Dominion Strategy Forum
Dominion => Dominion Articles => Topic started by: WanderingWinder on June 15, 2011, 12:48:07 am
-
While playing a game with theory this morning, he remarked that he needed to do the math on Horse Traders to see whether HT/Silver or S/S was better at getting to $6. I felt I did too, so when I had some time tonight, using his basic opening probabilities (http://dominionstrategy.com/2011/03/09/basic-opening-probabilities/), I did. So here it is, with Silver/Silver first and Horse Traders/Silver to follow.
Warning: Huge Collimated lists follow:
Silver/Silver
Probability Hands Coin Coin
15.2% ccces|ccees $5 $4
10.1% ccces|ccces $5 $5
10.1% cccee|ccces $3 $5
7.6% cccce|ccess $4 $6
7.6% cccee|ccess $3 $6
7.6% ccccs|ccees $6 $4
7.6% cccce|ccees $4 $4
5.1% cccce|ccces $4 $5
5.0% cccee|cccss $3 $7
3.8% cccce|ceess $4 $5
2.5% ccccs|cceee $6 $2
2.5% ccccs|ceees $6 $3
2.5% ccccs|cccee $6 $3
2.5% cccss|cceee $7 $2
2.5% ccccs|ccces $6 $5
1.5% ccccc|ccees $5 $4
1.5% ccccc|ceess $5 $5
1.3% cccce|cccee $4 $3
1.2% cccce|cccss $4 $7
1.0% ccccc|ceees $5 $3
0.7% ccccc|ccess $5 $6
0.3% ccccc|cceee $5 $2
0.2% ccccc|eeess $5 $4
Drawing $7 8.8%
At least one $6 or $7 42.4%
Not drawing $5 on either turn 8.8%
Drawing $5 or better twice 14.9%
Average total money $9.17
Horse Traders/Silver
Probability Hands Coin Coin
10.1% ccceh|ccces $5 $5
7.6% ccces|cceeh $5 $5
7.6% ccceh|ccees $5 $4
7.6% cccce|ccehs $4 $6
7.6% cccee|ccehs $3 $6
5.05% cccee|ccces $3 $5
5.05% cccee|ccceh $3 $5
5.0% cccee|ccchs $3 $6
3.8% ccccs|cceeh $6 $5
3.8% cccch|ccees $5 $4
3.8% cccce|cceeh $4 $5
3.8% cccce|ccees $4 $4
3.8% cccce|ceehs $4 $6
2.55% cccce|ccces $4 $5
2.55% cccce|ccceh $4 $5
2.5% ccchs|cceee $6 $2
1.5% ccccc|ceehs $5 $6
1.3% cccce|cccee $4 $3
1.25% cccch|cceee $5 $2
1.25% ccccs|cceee $6 $2
1.25% cccch|ceees $5 $3
1.25% ccccs|ceeeh $6 $4
1.25% ccccs|cccee $6 $3
1.25% cccch|cccee $5 $3
1.25% cccch|ccces $5 $5
1.25% ccccs|ccceh $6 $5
1.2% cccce|ccchs $4 $6
.75% ccccc|ccees $5 $4
.75% ccccc|cceeh $5 $5
0.7% ccccc|ccehs $5 $6
0.5% ccccc|ceees $5 $3
0.5% ccccc|ceeeh $5 $4
0.3% ccccc|cceee $5 $2
0.2% ccccc|eeehs $5 $5
Drawing $7 0%
At least one $6 or $7 38.7%
Not drawing $5 on either turn 5.1%
Drawing $5 or better twice 27.2%
Average total money $9.10
What does this mean? Well, to answer theory's question, Silver/Silver is a bit better at pulling a $6 out of the hat. It also produces a little more money in turns 3-4 overall. But if you want to consistently hit $5, Horse Traders is your best bet. Of course all of this assumes your opponent isn't attacking you, which will favor Horse Traders, and Horse Traders gives you an extra buy (although this isn't such a big deal early game so often). Silver's going to shine midgame while Horse Traders' value will start picking up again late, for 2 reasons - it gives the extra buy, and your deck has more green in it. Of course neither are probably so great in a big engine, HT is a terminal, so you need to watch out for that, but it gains a lot of value from attacks being on the board - particularly the big $5 attacks as well as your militia/goons attack. HT/Silver with a village follow-up later on can be really powerful on a Witch or Mountebank board. In a straight-up big money deck though, I'd be surprised plain ole silver doesn't outperform.
