opponents ignore FGs. Otherwise the turns spent buying chapel and trashing everything don't allow you to get enough FGs.
-
Oh... it does. Solitaire it and try it. You need 3 FG to buy a province. You need several in your deck.
-
Oh... it does. Solitaire it and try it. You need 3 FG to buy a province. You need several in your deck.
If you're solitaire, your opponent clearly won't stop you from getting enough FGs (since you have no opponent).
If you're in 2-player, and use 1 turn to buy chapel and 1-2 to play chapel and trash everything, good luck getting more than 3-4 FGs in your deck.
-
So what is the other player doing? Is he buying Fool's Gold with every buy once he sees you do FG/Chapel?
Is he embargo'ing the Fool's Gold?
Is he buying Woodcutter just to buy up FG before you do?
And what stops the FG player from buying golds if that ever happened?
-
So what is the other player doing? Is he buying Fool's Gold with every buy once he sees you do FG/Chapel?
Is he embargo'ing the Fool's Gold?
Is he buying Woodcutter just to buy up FG before you do?
And what stops the FG player from buying golds if that ever happened?
Yup. Any of those things will beat you. You can buy golds too, but you're basically just running chapel=>BM, which simply isn't good. (Btw, woodcutter(or any +buy)/FG and terminal draw/FG are actually really strong strats that are worth going for a good percentage of the time in 2-player.)
-
I think the only thing possibly competitive really is chappeling down to where you're still buying an FG every turn. In which case steward is just going outclass chapel here, no?
-
I think the only thing possibly competitive really is chappeling down to where you're still buying an FG every turn. In which case steward is just going outclass chapel here, no?
if you are just playing a trash-> BM strategy then yeah i would think steward should easily win out.
-
Yup. Any of those things will beat you. You can buy golds too, but you're basically just running chapel=>BM, which simply isn't good.
Yeah, but then what is your opponent running? If they've taken a sideline into FG just to block you, it doesn't seem likely that their deck is going to be well optimized for anything. Thus the fact that you're slow in an absolute sense doesn't matter much because your opponent is probably slowing down substantially in order to keep you from getting fast. This same phenomenon seems to happen a lot in Minion games. added: Embargo is obviously a completely different story, that's a good stopper.
While I'd agree Chapel isn't the best FG enabler, I do think that it's a pretty workable plan.
-
I ran a quick simulation and chapel/fool's gold seemed reasonable (even with imperfect trashing) and a combination like chapel/market/fools' gold looked good.
-
I ran a quick simulation and chapel/fool's gold seemed reasonable (even with imperfect trashing) and a combination like chapel/market/fools' gold looked good.
Against what?
-
I haven't tried it in simulators, but Chapel/Adventurer/Fool's Gold is pretty cool: http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201202/07/game-20120207-095138-c76596fa.html
-
The problem with all these solitaire games is that you can get 7 FGs no problem. And you can also still pull that off iso, because you catch people unaware of how strong FG is in 2-player. But eventually it will get to the point where enough people catch on. If you end up playing FG vs FG, opening with pure trashing puts you at a disadvantage.
-
The problem with all these solitaire games is that you can get 7 FGs no problem. And you can also still pull that off iso
Maybe you can...
-
I meant that you can still sometimes pull it off depending on whether or not your opponent has played with FG enough to realize how good it is. But I think as time goes on, something like chapel+FG is going to be completely unviable except against new players.
-
http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201202/07/game-20120207-112946-e0994f12.html
Buying only 4 FGs, I played this solitaire game and bought 5 provinces by turn 12.
With an awful enabler like Oasis, it took 25 turns to buy out all 8 provinces. (This would likely be less with adventurer, warehouse, embassy, caravan, laboratory, etc.)
It may also be optimal to buy a gold (or to turn a FG into a gold if opponent buys a province)... since 2 FG + a gold buys a province. I didn't look into that.
I don't understand what you're saying HiveMindEmulator.
