Print

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

[silverspawn]

yea stonemason is definitely underrated. i don't think its #1 or anything

I do.

I know

[Eevee]

Courtyard used to be criminally underrated for the longest time, but the decline of the usefulness of big money really hurts it. It's not nearly the engine card some of these other two costs are, and less important in money games than fool's gold, so I'd rank it a good bit lower. Stonemason should be higher, and I know the competition is steep, but lighthouse is like very good.

I never realized just how worse pawn is in comparison now that CM and squire are out until now.

[Tables]

Hmm, Chapel was rated four times below 50%. Interesting.

Fool's Gold in 2nd kind of surprised me. I always thought it was powerful, and it's slowly made it's way up the $2 ratings, but 2nd kind of feels too high to me now. Then again I haven't been playing as much Dominion over the last year, so Dark Ages and Guilds I've played way less than other expansions, and they might have changed things a lot (in particular I've been hearing that good engines are possible far more often nowadays).

I'm also going to agree Stonemason is probably underrated. I didn't submit a list this year, but if I had Stonemason would almost certainly have been top 4, possibly even 2nd or 3rd.

[Robz888]

Yeah, Courtyard looks like an overrate to me now, since it usually isn't your favorite card for a draw engine. I think Candlestick Maker is slightly overrated. I think I would put Stonemason and Crossroads better than it.

Squire... I still say Squire is better than Hamlet, though it's close.

Absolutely agree with Chapel and Fools Gold for 1 and 2.

[SCSN]

My top 3 is Chapel, Candlestick Maker, Stonemason. Courtyard is not even in my top 10.

[Qvist]

I've put Stonemason at around the rank where it ended. Stonemason's on play effect is rather weak, it's terrible in Big Money games and even in engine games I don't overpay that often because I don't want so many Stonemasons in my deck. This doesn't sound like a #1 or even a Top 3 card to me. Tell me where I'm wrong.

[Robz888]

I've put Stonemason at around the rank where it ended. Stonemason's on play effect is rather weak, it's terrible in Big Money games and even in engine games I don't overpay that often because I don't want so many Stonemasons in my deck. This doesn't sound like a #1 or even a Top 3 card to me. Tell me where I'm wrong.

Let me do my best SCSN impression: Big Money games don't really matter, unfortunately. They are a vanishingly smaller percent of the total. And you're wrong about SM in engines. You don't want that many SMs, but you want double the high-cost cards more than you don't want SM. Also, SM--more than virtually any other card--ends the game when you want to end it. It's mere presence has a huge, huge impact on the strategic landscape.

[SCSN]

I've put Stonemason at around the rank where it ended. Stonemason's on play effect is rather weak, it's terrible in Big Money games and even in engine games I don't overpay that often because I don't want so many Stonemasons in my deck. This doesn't sound like a #1 or even a Top 3 card to me. Tell me where I'm wrong.

Let me do my best SCSN impression: Big Money games don't really matter, unfortunately. They are a vanishingly smaller percent of the total. And you're wrong about SM in engines. You don't want that many SMs, but you want double the high-cost cards more than you don't want SM. Also, SM--more than virtually any other card--ends the game when you want to end it. It's mere presence has a huge, huge impact on the strategic landscape.

The reply I had begun to compose but then set aside in the naive hope that it would grow on its own started as follows:

When I see a big money board my usual response is to fall asleep and play instead in my dreams the now shimmering engine (replete with imagined cards from future expansions) wherein Stonemason displays his usual awesomeness...

Your post neatly captures the gist of the ellipsis!

Next challenge: try another impersonation, this time while clicking on cards, and post the results over here

[LastFootnote]

Let me do my best SCSN impression: Big Money games don't really matter, unfortunately. They are a vanishingly smaller percent of the total. And you're wrong about SM in engines. You don't want that many SMs, but you want double the high-cost cards more than you don't want SM. Also, SM--more than virtually any other card--ends the game when you want to end it. It's mere presence has a huge, huge impact on the strategic landscape.

Ooh! Ooh! Do me next!

[florrat]

When I see a big money board my usual response is to fall asleep and play instead in my dreams the now shimmering engine (replete with imagined cards from future expansions) wherein Stonemason displays his usual awesomeness...

Interesting. I see SM not really as an engine enabler, more as something which powers up every engine. If there is no way to get +actions or +cards, then a SM doesn't really make an engine much more viable. Sure, there are enough engines which work without draw or without actions, and those can be a little stronger with SM. But I see SM more as turning a weak engine into a strong one.

[7string]

Great to see the rest of the $2 card rankings published!!  Thanks Qvist!  I had Chapel, Hamlet, and Pawn in the same spots, but my other ranks were a little inverted...overall pretty pleased with the rankings.

My biggest surprise was seeing Hamlet slip to 4th.  I still had it at #2.  Certainly Fools Gold can sometimes be very powerful, but as Qvist says, you really need to play a pretty dedicated FG game and forego buying other valuable cards.  There seems to me too many games where this does not work well, whereas I almost always find Hamlet useful for either the +2 actions, the extra buy, or even just the discard ability (Tunnel etc.).  Hamlet just seems to me to be a far more versatile card than Fools Gold.  Same applies to Stonemason - I rated it a couple places higher at #6, but my perception of its weakness in mid-game makes me pause on rating it in the top 3-5 cards...  But Stonemason is still relatively new to me, and it took me a few games before I fully realized the power it has, so perhaps with more play...

