Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Epoch

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17
376
Game Reports / Re: Chapel / Bishop
« on: August 22, 2011, 03:14:17 pm »
The reason is that similar to opening Chapel/Moneylender. You have the chance to trash on turn 3 AND turn 4, and often (in the absence of good $2 cards, which you don't want with this strategy anyway) your silver is dead as well if you draw it with Chapel.

With Moneylender, though, if you don't draw it dead, it greatly improves the buying power of your deck -- almost guaranteed $4, quite likely $5.  While Bishop: 1.  Doesn't give you any such buying power (at best, Bishop + Estate improves the buying power of your hand by $1), and 2.  Of course, allows your opponent to trash as well, at probably the time they're most likely to be able to take advantage of it.  I think that negates the one additional card trashing.

You need to buy those Silvers at some point (and a Gold, which is somewhat difficult with this deck).  I think it's best to give up one card trashed for better buys and less opponent-trashing.

377
Game Reports / Re: Chapel / Bishop
« on: August 22, 2011, 01:36:05 pm »
My heuristic is that opening Bishop is almost invariably a bad idea, and it's a particularly bad idea if you're going to have it clash with another terminal, and you're also trying to thin your deck rapidly (increasing the possibility of conflicts).

Is there a reason to believe that Bishop/Chapel is a better opening than Silver/Chapel, with the intent to buy Bishop during the second or third pass through the deck, once, Chapel has cleaned out a lot of the cruft and your buying power is mostly silvers instead of mostly coppers?

378
Dominion General Discussion / Re: King's Court purchase timing
« on: August 18, 2011, 04:58:56 pm »
Yes, but getting back to the point of the thread, I think if you get a lucky 7 early (say open silver/$2 action and get a turn 3 hand with $7), I think you still buy the KC here, don't you?

I probably don't.  I mean, what's the $2 action?  There's a limited number of cards that can get you $7 on turn 3/4, and most of them are either unspectacular with KC or need supporting cards with it.  Smithy, for example, is great as long as you have an Action after playing KC/Smithy, but pretty bad otherwise.  Swindler and Bridge are exceptions, Pawn may be as well (though Pawn is a very rare $7 hand).

And remember that your other turn (say, turn 4) is likely to be pretty bad, with lots of Estates and Coppers and nothing else in the mix.  You're pretty likely to end up with $2 or $3 on the turn you don't buy KC, so it may only have one action to pair with on the next shuffle.

If there's something like a Lab on the table, I think I'd rather buy it with the $7 and trust that it will itself bootstrap me into getting KC, rather than get the KC first and end up with a $4 hand when I draw KC dead.

If the table is such that my eventual deck doesn't want a single Gold in it, and my optimal KC targets are cards that don't increase buying power (like, I'm hoping to set up KC/Saboteur), I might go for an early KC.

379
Dominion General Discussion / Re: King's Court purchase timing
« on: August 18, 2011, 04:10:07 pm »
A KC'd Warehouse really isn't bad at all, it's just not so absolutely spectacular.

Ooops, I wasn't thinking through how KC-Warehouse worked.  I was thinking that each iteration of the Warehouse diminished your hand-size, like playing 3 Warehouses in a row would.  Obviously, KC-Warehouse is better than that.

Still, a "really good" 3 card hand isn't great in my book.  Though of course if you draw KC-Warehouse-somethingx3, you can always play the Warehouse first and hope to come up with a better target for KC, so...  fair enough.

Quote
This is not to suggest that sometimes KC isn't the most valuable card on the board -- of course it is! -- but you shouldn't assume that it will be a power card without some serious consideration of what you want to KC, and what the result will be.
But it isn't! Really, quite often platinum, Goons, Grand Market, Possession, even like Hoard or Gold or Golem or Vineyards or Duke can all be better, as well as province and Colony.

I think that you're misinterpreting me.  I mean, "Of course there exist boards in which KC is the power card on the board," not, "Of course KC is always the power card on the board."

380
Dominion General Discussion / Re: King's Court purchase timing
« on: August 18, 2011, 03:30:16 pm »
Yeah, I think that the enormous power of KC on the right board can sometimes blind people to when it's not very good at all.  Remember that it's a very expensive Action that needs to be drawn with other Actions, and that there are plenty of Actions which aren't spectacular, KC'd.  A KC'd Village is more Actions that you need unless you're playing Diadem and a net +1 Card -- more than likely worse than Village-Smithy.  A KC'd Militia is only $1 better than Militia/Gold, and obviously you can't draw Gold dead.  A KC'd Warehouse is, of course, terrible.  Trashing cards often don't want to be KC'd.

