Print

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

[Seprix]

I know the cards. I know the strategies. But I lose to people who are new and thus should know less about the game all the time, who follow strategies that I'm pretty sure I know are wrong. Is every good player deciding to restart all of a sudden, or do I just suck now? How do I even improve now? I'm not winning anything anymore, and my losing isn't helping me improve a bit.

[Awaclus]

You improve by playing more.

[jsh357]

You improve by complaining.

No, but seriously, one thing to do is analyze your mistakes and figure out what your opponent did correctly.  Sometimes it's not easy, but if you can break it down step by step that helps.  Knowing what's in your deck, what you've played this shuffle, how many gains/buys you and your opponent have, and understanding the tempo of the game you're in are big things.  You can 'know all the strategies' and still not be playing a deck effectively. 

Monkey see, monkey do is also a decent tool.  Try watching a good player like MicQsenoch play a few games. Think about what you'd do on his turns.  Watch what he does. What was better, and why?  He's not always going to be correct, but you can make a reasonable assumption that he has a good reason for his plays.  Of course, doing this does not automatically improve how you play.  The point is to pick up habits, understand why decisions are made in a general sense.  Every game is different on some level, so you have to improve your overall judgment.

Finally, you have to abandon pride a bit.  Face the facts that you aren't a top player and have a lot to learn.  Wins are not something you are entitled to--you have to actually improve at the game to get there, and sometimes that means changing ways you think about the game when they aren't working out.

But what do I know, I'm just a bear.  I mean, a guy.

[Elanchana]

Losing streaks happen. Losing streaks suck. Losing streaks are also... not the end of the world.

So, sure, YMYOSL and all that. But maybe you're like me and don't want to look back at your previous games because it would mean reliving the failure and embarrassment. So to improve your playing in the future, I'd recommend a few things:

1. The Adam Horton method. When you get a board, pinpoint all attacks (and their counters), trashing (and its reliability and speed), villages (true vs. forced/unreliable and cantrip vs. disappearing), draw (and its significance), and +buy. Locating all these attributes, including their absence, will make it easier to formulate a strategy.

2. The theatre student method, as I call it: goal, tactics, obstacles. Defining your goal could be as simple as "I want to build an engine" or as specific as "I want to draw a hand of KC-KC-Bridge-Bridge-Bridge". Then come up with tactics you'll use: buying as many of a certain card as possible, junking up vs. slowing down your opponent, etc. This includes your opening cards. Finally, think of your biggest obstacles - bad draw, curse attacks, losing splits, and the like - and how you'll handle or avoid them.

3. Combine these two methods by knowing what will and won't work in your deck. If there are no villages on the board, terminal cards lose a lot of their value. If there is no trashing, junking/cursing attacks - and defense against them - become much more valuable. If the engine you're building has a lot of virtual coin attached, maybe you don't want to spend your $6 on a Gold. Know what you want and get it.

As you know, I am VERY far from an expert on this, but I have recovered from several losing streaks and I can at least tell you what works for me.

[Awaclus]

your goal could be as simple as "I want to build an engine"

That's not your goal. Building an engine is a means to reach your goal of playing your key cards often and/or connecting your key cards that need connecting. Don't build an engine without a purpose.

[Beyond Awesome]

My goal is to always get the most points or end the piles before my opponent can win.

[Awaclus]

My goal is to always get the most points or end the piles

Not both?

[Burning Skull]

My goal is to always end the most piles.

FTFY 

[Titandrake]

I haven't watched your games, but it's very likely that you're finding the correct strategies and executing them poorly.

This doesn't mean you're a bad player, because pretty much everybody executes strategies poorly. Some people just execute them less poorly than others. Sometimes, this means reordering cards revealed by Cartographer incorrectly. Other times, it means making a bad call on whether to trigger a reshuffle.

Let's put things this way: suppose we replaced your opponent with a bot from the simulator. This bot makes the exact same buy decisions as your high level strategy, but follows these play rules:

- play all Action cards that give +1 Action or more
- play as many terminals as possible
- play all treasures and buy something

Then, I'd say you should be able to get at least 55-60% win rate against this hypothetical opponent, depending on the board, because all those micro-decisions from deciding when to reshuffle, how to build a deck when you're behind vs ahead, different sequencing of actions, etc. should add up to an advantage for you.

