Print

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

[Burning Skull]

Pirate Ship is very strong if your opponent relies on Copper too much.

[Beyond Awesome]

Copper is OP

[traces Around]

Pirate Ship is very strong if your opponent relies on Copper too much.

This should be appreciated for its actual truth rather than just because it sounds funny.

[2.71828.....]

Conversations about pirate ship have been had before.

I like this quote (of a quote):

As theory famously put it:

"Every Dominion player tends to pass through four distinct and recognizable phases with respect to Pirate Ship, otherwise known as the What, Wow, Why, and Hey … phases.

What is the point of this card?
Wow, this card is unstoppably strong!
Why do I keep losing with Pirate Ship?
Hey, Pirate Ship is actually pretty bad …"

But more on topic, I really enjoy being able to use miser. It's a cool card

[Awaclus]

"Better than Pirate Ship", yet it only has a 14% win rate against Pirate Ship + FV in my earlier example.  It's not a simple better than or worse than relationship.  It depends on both the kingdom and opponent's strategy.  There is a time and place for both strategies.

Yeah, there is a time and place for Pirate Ship + FV when your opponent is going for Smithy/BM and there is a time and place for Smithy/BM never.

[NolanA]

Yeah, there is a time and place for Pirate Ship + FV when your opponent is going for Smithy/BM and there is a time and place for Smithy/BM never.

As mentioned in my earlier reply, the time and place I'd list for Pirate Ship + Strong Village combo in a 2 player game is generally when your opponent is doing something money sensitive without strong attacks, which includes far more than just Smithy / BM.  I'd generally open PS/FV and assume my opponent is going to do something money sensitive without strong attacks when the kingdom meets the criteria below:

1.  No strong attacks in kingdom, particularly cursing or hand size (Witch, Sea Hag, Ghost Ship, ...)
2.  Can't make a good draw your full deck type engine that includes source of multiple buys (Wharf, Smithy + Market/Festival/Salvager/...)
3.  Can't trash your treasure very quickly in early game (Chapel, ...)
4.  Can't get provinces relatively quickly without buying treasure (Merchant Ship, ...)
5.  Can't make an engine that blocks Pirate Ship attacks well (Lighthouse, ...)

Obviously most kingdoms aren't going to meet this criteria, but there are enough that I play the combo from time to time, when emphasizing the Sea Side expansion.  As I said earlier, so far I'm undefeated when playing this combo.   I'm open to challenges (on kingdom we agree upon beforehand).

Smithy / BM also has a place in games without a lot of expansions.   Assuming a Base + Sea Side focus like above, if the kingdom does not have strong attacks and you cannot make a draw your deck type engine with multiple buys, then Smithy (and variants) is likely to do well.   I wouldn't expect having a place for Smithy / BM to be controversial, but I can list some example kingdoms or games if you'd like.

[Awaclus]

3.  Can't trash your treasure very quickly in early game (Chapel, ...)

Pirate Ship gets super better if your opponent trashes all of their Coppers very quickly in the early game. If the only Treasures in their deck are Treasures that they actually don't want to trash and they have a good number of those Treasures, Pirate Ship is a pretty strong attack.

I'm open to challenges, if we can agree on the kingdom.

Sure thing, that sounds a lot more useful than this discussion, anyway. I think the obvious kingdom would be Pirate Ship + Fishing Village + 8 random cards (we can play some games with 8 full random and some with 8 random from just Base and Seaside, for instance).

[NolanA]

3.  Can't trash your treasure very quickly in early game (Chapel, ...)

Pirate Ship gets super better if your opponent trashes all of their Coppers very quickly in the early game. If the only Treasures in their deck are Treasures that they actually don't want to trash and they have a good number of those Treasures, Pirate Ship is a pretty strong attack.

It depends what the opponent is going to do with the Chapeled deck.  In some Chapel + FV strategies, they don't have a "good number of those treasures", and instead a large portion of the opponent's deck is either VC or action cards, so you don't hit treasure often with the Pirate Ship attacks and are slow to get Provinces. However, the Chapel strategies that would be most effective against the combo are generally covered by the other criteria, so I'll agree with you that Chapel can make the combo even better.

