Print

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

[gkrieg13]

People keep talking about how raze removes itself from your deck.  This is the exact same thing with ratcatcher.  The only difference is that you don't get the extra card's worth of sifting when you remove ratcatcher from your deck.  The fact that you can choose when it's effect takes place is also huge!  You can wait until you get that curse in your hand before you use it!

[markusin]

These events are tricky to rate. It will be obvious when Alms is the correct buy, so it's hard to credit outplaying your opponent(s) based on using Alms itself instead of the card you gained with it. That's not the case with Borrow.

I feel like the ranking for a card like Borrow would reflect on how often it's worth buying, but a card like Alms would undoubtedly be first if the rankings were based on gain/buy rate alone since you'd expect to buy it pretty much every game. I guess Alms should be ranked based on how often you'll want to skip playing treasures in order to use it's effect.

To me it seems the events have to be ranked based on different metrics than regular cards and those metrics vary from event to event. What does it really mean for an event to be strong?

I think it still works to consider the change in your overall win percentage if you don't have access to the event.  If you play a million games on random boards where you have exclusive access to Alms and your opponent doesn't, what happens to your win percentage?  Same question for Borrow instead of Alms.  I'd guess Alms is a lot better than Borrow when you consider it that way.  That means that Alms is contributing more to your win percentage than Borrow is.

There are probably cases where this way of looking at it doesn't fit with our intuitive understanding of card strength, but I don't think events are really different from cards this way.

I guess the weirdness for me comes from how they don't compete with stuff at the 0-cost mark. I guess Alms competes with a buy and Borrow with a card next turn. You can maybe grade them based on how often that exchange is worth making or how often it's worth using their effect instead of getting a 2-cost card. I guess they do compete when you have $2 in the case of Borrow and when you have $4 and 2 buys in the case of Alms by spending Treasure.

[markusin]

People keep talking about how raze removes itself from your deck.  This is the exact same thing with ratcatcher.  The only difference is that you don't get the extra card's worth of sifting when you remove ratcatcher from your deck.  The fact that you can choose when it's effect takes place is also huge!  You can wait until you get that curse in your hand before you use it!

With Raze I ask myself how often are you going to trash something costing more than Estate. For more expensive cards I'd rather trash-for-benefit on the level of Remodel.

[aku_chi]

People keep talking about how raze removes itself from your deck.  This is the exact same thing with ratcatcher.  The only difference is that you don't get the extra card's worth of sifting when you remove ratcatcher from your deck.  The fact that you can choose when it's effect takes place is also huge!  You can wait until you get that curse in your hand before you use it!

With Raze I ask myself how often are you going to trash something costing more than Estate. For more expensive cards I'd rather trash-for-benefit on the level of Remodel.

Granted.  I would rarely trash high-value cards with Raze.  But that's no different from Ratcatcher!  If Raze trashes an Estate, a Copper (because there was no Estate in hand), an Estate, and then itself, I'm pretty pleased.  It can generally trash those three cards faster than Ratcatcher can trash two junk cards.

[Qvist]

Part 3

[Awaclus]

As expected of Stonemason! It's still underrated though.

[markusin]

People keep talking about how raze removes itself from your deck.  This is the exact same thing with ratcatcher.  The only difference is that you don't get the extra card's worth of sifting when you remove ratcatcher from your deck.  The fact that you can choose when it's effect takes place is also huge!  You can wait until you get that curse in your hand before you use it!

With Raze I ask myself how often are you going to trash something costing more than Estate. For more expensive cards I'd rather trash-for-benefit on the level of Remodel.

Granted.  I would rarely trash high-value cards with Raze.  But that's no different from Ratcatcher!  If Raze trashes an Estate, a Copper (because there was no Estate in hand), an Estate, and then itself, I'm pretty pleased.  It can generally trash those three cards faster than Ratcatcher can trash two junk cards.

