Print

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

[aku_chi]

Ironmonger is useful in every deck. Herald isn't.

Ironmonger is pretty much village in engines with trashing .

Except that in the early game, Ironmonger helps you reach $5 and cycle.  Herald doesn't.  Yes, Herald has a higher ceiling in the decks that most people prefer to play, but it often isn't possible to reach that ceiling.  Ironmonger, on the other hand, is pretty much always great.

[Limetime]

Ironmonger, on the other hand, is pretty much always mediocrely good

FTFY

[tristan]

Ironmonger, on the other hand, is pretty much always mediocrely good

FTFY

Nope.
A Peddler that discards a Copper is a far better start than a cantrip for 4$.
Herald does have its uses but only in very particular games and even in these games you will virtually always buy a few Ironmongers before you switch towards Heralds.

[McGarnacle]

Ironmonger, on the other hand, is pretty much always mediocrely good

FTFY

Nope.
A Peddler that discards a Copper is a far better start than a cantrip for 4$.
Herald does have its uses but only in very particular games and even in these games you will virtually always buy a few Ironmongers before you switch towards Heralds.

Unless you don't have access to Ironmonger.

[Beyond Awesome]

In my Qvist rankings, I have ironmonger ranked as the second best $4-coster behind Remake

[tristan]

Ironmonger, on the other hand, is pretty much always mediocrely good

FTFY

Nope.
A Peddler that discards a Copper is a far better start than a cantrip for 4$.
Herald does have its uses but only in very particular games and even in these games you will virtually always buy a few Ironmongers before you switch towards Heralds.

Unless you don't have access to Ironmonger.

When comparing Ironmonger and Herald it kinda makes sense to assume that they are present in the very same Kingdom.

[Deadlock39]

It also makes sense to compare the relative impact each card has on the situation you are considering if you are assuming they are both present. In the case of a board where a engine enabled by Herald is present, you could replace Ironmonger with Pearl Diver and build essentially the same deck. It is true you want to open with Ironmongers over Herald in this case, but that fact does not support the conclusion that Ironmonger is a better card, or more important in this scenario.

Let me be clear that I am not taking a side here. Ironmonger is a good card almost always, but a key card only when it is the only Village and can reliably be used as such. Herald is worse-than-Pearl-Diver-bad on some boards, and arguably better than Lost City on others.  Which one is the 'better' card? Man, 'better' is a subjective thing that can be defined in a multitude of ways. The way you define it will determine which of these cards fits that definition more closely. (Surprise! You aren't arguing about which card is better, you are arguing about what 'better' means. Good luck with that.)

[tristan]

It also makes sense to compare the relative impact each card has on the situation you are considering if you are assuming they are both present. In the case of a board where a engine enabled by Herald is present, you could replace Ironmonger with Pearl Diver and build essentially the same deck. It is true you want to open with Ironmongers over Herald in this case, but that fact does not support the conclusion that Ironmonger is a better card, or more important in this scenario.

Why would I want to buy Pearl Diver, a card that does virtually nothing? Until my deck has a decent enough Action density (something that is easier achieved if there are trashers or gainers present) Ironmonger is a great card. In the beginning it is better than Peddler or Lab!
Now once the Action card density is high enough I do of course not want Ironmongers to be my village but Heralds to be my (slighty inferior) Lost City.
In quick games that tipping point might come very late in the game.