Sure thing, that sounds a lot more useful than this discussion, anyway. I think the obvious kingdom would be Pirate Ship + Fishing Village + 8 random cards (we can play some games with 8 full random and some with 8 random from just Base and Seaside, for instance).

 I'm open to that type of idea.   We can work out the details in PM. 

[Aleimon Thimble]

You've all been waiting for this! Okay, you haven't. But I'm gonna post it anyway. My top 3 favorite cards!


3. Haunted Woods

In the early Adventures discussions, I tried to convince people that Haunted Woods is stronger than Wharf. Turns out that it’s not. But it’s definitely cooler than Wharf. Its attack is weakish, but very interesting, and you can try to make it benefit yourself too if you get hit with it by topdecking stuff. But the main thing is the amazing delayed draw. +3 Cards on the next turn is so much stronger and sexier than +3 Cards now that I wouldn’t dare to compare this piece of pure beauty to something like Rabble. Plus, its name is cool, as well as its artwork. Haunted Woods sounds and looks scary, something you definitely want in your deck.

2. Prince

3 of the 5 cards in the top 5 are unconventional splitters (a category I kinda made up with cards that do not say +2 Actions but can leave you with extra Actions). I like those quirky engine cards a lot. Prince, however, is best with strong terminals. Militia, Monument, Smithy and Envoy are rock stars. The stars need to align for it to happen, and your engine needs to sort of kick into gear already, but if it does, your engine is now super reliable. I don’t care if DXV likes Black Market and Stash, to me, Prince is the ultimate Promo card. Plus, I got my copy of Prince when I finished third in the Dutch championship last year, so I have some positive memories of it to boot.

1. Herald

There it is. The single most satisfying thing in the Dominion universe. It’s called the Herald cascade. You play a Herald, +1 Card and +1 Action, and the top card of your deck is a… Herald! You play it for +1 Card and +1 Action, only to reveal… another Herald! The immense rush of dopamine in my brain whenever this happens can only be compared to hard drugs like cocaine or heroin. Disclaimer: don’t do heroin. Or cocaine. Maybe try weed if that’s legal where you live. Anyway, I digress. Do Heralds instead. You won’t be disappointed. Many, many kudos to drsteelhammer for getting this right early on, I will now give a like to your post, as I couldn’t do so earlier without spoiling it.

Full list:

1.   Herald
2.   Prince
3.   Haunted Woods
4.   Feodum
5.   Throne Room
6.   Counting House
7.   Miser
8.   Jester
9.   Highway
10.   Peasant
11.   Band of Misfits
12.   Golem
13.   Merchant Guild
14.   Minion
15.   Haggler
16.   Count
17.   Amulet
18.   Coppersmith
19.   University
20.   Forge
21.   Fortress
22.   Stonemason
23.   Bridge
24.   Apothecary
25.   Gardens
26.   Salvager
27.   Vault
28.   Saboteur
29.   Goons
30.   Quarry

[tristan]

Prince is cool as it is so game-changing but Herald is just a cheaper, conditional, forced-play version of Lost City. When it shines it is totally brilliant but most of the time it is mediocre or weak.

[aku_chi]

I think Haunted Woods and Rabble are pretty easy cards to compare, and the comparison is valuable.  They're both $5 terminal draw cards that attack your opponent by leaving junk cards on top of their deck.  Their attacks are most valuable when the opponent has a lot of victory cards and/or curses, and their "attacks" might help opponents who don't have junk cards in their deck.  I also believe that they have a very similar power level.

Of course, there are important differences.  As an attack, Rabble works better when stacked; multiple Haunted Woods don't matter.  There are a few more ways to play around Haunted Woods' attack (only buy events, discard junk or set it aside with Gear/Haven/etc...), though it can be more brutal than Rabble, and there are some different ways to work around Rabble's attack (Farming Village, Hunting Party (sometimes), Sage (sometimes), Scout!).  As draw, Rabble is better in a draw-your-deck style engine, and can be a big part of that engine.  Haunted Woods adds reliability to your turns and doesn't require as many villages.