Now, that's a bit of a pointless hypothetical, but here's the more interesting corollary: if you decide on a worse strategy, but execute it extremely well, you can still beat a stronger strategy, or beat bad luck.

---

At the start of the game, you want to ask yourself what your ideal deck is going to do. This could be "play a Butcher every turn", or "cycle through lots of cards with mass Stables, with one +Buy to pick up more Stables", or "hit $8 every turn using mostly treasures". Then, make sure that every buy goes towards that goal. Every deck should have a focus/lynchpin that it's founded on - if you can't say what you want your deck to be doing, you're gonna have a bad time.

If your crazy elaborate engine doesn't come together in time, then oh well. You at least have a crazy elaborate half-engine, and maybe you tone it down a notch next time and build a more modest engine. It's better than starting with a crazy elaborate engine blueprint and ending with a modest flower pot with a half-finished rocket booster instead of a flower.

Look, I lost the metaphor a while back. Bottom line, I think committing to silly, harebrained ideas and pushing them as much as you can tends to make you a better player, since it gives you an appreciation for when simple things are better, while leaving yourself open to crazy nuttiness.

I...think that was entirely different from the point I was planning to write out when I started this post, but oh well.

[jaketheyak]

I honestly think you're playing with the wrong attitude if you're so dismissive of your opponents' intelligence like that. They're all idiots that play stupid strategies, but they keep beating your expert playstyle because... reasons. Riiight.

[SCSN]

I know the strategies.

Can I be your student?

[Rubby]

But maybe you're like me and don't want to look back at your previous games because it would mean reliving the failure and embarrassment.

You would improve a lot more by not thinking of lost games as "failure and embarrassment". Every good player in the world has lost a lot of games.

I lose to complete (only gamewise) idiots all the time, who follow dumb strategies

Disparaging your opponents like this is detrimental, not only to your improvement at Dominion, but to being a nice person.

[TheOthin]

Even cards as bad as Thief and Saboteur can be the right plays sometimes. If your opponents are managing to win, reconsider if you're really so sure that their strategies are wrong.

Personally, I'm still really inexperienced, and I often find myself falling back on certain simple "rules" for cards to get or not to get based on my evaluation of the board and assume my opponents don't know what they're doing if they ignore them. But when those opponents win regardless, I have to acknowledge that that rule may not have been as absolute as I thought, that my opponent may have understood the "rule" and yet seen some good reason to violate it, and that I have to give more consideration in the future as to what would really be the way to go in similar situations.

[qmech]

Post some logs here or in the Help board where you think you clearly had the best strategy but lost anyway.  Even the process of writing something like that will often help you see things you've missed before.  And if it doesn't cause you to have inspiration yourself then sooner or later someone will look through the log and tell you whether you were just unlucky.

[Jack Rudd]

Even cards as bad as Thief and Saboteur can be the right plays sometimes.

Saboteur isn't a bad card, as such, just extremely situational. It's essentially a card that only works as an engine payload - it needs to be played at least once a turn to work.

[Throwaway_bicycling]

Post some logs here or in the Help board where you think you clearly had the best strategy but lost anyway.  Even the process of writing something like that will often help you see things you've missed before.  And if it doesn't cause you to have inspiration yourself then sooner or later someone will look through the log and tell you whether you were just unlucky.

I am not the OP, but I just looked at some of the games on Salvager, and I feel this one might be an interesting starting point:

http://gokosalvager.com/static/logprettifier.html?20150112/log.54109627e4b0750ebc1f6911.1421094317185.txt

(I will now switch to addressing OP.)

Lots could be said here, including the point that you committed suicide there at the end (draining Colonies when behind), but my general sense reading over this game is simply: I just really don't understand the strategy. Your opponent did not play flawlessly or anything, but I can articulate the basic strategy: Big Money using Apprenticed Silver for draw.

Now, whether or not it's the best strategy on the board (I'm pretty sure it's not) you can see where it's going, note that it's making progress, and even think of how to optimize it. This is much less easy for me to do for your game. You start by Foraging things (okay, that's kind of a plan of sorts), then go deep into the Wandering Minstrel pile...then buy some money (not a great match for WM by itself), buy some Cities and, yeah, have enough stuff and a slim enough deck to get some Colonies by the (untimely) end. But overall, I just see somebody buying a bunch of cards that are "good" with no strong cohesive plan.