-
I'm not saying that you will never win with Chapel+FG. From simulation, it appears that despite being an underdog, Chapel+FG beats pure FG 40% of the time (while losing 56%). So sure you'll get those games where you get lucky and get 5 provinces in 12 turns. But it's unlikely that it's going to actually be the best strategy.
It's not a terrible strategy in the sense that it will always lose, but it's bad in the sense that you can almost always do something that gives you a better chance of winning.
-
As someone else mentioned, what about Steward/Fool's Gold. That seems like it wouldn't lose as much as chapel would, and it could use the +2 card of steward late game.
-
Pure FG and smithy/FG seem slower than chapel/FG in solitaire? Maybe I have done something wrong.
-
I'm not saying that you will never win with Chapel+FG. From simulation, it appears that despite being an underdog, Chapel+FG beats pure FG 40% of the time (while losing 56%). So sure you'll get those games where you get lucky and get 5 provinces in 12 turns. But it's unlikely that it's going to actually be the best strategy.
It's not a terrible strategy in the sense that it will always lose, but it's bad in the sense that you can almost always do something that gives you a better chance of winning.
Scripts, please?
I'm guessing it's mis-playing the chapel.
-
Yeah, I'd think that if you're going against another FG gaining strategy you absolutely want to be gaining FGs even at the cost of less than maximal Chapeling. If you end up doing worse than just raw FG+Big Money that way, I'd guess it's because you don't get enough speedup to make up for the missing Estate points. I'd be really surprised if that were true, but it also wouldn't be astonishing if you didn't get huge gains. added: This is presumably the crux of WW's argument that you expect Steward to be straight better in a realistic environment - even without the eventual benefits Steward offers, you're unlikely to be able to use your Chapel as anything more than a glorified Steward anyway.
-
<player name="Fool's Gold"
author="HiveMindEmulator"
description="Simplest FG bot I can think of.">
<type name="Generated"/>
<type name="Province"/>
<type name="BigMoney"/>
<type name="TwoPlayer"/>
<type name="SingleCard"/>
<type name="Bot"/>
<type name="UserCreated"/>
<buy name="Fool$s_Gold"/>
<buy name="Province"/>
<buy name="Duchy">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInSupply" attribute="Province"/>
<operator type="smallerOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="4.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Estate">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInSupply" attribute="Province"/>
<operator type="smallerOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="2.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Gold"/>
<buy name="Silver"/>
</player>
<player name="Chapel+FG"
author="HiveMindEmulator"
description="">
<type name="Generated"/>
<type name="Province"/>
<type name="BigMoney"/>
<type name="TwoPlayer"/>
<type name="SingleCard"/>
<type name="Bot"/>
<type name="UserCreated"/>
<buy name="Chapel">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInDeck" attribute="Chapel"/>
<operator type="smallerThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="1.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Fool$s_Gold"/>
<buy name="Province"/>
<buy name="Duchy">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInSupply" attribute="Province"/>
<operator type="smallerOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="4.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Estate">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInSupply" attribute="Province"/>
<operator type="smallerOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="2.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Gold"/>
<buy name="Silver"/>
</player>
FG wins ~53-42 The chapel is misplayed, but I don't think that will put it over the top. Someone can try it with rspeer's simulator...
EDIT: Substitute steward for Chapel and it actually wins 55-40, so there is some hope. The steward looks like it's played pretty ok.
-
I think the only thing possibly competitive really is chappeling down to where you're still buying an FG every turn. In which case steward is just going outclass chapel here, no?
if you are just playing a trash-> BM strategy then yeah i would think steward should easily win out.
I think the more difficult question is between Steward and Salvager. Salvager is slower at thinning your deck, but would probably be faster at gaining FGs, given the extra buy. The only times Salvager would miss double FG buys would be S/c/e/e/e (in which case steward would make you choose between FG and trashing) or S/c/c/c/c. After the FGs are gone, Salvager's +buy is less useful than Steward's +cards or +coin, but if you get out to an early lead, Salvager's ability to essentially trash your opponent's Province before he can buy it is huge.