[traces Around]

Herald is just a cheaper, conditional, forced-play version of Lost City. When it shines it is totally brilliant but most of the time it is mediocre or weak.

A cheaper, conditional version of one of the best cards in the game is not a most of the time mediocre or weak card.

[Aleimon Thimble]

I think Haunted Woods and Rabble are pretty easy cards to compare, and the comparison is valuable.  They're both $5 terminal draw cards that attack your opponent by leaving junk cards on top of their deck.  Their attacks are most valuable when the opponent has a lot of victory cards and/or curses, and their "attacks" might help opponents who don't have junk cards in their deck.  I also believe that they have a very similar power level.

Of course, there are important differences.  As an attack, Rabble works better when stacked; multiple Haunted Woods don't matter.  There are a few more ways to play around Haunted Woods' attack (only buy events, discard junk or set it aside with Gear/Haven/etc...), though it can be more brutal than Rabble, and there are some different ways to work around Rabble's attack (Farming Village, Hunting Party (sometimes), Sage (sometimes), Scout!).  As draw, Rabble is better in a draw-your-deck style engine, and can be a big part of that engine.  Haunted Woods adds reliability to your turns and doesn't require as many villages.

I think direct terminal draw and delayed draw are different enough that it requires a closer look to compare them, and Haunted Woods is a lot more comparable to Wharf (and maybe Enchantress, haven't played with it) than to Rabble. Delayed draw is usually better, because, like you said, it adds reliability and doesn't require a Village in your starting hand. It works in a draw-your-deck engine just fine, you just have to be a bit more careful how many Woods you're playing each turn (just like with Wharf) instead of mindlessly alternating Village and Rabble until you have your deck in your hand. Rabble's attack is comparable to Haunted Woods, and it's also stronger on average, I'll give you that; Haunted Woods more than makes up for it with its delayed draw, though.

Prince is cool as it is so game-changing but Herald is just a cheaper, conditional, forced-play version of Lost City. When it shines it is totally brilliant but most of the time it is mediocre or weak.

Herald is a rock star pretty much always. It enables engines almost by itself, only needing very light trashing and maybe +Buy. The only reason Herald might be weak is if there are cards you do not want to autoplay (forced trashers and Ambassador, stuff like that). In that sense, it's a bit like Golem (which would be a power card as well if it didn't cost 4P).

[McGarnacle]

Herald is quite strong. It provides draw and village capability, plus the on buy effect can be nice for setting up a mega turn.

[tristan]

Herald is just a cheaper, conditional, forced-play version of Lost City. When it shines it is totally brilliant but most of the time it is mediocre or weak.

A cheaper, conditional version of one of the best cards in the game is not a most of the time mediocre or weak card.

In most Kingdoms Herald is weak. Sure, with gainers, decent trashing or in slogs it can shine but it shines rarely.

[traces Around]

Herald is just a cheaper, conditional, forced-play version of Lost City. When it shines it is totally brilliant but most of the time it is mediocre or weak.

A cheaper, conditional version of one of the best cards in the game is not a most of the time mediocre or weak card.

In most Kingdoms Herald is weak. Sure, with gainers, decent trashing or in slogs it can shine but it shines rarely.

Sigh.

Man, do you even engine?

[Aleimon Thimble]

Herald is just a cheaper, conditional, forced-play version of Lost City. When it shines it is totally brilliant but most of the time it is mediocre or weak.

A cheaper, conditional version of one of the best cards in the game is not a most of the time mediocre or weak card.

In most Kingdoms Herald is weak. Sure, with gainers, decent trashing or in slogs it can shine but it shines rarely.

Why the actual hell would you use Herald in slogs? It's a pure engine card, and one of the strongest ones in the game at that.

[AdrianHealey]

Presumably for it's overbuy effect?

[tristan]

Herald is just a cheaper, conditional, forced-play version of Lost City. When it shines it is totally brilliant but most of the time it is mediocre or weak.

A cheaper, conditional version of one of the best cards in the game is not a most of the time mediocre or weak card.

In most Kingdoms Herald is weak. Sure, with gainers, decent trashing or in slogs it can shine but it shines rarely.