Disclaimer: I am not a great player by any means, so I will leave it to those people to give you better advice than I can, but I recognize the style here since it is kind of what my losing games look like. :-)

[Seprix]

Post some logs here or in the Help board where you think you clearly had the best strategy but lost anyway.  Even the process of writing something like that will often help you see things you've missed before.  And if it doesn't cause you to have inspiration yourself then sooner or later someone will look through the log and tell you whether you were just unlucky.

I am not the OP, but I just looked at some of the games on Salvager, and I feel this one might be an interesting starting point:

http://gokosalvager.com/static/logprettifier.html?20150112/log.54109627e4b0750ebc1f6911.1421094317185.txt

(I will now switch to addressing OP.)

Lots could be said here, including the point that you committed suicide there at the end (draining Colonies when behind), but my general sense reading over this game is simply: I just really don't understand the strategy. Your opponent did not play flawlessly or anything, but I can articulate the basic strategy: Big Money using Apprenticed Silver for draw.

Now, whether or not it's the best strategy on the board (I'm pretty sure it's not) you can see where it's going, note that it's making progress, and even think of how to optimize it. This is much less easy for me to do for your game. You start by Foraging things (okay, that's kind of a plan of sorts), then go deep into the Wandering Minstrel pile...then buy some money (not a great match for WM by itself), buy some Cities and, yeah, have enough stuff and a slim enough deck to get some Colonies by the (untimely) end. But overall, I just see somebody buying a bunch of cards that are "good" with no strong cohesive plan.

Disclaimer: I am not a great player by any means, so I will leave it to those people to give you better advice than I can, but I recognize the style here since it is kind of what my losing games look like. :-)

I didn't really have a plan for that game in particular. There was no draw, really. Of course, I didn't really look at Apprentice when there was a shiny Forager card. I should have picked up one Forager card for sure, for the +buy, but my main trashing should have come from Apprentices.

My sad sorry gameplan was to draw my deck. Since there were a bunch of cantrips (expensive ones mind you), this was not going to work. So my next idea was to go for a City rush, except I didn't go for that early enough, so it was half hearted and stupid at that time. Overall, I think a BM Apprentice deck was the best option there, with maybe Forager for that crucial +buy to get more money or actions. But this is all speculation. I'd have to play this kingdom about 20 times to know every nuance about it.

[JacquesTheBard]

I have to admit, it is a tough board. The only three options I can see (each one using Forager) are BM-Apprentice with Feodums and Silvers for draw, Cities, or BM with some kind of terminal silver. Although Fortune Teller and Scavenger are fine terminal silvers, I doubt that terminal silver does much for you in a Colony game. Wandering Minstrel will do nothing for the first two decks and have a pitiful impact on the third, so you can safely skip it. Inn and Walled Village are poor options as well.

Some great players such as Stef can often build amazing engines around Apothecary, but I don't see that happening here. It's the only real source of draw, so it will still be heavily limited by the non-copper cards. Building a deck around copper simply will not work when trying to buy colonies, and the only source of +buy is Forager, which necessitates trashing your coppers.

This board is very, very weak.

[Seprix]

I have to admit, it is a tough board. The only three options I can see (each one using Forager) are BM-Apprentice with Feodums and Silvers for draw, Cities, or BM with some kind of terminal silver. Although Fortune Teller and Scavenger are fine terminal silvers, I doubt that terminal silver does much for you in a Colony game. Wandering Minstrel will do nothing for the first two decks and have a pitiful impact on the third, so you can safely skip it. Inn and Walled Village are poor options as well.

Some great players such as Stef can often build amazing engines around Apothecary, but I don't see that happening here. It's the only real source of draw, so it will still be heavily limited by the non-copper cards. Building a deck around copper simply will not work when trying to buy colonies, and the only source of +buy is Forager, which necessitates trashing your coppers.

This board is very, very weak.

Cities is very slow, and BM w/ Terminal Silver is the wrong move here. It seems Apprentice/Feodum is the way to go here. Maybe even a Province Rush is better than going for Colonies here since it would take a long time to even get up to $11 consistently. But if you end up buying all the Silvers up quickly, maybe City becomes viable, and then things might get interesting.