-
<player name="Chapel+FG"
author="HiveMindEmulator"
description="">
<type name="Generated"/>
<type name="Province"/>
<type name="BigMoney"/>
<type name="TwoPlayer"/>
<type name="SingleCard"/>
<type name="Bot"/>
<type name="UserCreated"/>
<buy name="Chapel">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInDeck" attribute="Chapel"/>
<operator type="smallerThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="1.0"/>
</condition>
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInSupply" attribute="Fool$s_Gold"/>
<operator type="equalTo" />
<right type="constant" attribute="10.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Fool$s_Gold"/>
<buy name="Province"/>
<buy name="Duchy">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInSupply" attribute="Province"/>
<operator type="smallerOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="4.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Estate">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInSupply" attribute="Province"/>
<operator type="smallerOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="2.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Gold"/>
<buy name="Silver"/>
</player>
A little fix so it only plays chapel from first position. This beats pure FG 48-45. The reason is that as first player, you can still get an OK FG split, but as second player, you can't.
-
A little fix so it only plays chapel from first position. This beats pure FG 48-45. The reason is that as first player, you can still get an OK FG split, but as second player, you can't.
Is this predicated on the assumption that 1st player is going FG/FG from the getgo? A lot of the discussion is centered on the idea that FG is being picked up by the opponent as a blocker. If that's the case, then I don't see why second player should be getting hosed here, because they will often come out of the first shuffle with either a 1 FG edge or FG parity, not behind by 1 FG.
-
Nevermind I think HiveMindEmulator is right.
-
Is this predicated on the assumption that 1st player is going FG/FG from the getgo? A lot of the discussion is centered on the idea that FG is being picked up by the opponent as a blocker. If that's the case, then I don't see why second player should be getting hosed here, because they will often come out of the first shuffle with either a 1 FG edge or FG parity, not behind by 1 FG.
Yeah, so the script doesn't buy chapel if a fool's gold is already gone, which is probably a reasonable thing to do. Pure FG is not really a normal strategy, so the precise results of the sim don't matter too much. I think the main point is that getting trashing at the expense of losing the FG split is not worth it. If you can still get an even split, going for a trasher may be the right thing to do.
-
FYI, the simulator is playing chapel/FG roughly how I'd expect I would. At least, on chapelling things away. On trashing FG for gold, I'm unsure. (This is all based on some 'sample game' spot checks). It's pretty darn close either way with these sims though, but I'm guessing the straight BM/FG bot has slightly more room for improvement.
All of this makes me think that Steward/FG is somewhat better than straight FG as well. But much harder to sim.
-
The fools gold/chapel bot needs a couple of improvements. It should buy provinces when it has half the fool's gold or the supply is empty. It shouldn't buy silver if it has sufficient fool's gold. With those in place it should be comparable to smithy + basic treasures as a deck (which I described before as reasonable). I don't see why it can't be improved significantly by adding other kingdom cards.
It suffers when compared to other simulated strategies that buy up a majority of fool's gold. In fact a smithy + fool's gold deck could be stronger if you buy the fool's gold first then the smithy afterwards, and it's a better deck than just fool's gold + chapel. On that basis the chapel doesn't seem as good an enabler for fool's gold as many +buy and drawing cards.
-
Testing FG/Steward versus Smithy:
It seems optimal to buy provinces once you have 4 FGs on the deck.
It makes sense to buy FG over gold and silver.
---
My thoughts on chapel: I guess the problem with chapel is that you can't go crashing trashing in the beginning because you need to buy FG. So Steward is almost just as good at trashing. Later on, the problem with a really small deck is that it gets diluted very quickly once you start greening. In the later game Steward is not a dead card like Chapel is.