This is not to suggest that sometimes KC isn't the most valuable card on the board -- of course it is! -- but you shouldn't assume that it will be a power card without some serious consideration of what you want to KC, and what the result will be.

To answer the actual question:  I err on the side of buying KC late.  It's unlikely to run out -- if someone really needs more than 5 KCs to win the game, something is deeply wrong with their deck, so you shouldn't really see the pile ever get depleted unless the game is all-but-formally over.  Drawing it dead is more of a waste than drawing any other action dead, since you could've had a Gold or other high-value card in its place.  And if you're aiming for a KC in your deck, your deck ought to fairly quickly be able to produce $7 turns, so you shouldn't miss more than a shuffle or (if your first $7 comes very early) two.

381
Game Reports / Re: Dear My Opponent: I am Sorry
« on: August 18, 2011, 02:14:56 pm »
Here's another one I have a lot to be sorry for.

Double tactician? Check.
King's courting bridges? Check.
Swindling his bridge into a curse? Check
Remaking coppers into golds and golds into provinces? Check and check.

Jonts20 doesn't mention:

Winning the game 70 to -2.
That King's courting bridges, swindling his opponent's bridge into a curse, and remaking Golds into Provinces all happened on the same turn (the turn where he gained two Provinces, bought 4 more Provinces, a Colony, and 4 Duchies.  Ouch).

382
Game Reports / Divergent Strategies
« on: August 17, 2011, 07:53:07 pm »
Hot off the presses, a game with some, to put it lightly, divergent strategies:

http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201108/17/game-20110817-164947-bbd3c398.html

cards in supply: Bishop, Chancellor, Hoard, Hunting Party, King's Court, Quarry, Royal Seal, Talisman, Venture, and Wishing Well

We both started 5/2 and went Hunting Party/nothing, which you might think would indicate a mirror match.  But here are our ending decks:

#1 Epoch: 71 points (8 Provinces, 4 Duchies, 8 ▼, and 3 Estates); 24 turns
       opening: Hunting Party / nothing
       [39 cards] 3 Hoards, 2 Hunting Parties, 1 Bishop, 1 Chancellor, 1 King's Court, 1 Venture, 1 Wishing Well, 5 Coppers, 9 Golds, 3 Estates, 4 Duchies, 8 Provinces

#2 the wanky shit demon: 59 points (49 ▼, 2 Duchies, and 4 Estates); 24 turns
                      opening: nothing / Hunting Party
                      [15 cards] 4 King's Courts, 3 Hunting Parties, 1 Bishop, 1 Copper, 4 Estates, 2 Duchies


He did a KC/Bishop trashing strategy, where I went essentially BM enabled by Hoard.

383
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Any Gossip About Fall 2011 Expansion?
« on: August 16, 2011, 09:44:09 pm »
Playing with the concept of a small, poor, sentinel  border estate:

Frontier
Victory - Reaction
1 VP
When your opponent plays an attack card, you may reveal this from your hand.  If you do so, set aside this card.  At the beginning of your next turn, for every card set aside this way, +1 Card +$1, and then discard the card set aside.

Wording probably needs work.

384
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Any Gossip About Fall 2011 Expansion?
« on: August 16, 2011, 06:43:28 pm »
Sure, I don't disagree, I just don't think the $6 2 VP version will get bought very often at all either, especially in a way that's different from just buying a duchy basically at all. I just don't think I'd print such a card, given what else is established.

I can agree with that.  Is there a way to jazz it up a little, make it more worthwhile?  "$6.  5 VP.  WYGTC, all players, including you, gain a Curse."

It creates a 4 point VP swing instead of a 3, slows you down more, slows your opponents down, but is a good buy rather than a bad one when Curses are depleted.

385
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Any Gossip About Fall 2011 Expansion?
« on: August 16, 2011, 06:26:20 pm »
Except that the curses may be out when you turn to green, which is really when you want to be buying duchies.

Sure.  But, then... just don't buy it.  I mean, you won't buy it when Curses are depleted if it costs $5, either, so why not make it cost $6 for when it's actually superior to Duchies, and in the (rarer) cases where it is inferior to Duchies, let people buy Duchies.