Why the actual hell would you use Herald in slogs? It's a pure engine card, and one of the strongest ones in the game at that.

The notion that Herald is unconditionally one of the best cards in the game is utterly preposterous.

Herald only becomes good once your deck reaches a decent Action card density. That's why it is good in long games (good luck achieving anything with Herald in games that take 15-20 turns).
As I said, you can reach this density via decent trashing (and mandatory trashers like Trading Post can backfire in the endgame as Herald force-plays Action cards). If gainers are on the board Herald is also OK because the cost of getting Heralds is lower (of course there could be other decent 4s; e.g. Ironmongers are most often better and even a simple Village+Smithy draw engine is most likely to beat a Herald deck) than if you always have to buy it.

[Aleimon Thimble]

Herald is just a cheaper, conditional, forced-play version of Lost City. When it shines it is totally brilliant but most of the time it is mediocre or weak.

A cheaper, conditional version of one of the best cards in the game is not a most of the time mediocre or weak card.

In most Kingdoms Herald is weak. Sure, with gainers, decent trashing or in slogs it can shine but it shines rarely.

Why the actual hell would you use Herald in slogs? It's a pure engine card, and one of the strongest ones in the game at that.

The notion that Herald is unconditionally one of the best cards in the game is utterly preposterous.

Herald only becomes good once your deck reaches a decent Action card density. That's why it is good in long games (good luck achieving anything with Herald in games that take 15-20 turns).
As I said, you can reach this density via decent trashing (and mandatory trashers like Trading Post can backfire in the endgame as Herald force-plays Action cards). If gainers are on the board Herald is also OK because the cost of getting Heralds is lower (of course there could be other decent 4s; e.g. Ironmongers are most often better and even a simple Village+Smithy draw engine is most likely to beat a Herald deck) than if you always have to buy it.

Well, yeah, Herald is good whenever your deck has a decent Action density. Almost all engines have a decent Action density though. Otherwise you're not playing an engine, and if you're not playing an engine, you shouldn't get Herald. Could you clarify why you would ever buy it in slogs?

Basically, if a Village would suck, then Herald usually also sucks (except if what you're missing is draw, because Herald can provide draw).
On the other hand, if a Village is good, then Herald is amazing (except if you have mandatory trashers you can't get rid of).

[tristan]

Herald is just a cheaper, conditional, forced-play version of Lost City. When it shines it is totally brilliant but most of the time it is mediocre or weak.

A cheaper, conditional version of one of the best cards in the game is not a most of the time mediocre or weak card.

In most Kingdoms Herald is weak. Sure, with gainers, decent trashing or in slogs it can shine but it shines rarely.

Why the actual hell would you use Herald in slogs? It's a pure engine card, and one of the strongest ones in the game at that.

The notion that Herald is unconditionally one of the best cards in the game is utterly preposterous.

Herald only becomes good once your deck reaches a decent Action card density. That's why it is good in long games (good luck achieving anything with Herald in games that take 15-20 turns).
As I said, you can reach this density via decent trashing (and mandatory trashers like Trading Post can backfire in the endgame as Herald force-plays Action cards). If gainers are on the board Herald is also OK because the cost of getting Heralds is lower (of course there could be other decent 4s; e.g. Ironmongers are most often better and even a simple Village+Smithy draw engine is most likely to beat a Herald deck) than if you always have to buy it.

Basically, if a Village would suck, then Herald usually also sucks (except if what you're missing is draw, because Herald can provide draw).
On the other hand, if a Village is good, then Herald is amazing (except if you have mandatory trashers you can't get rid of).

It's a timing issue. In a Kingdom with Herald and Village you might want a few Villages during the early game while your Heralds virtually always "miss".
About the game length, as I already said, if the game is short enough the turns in which Herald shines are potentially too few to make Herald a good card in the respective Kingdom.

[drsteelhammer]

20 turns is very long. It's probably more accurate that you only want Heralds when the game is shorter than that.

[AdrianHealey]

Isn't lost village, without the overpay effect, strictly better?

[ThetaSigma12]

Isn't lost village, without the overpay effect, strictly better?

No.

[AdrianHealey]

When isn't it?