-
<player name="Steward+FG"
author="IamN00b"
description="">
<type name="TwoPlayer"/>
<type name="Province"/>
<type name="SingleCard"/>
<type name="Bot"/>
<type name="UserCreated"/>
<type name="Generated"/>
<type name="BigMoney"/>
<buy name="Steward">
<condition>
<left type="countTurns"/>
<operator type="equalTo" />
<right type="constant" attribute="1.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Province">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInDeck" attribute="Fool$s_Gold"/>
<operator type="greaterOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="4.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Duchy">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInSupply" attribute="Province"/>
<operator type="smallerOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="4.0"/>
</condition>
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInDeck" attribute="Fool$s_Gold"/>
<operator type="greaterOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="4.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Estate">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInSupply" attribute="Province"/>
<operator type="smallerOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="2.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Fool$s_Gold"/>
<buy name="Gold"/>
<buy name="Silver"/>
</player>
Steward + FG as above beats "Smithy" (in the simulator)
54% win - 42% lose
<player name="Smithy+FG"
author="IamN00b"
description="">
<type name="TwoPlayer"/>
<type name="Province"/>
<type name="SingleCard"/>
<type name="Bot"/>
<type name="UserCreated"/>
<type name="Generated"/>
<type name="BigMoney"/>
<buy name="Smithy">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInDeck" attribute="Smithy"/>
<operator type="equalTo" />
<right type="constant" attribute="0.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Province">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInDeck" attribute="Fool$s_Gold"/>
<operator type="greaterOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="4.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Duchy">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInSupply" attribute="Province"/>
<operator type="smallerOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="4.0"/>
</condition>
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInDeck" attribute="Fool$s_Gold"/>
<operator type="greaterOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="4.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Estate">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInSupply" attribute="Province"/>
<operator type="smallerOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="2.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Fool$s_Gold"/>
<buy name="Gold"/>
<buy name="Silver"/>
</player>
Smithy/FG versus Smithy
51% win 41% lose
Smithy/FG versus Steward/FG
41%win 55% lose
I suppose that the trashing helps Steward hit FG collisions more often.
<player name="Woodcutter+FG"
author="IamN00b"
description="">
<type name="TwoPlayer"/>
<type name="Province"/>
<type name="SingleCard"/>
<type name="Bot"/>
<type name="UserCreated"/>
<type name="Generated"/>
<type name="BigMoney"/>
<buy name="Woodcutter">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInDeck" attribute="Woodcutter"/>
<operator type="equalTo" />
<right type="constant" attribute="0.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Province">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInDeck" attribute="Fool$s_Gold"/>
<operator type="greaterOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="4.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Duchy">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInSupply" attribute="Province"/>
<operator type="smallerOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="4.0"/>
</condition>
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInDeck" attribute="Fool$s_Gold"/>
<operator type="greaterOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="4.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Estate">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInSupply" attribute="Province"/>
<operator type="smallerOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="2.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Fool$s_Gold"/>
<buy name="Gold"/>
<buy name="Silver"/>
</player>
Woodcutter/FG versus Steward/FG
57% win 41% lose
<player name="Embassy+FG"
author="IamN00b"
description="">
<type name="TwoPlayer"/>
<type name="Province"/>
<type name="SingleCard"/>
<type name="Bot"/>
<type name="UserCreated"/>
<type name="BigMoney"/>
<type name="Generated"/>
<buy name="Embassy">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInDeck" attribute="Embassy"/>
<operator type="smallerOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="0.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Province">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInDeck" attribute="Fool$s_Gold"/>