As for Apothecary, I can see something like that being used here, since it scouts for you. But for Apothecary to be any good, you have to have actions to use, and not dumb Silver to clog up your deck. All the action building here is pitiful and sad, it seems. Not to mention the Potion buy.

Buying Wandering Minstrel was a very poor choice.

[Burning Skull]

I'd open Potion Forager here, and throw in an Apprentice and a Feodum (probaly only one) later. Seems pretty fast actually.
Apprentice allows to start greening early, since you can trash Provinces when you are ahead in points.

[theblankman]

I played a few test games on this board with a thin-deck money + Forager + Apprentice strategy.  Open Forager/Scavenger, get a second Forager soon after, Apprentice on first 5, and money otherwise with a second Apprentice somewhere along the way.  Use the Scavenger to topdeck Forager early on, Apprentice or Platinum late.  Don't be afraid to drop Gold or even Platinum to Apprentice.  Foragers can be worth $4 per play, and if the deck gets really thin you might buy Copper just to feed your Forager.  I get 5-6 Colonies in 20-22 turns this way, which isn't amazing, but this is a pretty weak board so perhaps it's good enough. 

More generally, I have to question the folks knocking terminal silver here.  I find Scavenger's cycling and topdeck ability great on this board.  Sure it's only $2 when you play it, but it lets you play your other good cards far more often (Forager early, probably Platinum late). 

[Awaclus]

More generally, I have to question the folks knocking terminal silver here.  I find Scavenger's cycling and topdeck ability great on this board.  Sure it's only $2 when you play it, but it lets you play your other good cards far more often (Forager early, probably Platinum late).

I think that it's not generally bad in Colony games. You still need Silvers most of the time anyway, and Scavenger's ability is very good.

[AndrewisFTTW]

I've found that the more I take my time and think every move out, the more I win. When I try to rush through a game, even if I think I'm optimally playing a strategy, I usually lose. That's just me though.

[dondon151]

One thing that you should always keep in mind in weak kingdoms with Apprentice is that if you jump out to an early lead, you can drain the most valuable VP pile pretty quickly by trashing VP -> buying VP.

EDIT: I'm out of practice but 5 Colonies in 18 turns probably isn't that bad.
http://gokosalvager.com/static/logprettifier.html?20150115/log.516d4fd3e4b082c74d7b96c1.1421347148441.txt

[Throwaway_bicycling]

One thing that you should always keep in mind in weak kingdoms with Apprentice is that if you jump out to an early lead, you can drain the most valuable VP pile pretty quickly by trashing VP -> buying VP.

EDIT: I'm out of practice but 5 Colonies in 18 turns probably isn't that bad.
http://gokosalvager.com/static/logprettifier.html?20150115/log.516d4fd3e4b082c74d7b96c1.1421347148441.txt

Okay; I declare this board solved. :-) I also saw Forager/Salvager to start, and assumed you would be trashing Gold or whatever 5 cost card you bought when you didn't get 6, but I also assumed you might need a village or two to get cranking. Guess not. In the mirror, I definitely would have lost to the Champ, since I would have wasted a turn or two being inefficient, but I felt I would have been within striking distance of the right plan.

Anyway, this board had +Buy, trashing, and arbitrarily good draw if you catch on to Apprentice. Salvager is gravy. So the plan would revolve around those strengths.

[Throwaway_bicycling]

Okay, so here's another recent Seprix game:
http://gokosalvager.com/static/logprettifier.html?20150112/log.54109627e4b0750ebc1f6911.1421080732514.txt

Any thoughts on this one? Note: I will allow you did not get the very best shuffle luck.

[Deadlock39]

(Just my 2 cents)
I think it is best if we let Seprix seek commentary on specific games in the Game Reports forum unless he specifically asks for it here.  I think he has received good feedback here, and may not want his games cherry picked.

[jaketheyak]

(Just my 2 cents)
I think it is best if we let Seprix seek commentary on specific games in the Game Reports forum unless he specifically asks for it here.  I think he has received good feedback here, and may not want his games cherry picked.

Yeah, I agree.
I think we've made it clear that Seprix shouldn't assume that he's already playing optimal strategy, this is starting to feel like harassment.

[Seprix]

A win is a win. A loss is a loss. I don't care. Do whatever. I'm reading the chat and taking notes for the future. It's all knowledge to me. I gotta study up for that Season 6 anyways.