Yeah that makes sense. I do think Ratcatcher is safer to get in multiples when you have spare $2 to spare. Even with multiple Ratcatcher, you can always trash cards from your hand when most convenient. I guess that's how Ratcatcher is supposed to be used anyway. Only being able to trash at the start of turn is a definite weakness though.

[drsteelhammer]

I think Stonemason is fine where it is now. It's not better than Chapel and the Travellers are quite hard to compare to the other two costs, so I see it as a second place for Stonemason.

[Chris is me]

Hamlet is definitely better than Fool's Gold, in that it's more often useful. I skip Fool's Gold way more often than I skip Hamlet. But it's pretty close.

I think Stonemason is more often critical than Peasant, which can be a bit slow for a lot of games. Page at 2 isn't insane but I think it will fall in future years.

Ratcatcher I think is a bit overrated. It's nice how it doesn't really impact your deck, but it's often difficult to decide what you want to trash as your turn starts.

[assemble_me]

As expected of Stonemason! It's still underrated though.

Indeed, I have it at #2 as well.

In my voting, Peasant is at #3 and Page at #4. I think it's easier to upgrade Peasants, that's why I voted it that way around.
Any comment on Peasant vs. Page by someone who has more experience with Adventures?

[faust]

Hamlet is definitely better than Fool's Gold, in that it's more often useful. I skip Fool's Gold way more often than I skip Hamlet. But it's pretty close.

That does not mean Hamlet is better though. Of course you don't skip Hamlet often; it's a cantrip. But FG impacts the game way more when you do get it, and thus it deserves to be above Hamlet.

[jsh357]

I put peasant above page. Teacher and champion are both crazy, but teacher adds more to your deck since you get access to four tokens. It also tends to be easier to get. Disciple and soldier are also really great cards. (Soldier depends on the board) I think page is slightly less good since it has to add treasure to your deck while upgrading and also runs the risk of failing due to warrior clashing.

Both are very close, mind. It doesn't bug me one is ranked over the other.

[Beyond Awesome]

As expected of Stonemason! It's still underrated though.

Indeed, I have it at #2 as well.

In my voting, Peasant is at #3 and Page at #4. I think it's easier to upgrade Peasants, that's why I voted it that way around.
Any comment on Peasant vs. Page by someone who has more experience with Adventures?

My experience is that Champion is crazy insane.

Anyway, SM is really, really good. The travellers are also really good. I don't think Page will drop in future years, but Peasant might and swap places with SM. Anyway, it is good to see it ranked where it is. I have no idea how it got ranked so low last time.

[Beyond Awesome]

By the way, I ranked both Raze and Ratcatcher 5 and 6. They are really good trashers. I am surprised they are ranked so low.

[A Drowned Kernel]

I don't have much experience with the Traveller's but what I have and my gut instinct says that while Champion is better than Teacher, Disciple is much, much, much better than Hero, which IMO might give Peasant the edge. Like, if the Peasant line stopped at Disciple, I think it would still be one of the best cards in the game.

[Limetime]

I put peasant above page. Teacher and champion are both crazy, but teacher adds more to your deck since you get access to four tokens. It also tends to be easier to get. Disciple and soldier are also really great cards. (Soldier depends on the board) I think page is slightly less good since it has to add treasure to your deck while upgrading and also runs the risk of failing due to warrior clashing.

Both are very close, mind. It doesn't bug me one is ranked over the other.

Champion is harder to get but at least isn't a reserve card like teacher. The thing going for champion is it affects all cards, some events take away the purpose of teacher and it isn't a reserve. The thing going for teacher is that it can place 4 different tokens on piles(that have to be different) and it is easier to get.

[Beyond Awesome]

I think in 2P, Champion is not as hard to get as people think.

[werothegreat]

Champion > Teacher
Hero < Disciple
Warrior > Fugitive
Treasure Hunter < Soldier
Page (qua card) < Peasant (qua card)

Overall, Teacher is easier to get, though.