Glad to see Candlestick Maker rated fairly high!  One of my very favorite $2 cards, but I feared I was being overly influenced by how much I enjoy playing it when I ranked it #8...turns out lot of others like it as much or more...

But what I love most about this whole exercise is that the lists and the comments from the more experienced players really make me think and reconsider how I use the cards!  When a card gets a higher rank than I expect, I will be more likely to buy more of them and try it out in future games.

Great comments everyone!

[WanderingWinder]

Certainly Fools Gold can sometimes be very powerful, but as Qvist says, you really need to play a pretty dedicated FG game and forego buying other valuable cards.

I don't think he's saying this, and it certainly isn't true. You can definitely build an engine and then pick up a few FG to be a payload. Indeed, in terms of straight cash production, it's probably the BEST payload, though of course there are many other cards that do more than cash production.

[7string]

Certainly Fools Gold can sometimes be very powerful, but as Qvist says, you really need to play a pretty dedicated FG game and forego buying other valuable cards.

I don't think he's saying this, and it certainly isn't true. You can definitely build an engine and then pick up a few FG to be a payload. Indeed, in terms of straight cash production, it's probably the BEST payload, though of course there are many other cards that do more than cash production.

OK - thanks WW.  I may have interpreted more into what he said than he meant.  In my experience if I didn't buy at least 3 or 4 FG's, early on they rarely ended up in the same play together...but I hear what you say that it also works well later in the game after building an engine.  One more card I may have underutilized... ; )

[eHalcyon]

Secret Chamber has the potential to be a significant engine component, which Pearl Diver... doesn't.

False!  TR/KC engine where Pearl Diver is the only non-terminal on the board.  Yeah you could skip it and just TR-TR or KC-KC, but Pearl Diver would be easier overall.

[Awaclus]

PD can be important in Conspirator engines, too, though Conspirator engines without other cards to support them aren't usually very good.

[Beyond Awesome]

I am sad to see Stonemason ranked so low. I had it at 2. It seems a lot of high ranked players, ranked it pretty high as well. SM isn't just great because of engines, it also has the whole three-pile thing going for it. Also, SM is crazy good in Governor games (if you get lucky). A couple of times, I spiked $7 getting two Governors and then trashed a gold with that SM for two more Governors. Governor is already fast and SM just makes that card faster.

FG is strong. You often can't ignore it. Even with engine boards, it's usually worth picking some up at some point. I don't buy Courtyard that often these days. It's still useful, but cards like Squire and lighthouse and even CM seem better than Courtyard. Anyway, I think I ranked Fg 3, but I honestly can't remember.

[jaybeez]

I thought I was kind of going out on a limb by ranking Fool's Gold #2 and I feel so vindicated right now, it's great.  The feeling, I mean.  FG is great too.

[AdamH]

Squire: Strictly Better™ than Herbalist since 2013

[Mr Anderson]

Squire: Strictly Better™ than Herbalist since 2013

No, Squire would be if it could scheme treasures. Herbalist-Philosopher's Stone should still be better than Squire-Philosopher's Stone.

[AdamH]

I know that, I was being sarcastic, hence the ™. I'm just making a snarky comment to get +1s.

I'm saving my Count/Mandarin joke for the $5 cards list.

[HiveMindEmulator]

I know that, I was being sarcastic, hence the ™. I'm just making a snarky comment to get +1s.

I'm saving my Count/Mandarin joke for the $5 cards list.

Don't +1 this, guys. I just checked with the USPTO and he doesn't even hold a trademark on "Strictly Better"!

[Awaclus]

I know that, I was being sarcastic, hence the ™. I'm just making a snarky comment to get +1s.

I'm saving my Count/Mandarin joke for the $5 cards list.

Mandarin: Strictly Better™ than Count since 2011

Ha! I stole it!

[AdamH]

You people. Now you're going to get more +1s than me. This is stupid.

[MarkowKette]

I think stonemasons ranking should be one or two ranks higher but i would certainly not put it into top 3.
Stone mason is a very skill-dependant card mainly because of sneaky three pilings. In some engines it is even be a must buy.
Just the threat to be potentially able to three pile very fast can make it such.
Yes, loading up on stonemasons for additional labs does'nt really increase your deck drawability and you can see similar effects with other 5 costs but it's quite often paired with another trasher in your engine so you can get rid of superfluos ones.

I think pawn is a bit overrated as there are now a lot of other $2 cards that do similar things but better. When i buy a pawn i use it a a plain cantrip at least 75% of the time.

The most underrated card in this list in my eyes is candlestickmaker. That might seem weird as it is very similar to pawn, a lot higher already in this list and i said pawn was one of the most overrated cards in this list. But being able to use 3 of pawns options at a time is a huge difference and even if you can't chose anymore and you get the same 3 every play the coin being a token totally makes up for that. Shifting coins to future turns makes such a big difference. This card is even viable in Big Money decks like BM-Library or other BM strats that are not terminal draw dependant. It's very often a must buy in engines and if it's not then it still is nice for most of the decks. On my personal list it is ranked #2. (after chapel ofc )

Last but not least i dont think haven should be higher than cellar.Yes, cellar is a bit more situational as it hurts your deck a bit more often than haven does but in those cases where you want them cellar has the bigger impact as sifting can be very important in engines.

[KingZog3]

When i buy a pawn i use it a a plain cantrip at least 75% of the time.

I think you're using it wrong. It can help many engines, and it's a cheap, non-terminal source of +buy. The cantrip part is just a fail-safe so it doesn't take up space if needed.