[Flip5ide]

I honestly think you're playing with the wrong attitude if you're so dismissive of your opponents' intelligence like that. They're all idiots that play stupid strategies, but they keep beating your expert playstyle because... reasons. Riiight.

Actually, this is probably the biggest advantage that lower-ranked players have over higher-ranked players: dismissing the other player's strategy after they buy a different card than you. If they don't buy the same card as you, they must not be playing the optimal strategy, because you always play the strategy that you feel is the "best" right?

Obviously this is a good player's line of thinking, their mindset. Often they are right and pull ahead. But sometimes you stop watching your opponent and before you know it you are behind somehow.

[dondon151]

Okay, so here's another recent Seprix game:
http://gokosalvager.com/static/logprettifier.html?20150112/log.54109627e4b0750ebc1f6911.1421080732514.txt

Any thoughts on this one? Note: I will allow you did not get the very best shuffle luck.

This looks like a pretty boring kingdom, but Seprix's Ironmonger buy on T10 should be at minimum a BoM, and Cartographer wouldn't be bad, either.

I'm not certain if Baker is unconditionally better than Cartographer; Cartographer's strength in these sorts of decks is hard to assess.

Turn 14 should have been a Duchy; if Seprix had been tracking his opponent's deck, he would have known that the opponent had not yet played his Gold or either of his Silvers, which basically guarantees a Province. Seprix would reshuffle his deck after turn 14, so his Gold, Ironmongers, and Bakers would go back in, and he would have 4 coin tokens in reserve.

[TheExpressicist]

Buying that turn 9 gold is puzzling. One coin token would have turned that into a Province. By my count, even without the gold he would have had enough coin tokens to buy Provinces on each of the turns that he used his gold.

[Awaclus]

A win is a win. A loss is a loss.

[pacovf]

[guidobass]

Obviously, what you do depends on the Kingdom, but to really simplify things, I teach/tell players to always try to get your money's worth. Got $6, get a gold. Got $8, spend all $8. A Province or 2 early may not hurt you, but may pressure your opponent.

Buy the cards that give you extra actions, actions and cards, actions and money, extra cards/money. Get fall-through cards (+ action) if they help you. Avoid attack cards, unless they benefit your hand when played. Trashers can be good/necessary.

When in doubt, buy money, limit action cars.

[jaketheyak]

Obviously, what you do depends on the Kingdom, but to really simplify things, I teach/tell players to always try to get your money's worth. Got $6, get a gold. Got $8, spend all $8. A Province or 2 early may not hurt you, but may pressure your opponent.

Buy the cards that give you extra actions, actions and cards, actions and money, extra cards/money. Get fall-through cards (+ action) if they help you. Avoid attack cards, unless they benefit your hand when played. Trashers can be good/necessary.

When in doubt, buy money, limit action cars.

I... I can't tell if this is satire.

[Seprix]

Obviously, what you do depends on the Kingdom, but to really simplify things, I teach/tell players to always try to get your money's worth. Got $6, get a gold. Got $8, spend all $8. A Province or 2 early may not hurt you, but may pressure your opponent.

Buy the cards that give you extra actions, actions and cards, actions and money, extra cards/money. Get fall-through cards (+ action) if they help you. Avoid attack cards, unless they benefit your hand when played. Trashers can be good/necessary.

When in doubt, buy money, limit action cars.

All of this is wrong.

It all depends on the board, my friend. Gold is usually something you want to avoid/have only one of. Money clogs up your deck in Engines, and isn't something you need if you can buy a Province with all your deck already sans the money. Gold should almost always be bought in a Big Money deck or something where it's necessary and perhaps a few Colony games. It all depends on the board for sure.

Your money's worth idea... It's not at all correct. Think of it this way. There is a kingdom with Scout ($4), Chapel ($2), and Silver ($3). Your starting hand is 4/3. Do you open Scout Silver? Of course not. Chapel is worth the $4 (and Scout is certainly not worth $4) and Silver helps you to get to better cards. Money is just a way to get to cards you want. If you have more money than you're using to spend on cards, you're wasting time you could be spending winning. I know it's an extreme example, but if this game has taught me anything, it's that there is NO SET RULES TO PLAY. There are general guidelines, but there's always an exception. Is there a board where you DON'T want chapel? Sure. It's very rare, but it's there.