Specific things:
TH is great in Feodum games.
Soldier is bananas in Attack-heavy games, particularly with Duration Attacks.
Disciple gives KC a run for its money as the best TR variant
The only point of Fugitive is to get to Disciple more quickly
Warrior can be incredibly oppressive if you keep a bunch of Pages in your deck.  Hitting your opponent's TH or Warrior before they can get Hero is basically game-winning.

[aku_chi]

I've played quite a lot of Adventures (2-4 player games) and I think the Travellers are a bit overrated.

The first thing to realize is that they're costed like Chapel.  By and large, you want to buy one copy of a Traveller and you want it in your opening buy.  So, like Chapel, the Travellers are often going to cost you three coins and an opening buy.  (Caveat: I have bought multiple Peasants for multiple Disciples.  I think this is a reasonable approach on some boards.)

Then there is the opportunity cost.  Page and Peasant have terrible on-play effects.  Herbalist and Pearl Diver are rightly at the bottom of the rankings, and Peasant and Page are strictly worse.  They're even worse than that, because you need to play them on turns 3 or 4 (Herbalist and Pearl Diver are better in the mid-game) - and you probably payed three coins for them.  Soldier is a poor card.  How realistic is it to have another attack in play on turns 5-7, when you play it?  You would need an action splitter or Urchin.  So, it's terminal silver and an attack that probably does nothing (it might do something in multiplayer games).  Treasure Hunter is a really powerful Silver gainer (especially in multiplayer), but it increases decksize, which is detrimental to Travellers.  So, it isn't until turn ~8-12 that you begin to get positive value out of your opening three-coin purchase.

Then there's the speed to get to the good stuff.  You need to see your Traveller five times before you hit the jackpot.  Without support, but also without ever missing your shuffle, you should expect to see Champion/Teacher around turn 15-17.  And Teacher does nothing until the following turn.  There are a lot of kingdoms where that is just too slow.  If it ever misses your shuffle (very likely without support), you won't see Champion/Teacher until turn 18 at the earliest.  Forget about it!  Thankfully, the Peasant line has a fantastic penultimate card in Disciple.  When I buy Peasant, I often have Disciple as a goal.  Exchanging for Teacher is an option if everything is going well.  Hero is not a great consolation prize (better with Bank or Platinum).

With the right support, the Travellers can be fantastic, for sure.  Deck accelerators like Ironmonger and Spice Merchant synergize very well.  Alternate VP lengthens the game, which makes it very likely that Champion/Teacher will get great value.  All said, the Travellers are great cards.  But so are Stonemason, Hamlet, Squire, Courtyard, and Fools Gold.

[werothegreat]

By and large, you want to buy one copy of a Traveller and you want it in your opening buy.

Hahahahahahahahahaha no.

You want to grab as many Disciples, Soldiers and Warriors as you can get your grubby little mitts on.  With Warrior, you don't mind just having a bunch of un-exchanged Pages in your deck, and Peasant can be crucial as a +Buy.  You can also throw tokens on Page.

Don't think about Travellers as "oh, I want Champion/Teacher, I only need one, I'll buy one Page/Peasant."  Think of the upgrades as Kingdom cards, just with an alternate cost - instead of costing their listed price, they cost and time.  If you want more Disciples, snag some more Peasants and exchange them.

[Beyond Awesome]

It's like you say deck accelerators help. But, you mention things like Ironmonger and Spice Merchant. With good to great trashing, the travellers become much better and easier to get quickly. And, why wouldn't you buy them on your opening buys even for $3, and about 50% of the time you will pay $2 because you are opening 5/2 (although I swear I open 3/4 more often).


The thing is the impact they have on the game which is huge. Champion's impact is bigger than KC. Teacher is probably even bigger than KC as well when you get down to it. Peasant can turn into a TR that is also a gainer. With what games I have played, I would say they are hardly overrated. I have seen games where an engine was not possible at all suddenly come to life. Like every time these cards are on the board, the possibility of an engine is very strong even if you don't have any normal engine components.

PPE: 1

Champion practically warps the whole game around it. You can't ignore the travellers if they are on the board. If you do, you'll lose. Usually, what makes a card good is if it is a must buy which the travllers are.