<operator type="greaterOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="1.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Duchy">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInSupply" attribute="Province"/>
<operator type="smallerOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="4.0"/>
</condition>
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInDeck" attribute="Fool$s_Gold"/>
<operator type="greaterOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="4.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Estate">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInSupply" attribute="Province"/>
<operator type="smallerOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="2.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Fool$s_Gold"/>
<buy name="Gold"/>
<buy name="Silver"/>
</player>
Woodcutter+FG (buying provinces when FG in deck >= 4) versus Embassy+FG (buying provinces when FG in deck >= 1)
42% win 54% lose
<player name="Woodcutter+FG"
author="IamN00b"
description="">
<type name="TwoPlayer"/>
<type name="Province"/>
<type name="SingleCard"/>
<type name="Bot"/>
<type name="UserCreated"/>
<type name="Generated"/>
<type name="BigMoney"/>
<buy name="Woodcutter">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInDeck" attribute="Woodcutter"/>
<operator type="equalTo" />
<right type="constant" attribute="0.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Province">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInDeck" attribute="Fool$s_Gold"/>
<operator type="greaterOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="0.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Duchy">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInSupply" attribute="Province"/>
<operator type="smallerOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="4.0"/>
</condition>
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInDeck" attribute="Fool$s_Gold"/>
<operator type="greaterOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="4.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Estate">
<condition>
<left type="countCardsInSupply" attribute="Province"/>
<operator type="smallerOrEqualThan" />
<right type="constant" attribute="2.0"/>
</condition>
</buy>
<buy name="Fool$s_Gold"/>
<buy name="Gold"/>
<buy name="Silver"/>
</player>
Trying to tweak the rules a little
Woodcutter+FG (buying provinces when FG in deck >= 0) versus Embassy+FG (buying provinces when FG in deck >= 1)
45% win 50% lose
-
Keep in mind that the simulator is misplaying steward...
-
true true. baron seems similar to woodcutter with FG?.
-
Anecdotally, I've found that FG/nomad camp/FG-FG seems to work quite well. In fact, I'm not entirely convinced you need much trashing at all if you can buy FGs fast enough...
How does FG/nomad camp compare to FG/Chapel?
Likewise Spice Merchant / FG seems to be theoretically strong to me too: Lots of opportunities to buy 2 FGs at once in the early game, and copper trashing at the same time.
-
I think it goes something like nomad camp > courtyard > remodel > envoy > smithy > woodcutter > spice merchant > steward > oracle > herbalist > worker's village/pawn/hamlet > chapel.
-
I think it goes something like nomad camp > courtyard > remodel > envoy > smithy > woodcutter > spice merchant > steward > oracle > herbalist > worker's village/pawn/hamlet > chapel.
No place for Salvager?! Am I the only one who thinks a Salvager/FG opening would be pretty strong?
-
Oh, I forgot salvager... It should probably be just below spice merchant I think...
The problem is that if you don't get it with an estate, you can't really take advantage of the +buy. Plus since your money cards are cheap, salvage isn't as good later in the game.
-
I think it goes something like nomad camp > courtyard > remodel > envoy > smithy > woodcutter > spice merchant > steward > oracle > herbalist > worker's village/pawn/hamlet > chapel.
I have a hard time believing this. Courtyard you obviously want after the FG race, at which point you should be buying provinces. I would guess Smithy>Envoy, probably, because the +1 card is mitigated by the fact that the variance between cards is much larger in a FG deck (veto silver/gold>copper for 1/2 coin difference, FG>copper for 3 coin difference.
And I would guess herbalist to play better than Woodcutter/Oracle. Topdeck fools gold is actually pretty strong..
-
I think it goes something like nomad camp > courtyard > remodel > envoy > smithy > woodcutter > spice merchant > steward > oracle > herbalist > worker's village/pawn/hamlet > chapel.
I have a hard time believing this. Courtyard you obviously want after the FG race, at which point you should be buying provinces. I would guess Smithy>Envoy, probably, because the +1 card is mitigated by the fact that the variance between cards is much larger in a FG deck (veto silver/gold>copper for 1/2 coin difference, FG>copper for 3 coin difference.
And I would guess herbalist to play better than Woodcutter/Oracle. Topdeck fools gold is actually pretty strong..
So this is not scientific at all. It's just the order I would prioritize if I were to play a game right now. But I will offer some justification.