Getting Provinces early is okay for new players, but you almost certainly won't be doing that with a good +buy card on the board in an Engine setting. As said before, it's all on what the board is.

When in doubt, buy action cards that aren't terminal. Though this isn't a rule anyone should follow either. What I would encourage is to let people do their own thing, fail, and learn from it. Like me. I don't feel like I'm learning when I lose, but really, I do.

And Attack cards slow your opponent. Sea Hag doesn't help you at all, but it's just so strong anyways. If it helps you, awesome! But if it doesn't, it needs to be a strong attack. Which is why Saboteur fails, but Sea Hag does not.

I don't know really, but I feel like what you're saying isn't right from what I've seen in high level play.

[TheOthin]

This reminds me of a bit of a trickier dilemma I've run into a lot: deciding between two cards you actually want in your deck, but you have more of an immediate need for the cheaper one. Maybe you could pick up a key $5 terminal, but you're a bit heavy on terminals and there's a village you'd rather add first, if you could be sure you'd be able to get the expensive terminal right afterward. But if you can't be sure you'll hit $5 again soon, it can be tempting to spend it while you have it.

Now that I'm typing this out I'm getting the idea that one good general rule for this might be using deck tracking to get a good idea of whether or not you'll hit $4 or whatever you need for the cheaper card before your next reshuffle, but are there any other good things to keep in mind?

[Mic Qsenoch]

This reminds me of a bit of a trickier dilemma I've run into a lot: deciding between two cards you actually want in your deck, but you have more of an immediate need for the cheaper one. Maybe you could pick up a key $5 terminal, but you're a bit heavy on terminals and there's a village you'd rather add first, if you could be sure you'd be able to get the expensive terminal right afterward. But if you can't be sure you'll hit $5 again soon, it can be tempting to spend it while you have it.

Now that I'm typing this out I'm getting the idea that one good general rule for this might be using deck tracking to get a good idea of whether or not you'll hit $4 or whatever you need for the cheaper card before your next reshuffle, but are there any other good things to keep in mind?

I would err on the side of getting the key expensive card, especially if hitting the threshold again soon is at all doubtful. If your fear is mainly about being overterminal'd, then I say go for it (too many terminals > too few). This is very case sensitive though, if you run into this choice anytime soon, post the log. You are correct that deck tracking can be very important here. The important general factors are the obvious things:
- How much money will I have in future turns? How likely am I to reach the expensive threshold again and when?
- How important is having the expensive card (or the cheap one) in my next shuffle?
- Is the split on either component important? If having a limited number of villages will cripple you later, get the cheap village. 

[guidobass]

Obviously, what you do depends on the Kingdom, but to really simplify things, I teach/tell players to always try to get your money's worth. Got $6, get a gold. Got $8, spend all $8. A Province or 2 early may not hurt you, but may pressure your opponent.

Buy the cards that give you extra actions, actions and cards, actions and money, extra cards/money. Get fall-through cards (+ action) if they help you. Avoid attack cards, unless they benefit your hand when played. Trashers can be good/necessary.

When in doubt, buy money, limit action cars.

All of this is wrong.

It all depends on the board, my friend. Gold is usually something you want to avoid/have only one of. Money clogs up your deck in Engines, and isn't something you need if you can buy a Province with all your deck already sans the money. Gold should almost always be bought in a Big Money deck or something where it's necessary and perhaps a few Colony games. It all depends on the board for sure.

Your money's worth idea... It's not at all correct. Think of it this way. There is a kingdom with Scout ($4), Chapel ($2), and Silver ($3). Your starting hand is 4/3. Do you open Scout Silver? Of course not. Chapel is worth the $4 (and Scout is certainly not worth $4) and Silver helps you to get to better cards. Money is just a way to get to cards you want. If you have more money than you're using to spend on cards, you're wasting time you could be spending winning. I know it's an extreme example, but if this game has taught me anything, it's that there is NO SET RULES TO PLAY. There are general guidelines, but there's always an exception. Is there a board where you DON'T want chapel? Sure. It's very rare, but it's there.

Getting Provinces early is okay for new players, but you almost certainly won't be doing that with a good +buy card on the board in an Engine setting. As said before, it's all on what the board is.

When in doubt, buy action cards that aren't terminal. Though this isn't a rule anyone should follow either. What I would encourage is to let people do their own thing, fail, and learn from it. Like me. I don't feel like I'm learning when I lose, but really, I do.