If you made it worth 1 VP, it's not that appealing - I mean, it dilutes your deck just as much as it does theirs, plus you wasted a primo $5 buy, all for a 2VP swing? Heck, I don't think I'd even want it too often at $4.

Then go with the $6 2 VP version instead of the $5 1 VP cost, I'm easy.  I'm just saying, it shouldn't be strictly-superior-to-Duchy-unless-your-opponent-is-holding-Watchtower-or-Curses-are-deleted.  Witch is strictly inferior to Smithy when Curses are depleted, that doesn't mean the correct cost for Witch is $3.

386
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Any Gossip About Fall 2011 Expansion?
« on: August 16, 2011, 05:42:33 pm »
How about something like this:

Forbidden Land (Victory Card)
Cost: $5
2 VP

----
When you buy this card, each player gains a curse card.

--

Hold onto your watchtowers!

Seems like that would want to be priced at $6.  (Logic: Duchy costs $5 and gives you +3 VP.  This card gives you an expected +3 VP swing, and also dilutes your opponents' decks, so it is mostly superior to Duchy).

Alternately, it could be worth 1 VP instead of 2.

387
Some other considerations might be ...

It can be dangerous to assume that an opponent will ignore provinces in a colony game.

It feels to me like it ought to be more dangerous than it is.  That is, I can see theoretically wanting to end the game on Provinces a fair amount, but in practice, it very, very rarely seems to happen.

This is possibly explained by the differences in our levels of play: perhaps you more frequently play opponents who are better at realizing the advantage of going to Provinces despite Colonies.  If so, I feel comfortable just putting a caveat in that clause like ("at least, until very high levels of play"), since this is a guide intended for beginners.

Does anyone else have any comment on that subject?

388
Oh... I see. Seems very counter intuitive to me.

WanderingWinder is right, I meant "out" like "out on the table" or "out of the box."  You are right, it is not intuitive.  I will edit.

389
Perhaps the most fundamental question you should ask yourself at the start of a game of Dominion is "how will this game end?"  Correctly determining whether the game will end through the depletion of Colonies, Provinces, or via a three-pile ending is critical to creating a strategy that can be the winner at that end of the game.  Cards which may be excellent in a Province game could be terrible in a three-pile game or a Colony game.

This article will explore the various ending conditions, how to determine whether your game is likely to end in that condition, and what that will mean for your tactics.

Colony

When Colonies are available, depletion of the Colony pile is typically the way the game will end.  Unless you see strong reason to believe that there will be a three pile ending or (very unlikely) a Province ending, you should plan on a Colony ending in a game where Colonies are present in the first place.

Colony games are very likely to be the longest types of Dominion games.  They give you more time to build a stronger deck, and are the easiest kind of game to win with an "engine" deck.  Obviously, they also require a stronger deck in order to consistently hit the $11 target buy.  If a game is likely to end with a Colony depletion, then you can look at the higher tier of Action cards ($5+) and reasonably build your deck around getting a bunch of those cards, rather than just a few crux cards, even without cards that rapidly improve the buying power of your deck.

When you expect a Colony ending, it takes a higher class of card to be useful in your deck.  Your end-game expected hand value needs to be $11+.  That means that cards that are worth only $2 in your hand (like Silver) are not themselves pulling their weight in a Colony game.  Of course you can use Silver (and Copper), particularly with strong card drawing, but you don't want to weigh your deck down with a bunch of copies of cards that only are worth $2 in your hand.  It can be tempting to get lots of Silver or similar cards (terminal +$2 actions, for example) in your deck early, as a way to afford the higher-cost Actions, Gold, or Platinum, but remember that you won't love those cards in the late game.

Province

Most Dominion games end with Province depletion -- specifically, most Dominion games without Colonies available end through Province depletion.  When Colonies are on the board, it is very rare for Province depletion to end the game, and should almost never be planned for.  But when Colonies aren't available, the default is to assume that the game will end with Province depletion, unless you see a strong reason to believe there will be a three pile depletion.

Province games are what you should have the most experience with.  They reward rapid engines and modified big-money strategies.  Copper is overall a negative in the late game in Province decks, but Silver is fine, delivering well more than the $1.6 average value needed in a card to produce the $8 hands that you're aiming for.  Many engine decks are just too slow for Province games, producing a deck that's very strong in the late game, but which is already suffering from a 2 or 3 Province deficit to a faster, Big Money-esque game.  If you build an engine in a Province game, you should do so knowing that either:

1.  This is a particularly fast engine.
2.  This is a particularly strong engine, able to guarantee you multi-Province buys to come back from your deficit.
3.  The game is likely to be slower than usual, probably due to Attack cards.