Courtyard might even be better than nomad camp depending on how likely you're going to be able to use the buy later (i.e. with stables, nomad is better, but if there are no other helper cards, Courtyard is probably better. The play strategy of courtyard I think is just to open CY/CY, add about 3 FGs and then play CY+money. The CYs help line up the FGs so you don't need a lot. It's a minor improvement to the ridiculously fast CY+money strat and doesn't rely on mass FGs. Nomad into CY isn't really going to be faster, since you can't use the +buy on the draw turns without a village.
Envoy/smithy is a tossup. I had no really strong reasoning there. I mean, they don't see your hand, so they might end up blocking FG when it's your only one, making their "veto" less effective. It could go either way based on luck, but I put envoy ahead because regular envoy+money > smithy+money. Again, this is in the context of just getting a big draw card and like 3 FGs, not trying to race to half of them.
Herbalist's top-decking ability is really nice, but it suffers from not providing enough money. [herb, FG, FG, copper, estate] doesn't buy a province. But you definitely could be right. I wouldn't be all too surprised if it does end up being better, particularly if you have some sort of lab around so you don't get stuck on these kinds of 5-card hands too much.
-
I think it goes something like nomad camp > courtyard > remodel > envoy > smithy > woodcutter > spice merchant > steward > oracle > herbalist > worker's village/pawn/hamlet > chapel.
I have a hard time believing this. Courtyard you obviously want after the FG race, at which point you should be buying provinces. I would guess Smithy>Envoy, probably, because the +1 card is mitigated by the fact that the variance between cards is much larger in a FG deck (veto silver/gold>copper for 1/2 coin difference, FG>copper for 3 coin difference.
And I would guess herbalist to play better than Woodcutter/Oracle. Topdeck fools gold is actually pretty strong..
So this is not scientific at all. It's just the order I would prioritize if I were to play a game right now. But I will offer some justification.
Courtyard might even be better than nomad camp depending on how likely you're going to be able to use the buy later (i.e. with stables, nomad is better, but if there are no other helper cards, Courtyard is probably better. The play strategy of courtyard I think is just to open CY/CY, add about 3 FGs and then play CY+money. The CYs help line up the FGs so you don't need a lot. It's a minor improvement to the ridiculously fast CY+money strat and doesn't rely on mass FGs. Nomad into CY isn't really going to be faster, since you can't use the +buy on the draw turns without a village.
Envoy/smithy is a tossup. I had no really strong reasoning there. I mean, they don't see your hand, so they might end up blocking FG when it's your only one, making their "veto" less effective. It could go either way based on luck, but I put envoy ahead because regular envoy+money > smithy+money. Again, this is in the context of just getting a big draw card and like 3 FGs, not trying to race to half of them.
Herbalist's top-decking ability is really nice, but it suffers from not providing enough money. [herb, FG, FG, copper, estate] doesn't buy a province. But you definitely could be right. I wouldn't be all too surprised if it does end up being better, particularly if you have some sort of lab around so you don't get stuck on these kinds of 5-card hands too much.
Funny how I argue that Herbalist's topdeck is so great and than completely ignore that same aspect when thinking about courtyard. You're probably right on courtyard.
-
Perhaps Mandarin might actually be useful in a FG deck. With Mandarin you only need 2 FG's to get a province and the topdecking would be useful to save extra FGs for next turn.
-
Oh, the other one I forgot is Horse Traders. HT+2FGs is also a province, and it plays just like woodcutter in the early game.
-
Margrave has interesting interactions with FG...
-
^Of course there are 5's that beat everything on this list: Mint, Wharf, Margrave, Council Room. Market, Festival and Mine would probably be below Nomad Camp.
Oh, also Bridge is really really good. Up there with Remodel, because while it's just like woodcutter early, the cost reduction aspect makes it easier to use the +buy for extra VPs later.
-
Heh, just played an interesting FG game:
Apothecary, Baron, Fool's Gold, Forge, Lookout, Mine, Possession, Potion, Saboteur, Treasure Map, Vineyard
oppo opened Baron. I thought it over and decided that hey, if he gets 10 FG's, my Possessions will really rock. So I duly opened with the dreaded Potion/Copper...