And Attack cards slow your opponent. Sea Hag doesn't help you at all, but it's just so strong anyways. If it helps you, awesome! But if it doesn't, it needs to be a strong attack. Which is why Saboteur fails, but Sea Hag does not.

I don't know really, but I feel like what you're saying isn't right from what I've seen in high level play.

This is why I hate putting messages into threads.

I understand all the strategy stuff, what SHOULD be done. I understand that doing certain things early goes against the grain for you, and the experts.

I did say "Obviously, what you do depends on the Kingdom", and no idea is all correct because "Obviously, what you do depends on the Kingdom". But the person who started this was looking for help, not an analysis of how to play a Kingdom that they may not ever play again.  There's a lot more to think about in any game, as the poster probably knows. They want something to try.

Maybe you all play top quality players all the time so you have to be "on your game". I don't think "high level play" is what was asked for here. I didn't get technical, I just gave simple advice on what to try, not make your mantra.

So, it's not "all wrong" or satire. It's just advice. General guidelines in 100 words or less, or more.

[jaketheyak]

Sorry, didn't mean to be snarky, but it was just such very very bad advice that it looked like you were deliberately trying to be funny.
Everything you said looked like a list of mistakes that new players make:

Spending the full value of your hand instead of buying the key cards that your deck actually needs.
Buying Provinces as soon as you hit $8, regardless of what kind of shape your deck is currently in.
Avoiding attack cards that only hurt your opponent and don't help you (this one is often true, but ignore Sea Hag at your peril).
Buying money and avoiding buying too many actions, i.e. favouring a big money strategy over an engine.

The one thing you definitely got right was when you said "trashers can be good/necessary", but that is such an incredible understatement.

Yes, it always depends on the board, but high-level players will almost always put together an engine if there is one to be had.
Try and watch some of the videos that these players have on Twitch/Youtube (like Mic Qsenoch here).
In particular, I personally found it quite an eye-opener to realise just how long really good players will delay buying green cards.
It takes real control to let your opponent take an early lead, whilst being confident in your ability to come back with a power engine.

ETA: Oh, also, these are all mistakes that I have made/continue to make. Getting good at this game is hard work, which is why I objected to Seprix's original comments in the first place.

[Seprix]

http://www.gokosalvager.com/static/logprettifier.html?/20150116/log.5139535be4b0cd4b5a40dccd.1421474488643.txt

This one stung. I think what I should have done was first off, NOT buy Squire. I didn't want more Silver, but I should have just gotten nothing there I think. Also, I for sure did not get enough Bridges early on. I think my buying was not optimal, though I rallied for this awesome comeback for a second there. In the end, he won. It's hard to overcome a 3 Province deficit, and I didn't want to Green yet because I just wasn't ready, I felt.

[c4master]

If you wanted to go for a bridge megaturn (I'm not sure whether that's possible on this board), you should avoid silver and I personally wouldn't have opened Ironworks, I guess.

[Awaclus]

If you wanted to go for a bridge megaturn (I'm not sure whether that's possible on this board), you should avoid silver and I personally wouldn't have opened Ironworks, I guess.

You have to open Ironworks if you're going for a Bridge megaturn.

[eigensheep]

Definitely go for bridge megaturn.

Your big problem here is that you got 5 villages before your second terminal.

Trashing needs to be gotten early. Every time you play your bishop it's like gaining a laboratory.

[Throwaway_bicycling]

http://www.gokosalvager.com/static/logprettifier.html?/20150116/log.5139535be4b0cd4b5a40dccd.1421474488643.txt

This one stung. I think what I should have done was first off, NOT buy Squire. I didn't want more Silver, but I should have just gotten nothing there I think. Also, I for sure did not get enough Bridges early on. I think my buying was not optimal, though I rallied for this awesome comeback for a second there. In the end, he won. It's hard to overcome a 3 Province deficit, and I didn't want to Green yet because I just wasn't ready, I felt.

Last post for me on this thread, I swear.

Okay, so your commentary here is focusing on what you bought/didn't buy rather than what your overall strategy or approach was. Again, it's easy to tell what what your opponent was up to: Big Money with Lab for additional draw, aided by Haggler. Also note that this is pretty fast: four Provinces in 13 turns as played, and six Provinces in 17 turns, aided somewhat by a 5/2 opening. But wait: as you note, there is Bridge on the board, and cards that can help you acquire and play a lot of them.