Three Pile Depletion (End Game)

A not-very-interesting type of Dominion game endings is the late game three-pile depletion.  This usually happens when there are a small number of Provinces or Colonies left, and both players' decks have been clogged up with green cards and can no longer summon $8 or $11 to end the game on Provinces or Colonies.  Usually then a race on Duchies (or Provinces) commences and sometimes the game ends up squeaking to a slow close on piles.  However, this is basically just a failure case of the Province or Colony ending conditions.  You don't need to worry a lot about this at the beginning of the game, and your strategy is likely to be similar to what it would be in a basic Province or Colony game.

Three Pile Depletion (Early/Mid game)

The rarest form of Dominion game ending is a rapid three pile depletion.  These games can be very rewarding, as they are uncommon enough that many players miss the possibility of a rapid three pile depletion, and can be very unprepared for the game to end, allowing you to obtain a solid win.

In order for a rapid three pile depletion to be viable, there needs to be a way to deplete three piles quickly and for the player driving the game-end to do so with a safe enough VP lead that his opponent can't derail the strategy by buying a solitary Province or similar card.

The best-known board state for a rapid three-pile depletion is for both Gardens and Workshop (or Woodcutter) to appear on the board.  Such a board typically ends with the depletion of Gardens, Workshop/Woodcutter, and Estates, and ends much faster than a Province game.

But any time you see one stack of cards that is almost certain to deplete itself rapidly, it is worthwhile to consider the possibility of a quick three-pile ending.  The classic pile that is likely to deplete itself in the mid game is the Curses pile in the presence of strong cursing attacks, particularly Witch, Familiar, or Sea Hag (Torturers will probably only deplete the Curses in the late game if there are Villages on the board, or not at all otherwise; Mountebank often stalls out and doesn't deplete curses until fairly late because the attack can miss; Young Witch is often skippable or counterable, but if it isn't, it will cause Curse depletion).  Popular, strong, spammable cards like Fishing Village and Caravan are also likely to deplete in the early game and can set up a three-pile ending.  Grand Market is an interesting special case -- usually, it is expensive enough that it can't be depleted in the early game, but if there is something that starts a GM run early, it is so good at setting up other-pile depletion that it can very easily create a three-pile ending.

Duke/Duchy can also lead to a fairly early three-pile depletion.

If one pile looks likely to rapidly deplete itself, then a three-pile ending is much more likely than otherwise, and you should consider whether you can build a deck that will be substantially quicker than a Province/Colony deck and can take advantage of a three-pile ending.  Typically, you'll need some way to deplete a VP pile (most likely Estates or a non-standard VP card) quickly without stalling out your deck.  That will probably mean buying a lot of some enabler card that will be your third pile to deplete.


Conclusion

Understanding how a game will end is usually not particularly difficult.  For most games, it can be reduced to "Colonies if Colonies are available, otherwise Provinces."  Because of that, it's not heavily commented on here on Dominion Strategy.  But despite being simple, it's crucial.  You can't make a strategy for a board without understanding the pace of the board -- whether it's worthwhile to buy more expensive cards that will make your deck better in the long run, but slower in the first part of the game.  And you can't understand the pace without knowing how the game will end.

Don't let yourself just assume that every game will end on Provinces or Colonies -- study the board before your game starts and look for the possibilities for a less-common ending condition.  You'll save yourself several losses to people who end the game on three piles when your deck is just starting to kick into gear.

390
Guys, the opening three things are examples, not the main question.

The QUESTION is, "How do you judge these decisions"?  What is the thought process you use to decide, "Do I take a less-good card now, because it will not be available soon," versus "Do I take a more-good card now even though I'll have more opportunities to buy it later"?

Trying to answer it for myself, I suspect that the answer depends on whether the contested card actually combos with itself (like Minion or Nobles), or whether it's just a useful, good card (like Caravan or Fishing Village).  The former seems more likely to be worth forgoing a "better" card to buy, both to increase the chance that your deck will start consistently firing, and to decrease the chance that your opponent's deck will start consistently firing.  The latter seems like it's less vital that you end up at least 5-5 rather than 4-6.