-
1) You mention horse trader is stronger against attacks, but I think it is only stronger against cursing attacks. I would certainly rather a silver than a horse trader against a militia for example.
What? Why?
Against a Cursing attack Horse Traders gives you 1 bonus card: in exchange for taking a Curse you get a 6-card hand. A bonus card is cold comfort for taking a curse (which is going to cost you a useful card in hand for each shuffle from now on). Against a Militia-type attack HT gives you 2 bonus cards, generally making you better-off than if the attack had not been played at all (replace the worst card in your hand with the next card in your deck). Against Minion it gives you an option between taking a free bonus card with no penalty whatsoever, or dumping your whole hand for 4 new cards if you think that would be better.
-
On some boards you could use the +buy early. With Hamlet and Menagerie I would probably open with HT, planning on a Hamlet/Menagerie engine (although I can't really think on any other case).
-
particularly the big $5 attacks as well as your militia/goons attack. HT/Silver with a village follow-up later on can be really powerful on a Witch or Mountebank board. In a straight-up big money deck though, I'd be surprised plain ole silver doesn't outperform.
-
particularly the big $5 attacks as well as your militia/goons attack. HT/Silver with a village follow-up later on can be really powerful on a Witch or Mountebank board. In a straight-up big money deck though, I'd be surprised plain ole silver doesn't outperform.
What a necro. :P
When you say "straight-up big money", do you mean pure big money? That is virtually never the right strategy.
If you mean BM+X, it depends on the X. HT is terminal, so it could get in the way of terminal draw. HT still has upsides though -- it gives a nice bonus against opponents' attacks, and it gives +Buy which can be handy at times.
But there's a good chance there's an engine on the board and HT helps the engine by providing +Buy and hitting $5 consistently for key cards, so I wouldn't count on BM+X being dominant too often.
-
^I think it was an accident. His post is just a copy of the last 2.5 sentences of the OP...
-
^I think it was an accident. His post is just a copy of the last 2.5 sentences of the OP...
Huh, so it is. How does that kind of accident happen though? :o
-
It is usually spam when that type of thing happens... Generally in the signature, but there are no links there, so I don't know. Maybe links aren't allowed in signatures on new accounts?
-
The pattern I've seen on other sites is (1) Post hopefully innocuous text, often by copying from another post in the same thread or just saying something extremely generic like "I agree, thanks for the information", (2) Wait until the auto-approval triggers based on post count or date or whatever, (3) add a signature with spam link.
-
The pattern I've seen on other sites is (1) Post hopefully innocuous text, often by copying from another post in the same thread or just saying something extremely generic like "I agree, thanks for the information", (2) Wait until the auto-approval triggers based on post count or date or whatever, (3) add a signature with spam link.
This is interesting to know. Thanks for the information.
-
Yeah I was confused about that too. But most of the spam accounts sign up with a nonsensical email address and this had a real-looking email address. So...I dunno. I'll keep watching it.
-
Yeah I was confused about that too. But most of the spam accounts sign up with a nonsensical email address and this had a real-looking email address. So...I dunno. I'll keep watching it.
A really simple trick you can do is, for accounts with no posts, only allow posts in one subforum (then in the instructions for new accounts, say to put your first post in that forum). Then at 1 post let them post anywhere. Automated accounts will fail to post and so much for them.
-
Yeah I was confused about that too. But most of the spam accounts sign up with a nonsensical email address and this had a real-looking email address. So...I dunno. I'll keep watching it.
A really simple trick you can do is, for accounts with no posts, only allow posts in one subforum (then in the instructions for new accounts, say to put your first post in that forum). Then at 1 post let them post anywhere. Automated accounts will fail to post and so much for them.
Introductions!