So: imagine (say) turn 15 where you play (say) 6 Bridges and $12. Opponent already has 4 Provinces, but you can buy the other 4 plus 3 Duchies and, of course, you acquired another Duchy with Ironworks earlier in the turn. Game over, and Seprix wins! It could happen...now how might you try to make that happen?

[eHalcyon]

Definitely go for bridge megaturn.

Your big problem here is that you got 5 villages before your second terminal.

Trashing needs to be gotten early. Every time you play your bishop it's like gaining a laboratory.

Not a great comparison. Bishop helps your opponents just as much, so you're not gaining anything over then other than the VP. That said, it's possible that the trashing will help you more than your opponent.  Even so, Ironworks is more important early on because most of your key cards are $4.

[Seprix]

http://www.gokosalvager.com/static/logprettifier.html?/20150116/log.5139535be4b0cd4b5a40dccd.1421474488643.txt

This one stung. I think what I should have done was first off, NOT buy Squire. I didn't want more Silver, but I should have just gotten nothing there I think. Also, I for sure did not get enough Bridges early on. I think my buying was not optimal, though I rallied for this awesome comeback for a second there. In the end, he won. It's hard to overcome a 3 Province deficit, and I didn't want to Green yet because I just wasn't ready, I felt.

Last post for me on this thread, I swear.

Okay, so your commentary here is focusing on what you bought/didn't buy rather than what your overall strategy or approach was. Again, it's easy to tell what what your opponent was up to: Big Money with Lab for additional draw, aided by Haggler. Also note that this is pretty fast: four Provinces in 13 turns as played, and six Provinces in 17 turns, aided somewhat by a 5/2 opening. But wait: as you note, there is Bridge on the board, and cards that can help you acquire and play a lot of them.

So: imagine (say) turn 15 where you play (say) 6 Bridges and $12. Opponent already has 4 Provinces, but you can buy the other 4 plus 3 Duchies and, of course, you acquired another Duchy with Ironworks earlier in the turn. Game over, and Seprix wins! It could happen...now how might you try to make that happen?

Because Bishop was not great trashing (opponent gets trashing here too for free), my plan was to draw my entire deck every turn, and from there, Bridge out. Except I didn't trash aggressively enough. Ironworks Silver is the right call for turn one, but after that, no silver. My main mistake is getting $3 hands, and buying anything with it.

[Asper]

Just one word to those accusing Seprix' question of being rude: Asking why you are always losing recently doesn't imply you think that all your opponents are morons. It just implies that you don't think they all became much better than you overnight. Which is reasonable, i might add.

[WanderingWinder]

Just one word to those accusing Seprix' question of being rude: Asking why you are always losing recently doesn't imply you think that all your opponents are morons. It just implies that you don't think they all became much better than you overnight. Which is reasonable, i might add.

In defense of those people, before he edited the OP, it called people he lost to all the time "complete idiots", which does indeed imply that.

[Mic Qsenoch]

http://www.gokosalvager.com/static/logprettifier.html?/20150116/log.5139535be4b0cd4b5a40dccd.1421474488643.txt

This one stung. I think what I should have done was first off, NOT buy Squire. I didn't want more Silver, but I should have just gotten nothing there I think. Also, I for sure did not get enough Bridges early on. I think my buying was not optimal, though I rallied for this awesome comeback for a second there. In the end, he won. It's hard to overcome a 3 Province deficit, and I didn't want to Green yet because I just wasn't ready, I felt.

There's no reason to buy Provinces until you are winning the game. As the engine player you have access to a massive pile of points from Bishop that your opponent can't get. You can buy Golds and Haggle 5 costs and play multiple Bishops (trashing Golds) a turn until you catch up with your opponent and then buy the Provinces. Stef wrote a game report about this exact scenario:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=12354.0

[Asper]

Just one word to those accusing Seprix' question of being rude: Asking why you are always losing recently doesn't imply you think that all your opponents are morons. It just implies that you don't think they all became much better than you overnight. Which is reasonable, i might add.

In defense of those people, before he edited the OP, it called people he lost to all the time "complete idiots", which does indeed imply that.

Oh. That changes things.