But how about the amount of the contested card left in supply, or the ratios that you and your opponent have?  Is it more or less good to decline the contested card if you already have a lead in the contest?  Like, if you have 3 and your opponent has 2, is it better to lengthen your lead or to say, "Well, if he catches up, no worries"?  How about if there are 3 left in the supply versus 7 left in the supply?

How about if it's earlier or later in the game?

I can see arguments in all directions.  Like, "Sure, I don't need to worry about getting every last Minion, so since I'm ahead, I'm okay with letting my opponent catch up a little," versus, "I have a decisive Minion lead, I can consolidate that by preferring Minions to other, 'better' cards and making sure that my opponent simply can't put together a Minion engine."

391
Dominion General Discussion / Contesting a card vs. buying the best card
« on: August 15, 2011, 01:32:58 pm »
You and your opponent both are going for Minions, and you draw $6 (or $7).  Do you get a Gold or a King's Court, understanding that they are the better card for your deck (let's stipulate that they are the better card for your deck), or do you get another Minion on the basis that denying your opponent the Minion is better than the differential in utility in your deck?

You and your opponent are racing for Duchies in a Duke kingdom.  You draw $5.  You already have 4 Duchies, and no Dukes, so a Duke buy gets you more VP than a Duchy buy.  Do you go Duchy to deny your opponent?

Fishing Villages are out and likely to be depleted to 0.  You get $4 or $5 with good $4 or $5 actions on the board.  Do you get the Fishing Village instead?



Obviously, the answer is "sometimes."  But how do you make that decision?  What are your heuristics for deciding when it's better to end up with the majority of a contested card, and when it's more valuable to get a card that's stronger overall, but will not likely be depleted, and will be there for you later?  I feel like I'm reading tea leaves when I try to make this decision.

392
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Any Gossip About Fall 2011 Expansion?
« on: August 12, 2011, 02:40:39 pm »
"WYGTC, you may gain (a silver)(another copy of this card)(an estate)(a duchy)"

That seems problematic...

"When it is possible to buy this card, the game ends when any two card supplies have been depleted."

393
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Any Gossip About Fall 2011 Expansion?
« on: August 09, 2011, 03:48:39 am »
Silver Rush
+1 Action
Trash any number of Silvers from your hand.  For each Silver so trashed, gain +2 cards and +$2.
Trash this card.




I was playing around with the idea of a card that let you successfully transition from a silver-heavy early-game into a late-game deck where Silver is a liability.  I think this concept has something going for it, though it'd need some playing around with to get the balance straight.  My concept was, in a few turns, burn all of the Silver in your deck into, say, Golds or high cost Actions or whatever.

394
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Vanilla Cards
« on: August 09, 2011, 02:31:45 am »
I think this is probably the most interesting vanilla card we haven't seen:

Stonemasons
$4 Action
+1 Action
+1 Buy
+ $2

Feels like if it were on the board with Peddler, the only thing to do would be to get into a Stonemasons/Peddler race.  And then it leads straight into three-piling with Estates?  If you thought a Gardens strategy was fast.  And speaking of Gardens...

I think that a card which was just straight up +3 Actions (probably at $3) would be potentially interesting, but perhaps not.

An Action which was just +$3 for $5 is probably not unbalanced (terminal Gold, slightly lower cost) seems like it would be well-balanced but dull. 

395
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Any Gossip About Fall 2011 Expansion?
« on: August 09, 2011, 02:22:15 am »
But strictly worse than Salvager unfortunately...

Duh, of course you're right.

You could allow it to trash multiple treasures per turn, but it's probably too close to Salvager anyway.

396
Game Reports / Re: Dear My Opponent: I am Sorry
« on: August 08, 2011, 06:12:48 pm »
I think that there are plenty of games where you can go from essentially 100% chance of winning to, you know, 80% chance of winning by skipping a turn.  Sure, I could skip my mega-turn, and still PROBABLY win, but I want to DEFINITELY win.  I agree that that's kind of ultra-competitive and lame of me, but I'm not sure that there's an alternative.

(I note that I've played against Captain Frisk and agree that he's a gentleman and I would be happy to take his word for a resign.  But random handle I've never met?)

397
Tournaments and Events / Re: Any GenCon or WBC news?
« on: August 08, 2011, 06:04:05 pm »
It feels like a 3-4p strategy guide would have to take into account a factor that's not very significant in 2p: what if really bad opponents dictate the pace of the game?