Opponent spent the next few turns getting the FG's, as expected, while I bought apothecaries and possessions. Turns out, there's a very interesting mechanic with Possession and FG: if on a Possessed hand I pick up 4 FG's, I can play 3 of them, buy a Province, and since I'm now the one gaining the Province, I can "trash" the last FG for a Gold...
I probably significantly misplayed after the opening, but man, is it ever fun to possess a 10 FG deck!
-
Ouch, and apothecary makes it actually viable to get and cycle Possessions quickly enough. Buy up apothecaries, get Possessions with them and copper...
-
Just to satisfy my curiosity, would someone simulate Ambassador+Fool's Gold vs the above options for me?
-
The problem with ambassador+FG is that although it will probably beat the lower-end options here, it will very likely lose to ambassador=>engine. I think most of these FG strategies are going to be weak against any kind of junk-giving attack.
-
My most spectacular win so far has been with chapel + fool's gold. I only needed 3 copies of FG to win. In turns 3 to 5 I had good hands and was able to strip while simultaneously buy the next two FG. Turn 6, 7 and 8 I bought 3 provinces. This was in a 4 player game, so by that point I already had a very comfortable lead.
However, I have to add that there was a great cycle card available for $5 (so exactly possible to buy with 2 FG): Embassy. I bought one in turn 9 and was able to buy more provinces in the following turns. Without that card I would have run out of steam. And of course a 4 player MP game is ideal for a province rush in any case. Still, I think the combo has potential.
edit: things happened one turn later, sorry.. first province was turn 7. I had no game record, needed to reconstruct the game on top of my head.
-
(http://i.qkme.me/3uzxlh.jpg)
-
So, would that be a necropolice card?
-
Yes, yes, I know it was a very old post. But still relevant, right? I could have started a new thread with a link to this one.
I also posted this because the wiki specifically says that fool's gold "dislikes chapel". Which I think depends very much on the rest of the cards..
http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Fool%27s_Gold#What_doesn.27t_Fool.27s_Gold_like.3F (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Fool%27s_Gold#What_doesn.27t_Fool.27s_Gold_like.3F)
-
No worries, we don't really mind old post replies around here. I just thought it would be funny :)
-
My most spectacular win so far has been with chapel + fool's gold. I only needed 3 copies of FG to win. In turns 3 to 5 I had good hands and was able to strip while simultaneously buy the next two FG. Turn 6, 7 and 8 I bought 3 provinces. This was in a 4 player game, so by that point I already had a very comfortable lead.
However, I have to add that there was a great cycle card available for $5 (so exactly possible to buy with 2 FG): Embassy. I bought one in turn 9 and was able to buy more provinces in the following turns. Without that card I would have run out of steam. And of course a 4 player MP game is ideal for a province rush in any case. Still, I think the combo has potential.
edit: things happened one turn later, sorry.. first province was turn 7. I had no game record, needed to reconstruct the game on top of my head.
Most of the analysis on this forum is for two player games. A four player game certainly does change things, as it is much more difficult to achieve a critical mass of Fool's Gold. If at least one of the four players decides to ignore Fool's Gold, then you would expect to get 3 or 4 of them. More likely 3 if your opponents don't take Chapel. But Chapelling and having Embassy to gather your Fool's Golds may be able to get them together. Adventurer might even have been nice in a deck like this once the Copper is gone.
-
Chapel isn't good for Fool's Gold in mirrors because you are trying to win the FG split, and chapel slows that down - you have to spend a turn buying it, and then you are not trashing much with it (which defeats the point) or spending more turns trashing - all of which could have been FG. However, in non-mirrors, or to be more specific, when your opponent is not going for FG (say they're going for a treasureless deck - this is reasonably likely considering the presence of chapel on board), then chapel is really good for fool's gold, because it helps them connect a lot. So, you can't just make such a broad statement as 'fool's gold "dislikes chapel"', because it's only situationally true.