Also, minus the whole travller exchange thing, Herbalist and Peasant are almost the same card. The money top-decking thing of Herbalist is super-weak and you rarely ever want to top-deck your treasures. Hell, in the Ruins section I mention how Herbalist and Ruined Market are almost the same card, and it's true.

[jsh357]

I think there are boards that are not conducive to travellers, but they are rare.

Turn 15-17 doesn't seem like a reasonable turn estimate for getting Teacher/Champion to me. With accelerators you should probably expect 10-12, but there's a lot of variance.

[aku_chi]

It's like you say deck accelerators help. But, you mention things like Ironmonger and Spice Merchant. With good to great trashing, the travellers become much better and easier to get quickly. And, why wouldn't you buy them on your opening buys even for $3, and about 50% of the time you will pay $2 because you are opening 5/2 (although I swear I open 3/4 more often).

You only have a 16.7% chance of opening 2/5 or 5/2...

Deck thinning helps, but terminal trashing is a risk.  Peasant, Soldier, Warrior, and Hero are all terminal.  You need to play them.  By the time you get Warrior, trashing is less important and you might have some action splitters.  But the Peasant line and terminal trashing has more significant antisynergy.

The thing is the impact they have on the game which is huge. Champion's impact is bigger than KC. Teacher is probably even bigger than KC as well when you get down to it. Peasant can turn into a TR that is also a gainer. With what games I have played, I would say they are hardly overrated. I have seen games where an engine was not possible at all suddenly come to life. Like every time these cards are on the board, the possibility of an engine is very strong even if you don't have any normal engine components.

Champion and Teacher are probably better than King's Court.  They also cost a LOT in time and opportunity cost.  You can't buy Champion for 7 coins.  If you could, that would be a better card than Page.

Concerning the last point: I'm skeptical.  In those games you've played, did everyone invest in Travellers?  If so, it's not surprising that the game slowed down and Champion/Teacher got huge value.  Travellers are better if everyone invests in them.  On boards where "an engine was not possible", I would like to see a Traveller strategy compete with big money.

Also, minus the whole travller exchange thing, Herbalist and Peasant are almost the same card. The money top-decking thing of Herbalist is super-weak and you rarely ever want to top-deck your treasures. Hell, in the Ruins section I mention how Herbalist and Ruined Market are almost the same card, and it's true.

I would be very unlikely to buy an Herbalist unless I expected to get some value out of the treasure top-decking.  Then again, I find the concept of buying Ruined Market incredulous.

[Jean-Michel]

I'm confident that Coin of the Realm will be higher in the next year's list. A card costing $2 that is comparable with Fishing Village is bound to be very powerful. Other than that, I have the same disagreements as I've had with the previous rankings - cantrips like Hamlet, Pawn and Haven are overrated. They just don't do anything really meaningful most of the time. Sure, if the Hamlet is the only village, I'll sigh and force myself to buy them. And of course if I don't have anything else to buy, I'll pick up one. But I still don't consider any of those three strong.

OK I've done complaining about Hamlet now. I guess I'll never learn to stop hating it.

[ehunt]

I'm confident that Coin of the Realm will be higher in the next year's list. A card costing $2 that is comparable with Fishing Village is bound to be very powerful. Other than that, I have the same disagreements as I've had with the previous rankings - cantrips like Hamlet, Pawn and Haven are overrated. They just don't do anything really meaningful most of the time. Sure, if the Hamlet is the only village, I'll sigh and force myself to buy them. And of course if I don't have anything else to buy, I'll pick up one. But I still don't consider any of those three strong.

OK I've done complaining about Hamlet now. I guess I'll never learn to stop hating it.

I dislike hamlet too (because it involves too much clicking!) but it's without a doubt one of the best villages, because of the +buy and the price, which allow you to easily have a bunch of them by the 3rd or 4th shuffle. There are so many combos that mitigate the drawback that it's not even crazy to prefer it to Worker's Village on some boards.