Like, theory's comment about ending a 4p game when you're dead last.  There's just...  not that problem in 2p.  Obviously, if a player ends the game and he's not first, his opponent is happy.

Or the entire concept of the tempo of the game being controlled by three players who don't know what they're doing.  In a 2p game, it's so rarely the case that someone who doesn't know what he's doing can cause the game to end unexpectedly quickly that you don't really need a robust strategy to deal with it.  Just, you know, keep an eye on short piles, and buy a VP or two if your opponent is madly ending the game on piles without any idea how to win.  Whereas if three buys come between each of your buys...  you might only have one or two turns worth of warning before you can conceivably go from "we're in mid-game" to "it ended."

That feels, then, like a 3p or 4p strategy would have to have a component of "gauge the quality of your opponents and figure out if they will play with basic understanding of how the game works," that 2p doesn't (99% of the time) need.  Which is kind of frustrating: I'm reminded of playing poker with a table full of calling stations: sure, there's a strategy (only play really good cards), but it's a frustrating strategy and it's entirely possible to not get good enough cards early enough to win, and so lose on luck.

398
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Any Gossip About Fall 2011 Expansion?
« on: August 08, 2011, 05:50:58 pm »
But what does it do for you? If it gives +$3, it's strictly better than Moneylender at $4, so it would need to be more expensive. But it's not a very impressive 5. So probably it would have to trash for 2 more than the treasure's face value (HOP, Bank, potion would trash for 2, talisman, quarry, copper, venture for 3, silver, harem for 4, gold, contraband for 5, and platinum for 7) then it would be an interesting 5?

It could potentially give you money equal to the card's cost.

Which would also make it "not strictly better than Moneylender," since Coppers would give you 0.

399
Game Reports / Re: Dear My Opponent: I am Sorry
« on: August 08, 2011, 05:04:50 pm »
I do my best to resign gracefully (unless I tell my opponent I intend to resign, and then he continues to play another 5 minute turn),

I've been that person (the one who gets told that his opponent is going to resign, and then takes a long turn).  It's a little hard for me to figure out what to do.  I mean, yes, he told me he's going to resign, and that's great and I try to play fast.  But it's some random dude on the internet, y'know?  How am I supposed to know if he'll keep his word?  I don't want to throw away a winning game because my opponent psy-opped me.

400
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Any Gossip About Fall 2011 Expansion?
« on: August 08, 2011, 04:20:53 pm »
Well, Prosperity was the so-called "Big Money" expansion.  I do think at some point there will be a card that gives incentives for having silver, but it won't be the theme of an entire expansion.  Or maybe there won't be: Donald said he once playtested a Big Moneylender which trashed Silver for $5 and basically nobody ever bought it.

Well, that's really more because the Moneylender mechanic is strong for Copper and not-strong for Silver, than because there's something inherently wrong with interacting with Silver.  Moneylender's appeal depends on the notion that you start off with a ton of Copper, and don't really want that Copper, so trashing it for benefit appeals.  Also, the $3 is well-situated for an early accelerator.  Trashing Silver for $5 implies that you bought a ton of Silver (so that some of it coincides with the Action), and that you no longer want it, and that $5 isn't going to send you into the realm of "I just got a lot of money I can't use."

Contrast with something that, say, digs for Silver, like a more targeted Adventurer.  "Action - Dig for two Silver.  $4"  That would clearly be a valuable-ass card in the early game.  Maybe game-breakingly good, actually.  I suspect also that a Silversmith card that worked like this:  "Action.  +1 Buy.  Silver played this turn produce an extra $1" would be surprisingly good.  (Obvious response:  Coppersmith isn't very good, and it uses the more available Copper.  Counterpoint:  In a Province game which isn't engine-oriented, at least, Silver is neutral-to-positive in your deck, while Copper is bad.  The +buy means that you can actually use the occasional big-extra-money hand without also somehow getting a non-terminal +buy or a village/+buy combo into play at the same time).

Or a later-game trash-for-benefit for Silver could also be useful, especially if combined with a dig.  "Action - Dig for a Silver.  If you find it, trash it and gain a Duchy."

Obviously, I have no idea whether there will be anything that targets silver will ever be in the game, but the failure of the super-Moneylender doesn't mean you could introduce a successful silver-targeting card.

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17

Page created in 2.002 seconds with 18 queries.