Print

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

[Seprix]

Want to complain about useless rankings that have no real basis in actual gameplay? This is the place for you. The cards are roughly tiered in their subcatagories where I would imagine they would be. If Witch being ranked below Artisan is just crazy, well maybe it is. They're pretty similar in dominance, so there. It's a rough estimate. And you can always convince me to move a card up or down.

A special note about Villages: You're always going to get one. You can make an argument about putting them all on A, or even freaking S. You can't build engines without Villages, period. So in order to not make this list completely stupid, I have implemented a special rule with Villages: With any given village on the board, compare it to any sort of other alternate Village on the Kingdom. If you find yourself picking it up less, then it goes lower than A. If you find yourself picking it up more than that random Village, it could very well stay where it is, or go straight to S. That's the standard I am implementing.

Finally, if you're going to complain about rankings being useless, just press Alt-Back arrow. This is a discussion about the tier lists, not on whether tier lists are good or whether ranking systems are even useful. Plenty of threads for that convo. But anyways, on to the lists.

Base Set


Someone complained about Curse being on the same section as Mine, so just think of that more as me being too lazy to make another tier, because that's exactly what happened. Besides, with the advent of Empires I have found myself buying Curse more than Mine at least.

Chapel and Sentry are pretty much some of the top trashers in the game. Some people are more down on Sentry because sometimes it whiffs, but really, try ignoring Sentry and you straight up lose. Witch for some reason has people rating it lower, just because it's not a shiny new card. Cursing is still good in 2017.

Throne Room isn't S because well, it's the spice card of Dominion. If the Kingdom is good, it will be good. If there's absolutely nothing salvagable about the Kingdom, then well Throne Room is terrible. Kingdoms trend heavily towards being strong for Throne Room. Really, you could convince me to make it S.

Oh, you probably just noticed I put Copper, Silver, Estate, and the works on this list. Well they were introduced in the Base, so there you have it. I'll try to do that with all of the Set lists, with the major exception of the Boons/Hexes and maybe the Ruins. Who needs to know those, Qvist will suit you just fine, there's not enough of those to warrant any sort of tier list.

There was some griping about Laboratory, so let me explain that one. It's a nonterminal Moat. It's not exciting, it's probably one of the worst draw cards in the game. But it still draws. It just never feels good straight up buying one. Almost like there's some efficiency lost. Maybe it's just me. It totally could be.

Intrigue


Masquerade is the best overall card in Dominion besides maybe Donate. If you're not opening it, you're probably playing the Kingdom wrong. I have it rated higher than everything besides the very strongest cards, such as Donate and King's Court. It's an "ignore and lose" card. It cycles, it trashes, and it puts psychological pressure on the opponent. It's a potent weapon.

Bridge is busted. An Awaclism: "When Bridge is on the board, build the engine or lose." I can't argue with that. Steward's strength is in its flexibility. It can trash, draw, give economy, all of that. I also really really really wanted to put Swindler into S. It warps games absolutely. But in the end, I was talked off of the cliff.

Lurker was hard to place. It could be in A, really. It's a tough one. I put it in B because people overbuy it, but that's all really. Harem also makes the worst art and the worst rank. What a shock.



I think this will mostly be uncontroversial minus Vineyards being S maybe. Not too much to say. Maybe Golem is a bit low.



Double Lookout opening is very strong. I'm saying it now. People are going to go ballistic that I put it in S. And heck, maybe it belongs in A. But surely it's close to the top of A if so. The fact that Lookout gets a bit awkward later, that's a small price to pay for the amazing combo of trashing and cycling.

(more coming soon...)

[Beyond Awesome]

I like this. I have only looked at your Base rankings so far. One thing that really stands out to me is where Remodel is. I feel it is shockingly low. The card is great in engines. I mean, there could be other Remodel variants, but Remodel is still nice.

I would put Lab on Tier A, but hey, it's your list.

[Seprix]

I like this. I have only looked at your Base rankings so far. One thing that really stands out to me is where Remodel is. I feel it is shockingly low. The card is great in engines. I mean, there could be other Remodel variants, but Remodel is still nice.

I would put Lab on Tier A, but hey, it's your list.

Remodel might very well be too low. I did this list while having a majorly stressed weekend with little sleep. I might look at this tomorrow and think, "wow what was I thinking".

[enfynet]

I don't think I ever realized how little attention I paid to the artwork until now.

[Cave-o-sapien]

I haven't even read this yet but kudos on the presentation. It's a joy to look at.

Edit: have now read it.

Is Minion too low?

[LibraryAdventurer]

Two cards that most stand out as being out of place:
How is artisan top tier? 
Why is Wishing well so high?

[faust]

Agreed that Artisan is not S-tier. On the low end of Base, Gardens and Duchy should definitely be swapped out, and Remodel can move up. On Intrigue, Baron and Nobles are too low, and Mill, Secret Passage and Courtyard are too high.

Patrol and Wishing Well could arguably stand to be moved down a tier as well.

[ThetaSigma12]

I refuse to be obviously bated into disagreeing about the subjective strengths of cards!









...Whom am I kidding. Wishing Well should be lower.

[ghost_of_jonts]

S-Tier stands for Scout Tier, right?

[Seprix]

Considering changes to Wishing Well.
Duchy and Gardens will be changed.
Anyone care to convince me on why Remodel should be higher?

[Polk5440]

Curious what prompted you to make the list? Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of having a tiered list that helps people quickly identify key cards, but I thought you would be one of the last people to post one...

The 4 tiers would include an “S” tier, an “A” tier, a “B”, tier and a “C” tier.

We have Qvist rankings and now Adam rankings, do we need a third list? Just take Adam's rankings and tier those.

[Polk5440]

Oh, and Remodel trashes, but I don't think there is anything in the list that I would rank more than 1 level different. I would put Moneylender in A and Remodel in B. Vassel could be C in my opinion; I just don't use it very much successfully, but maybe that's on me!

[jsh357]

Seprix was aping off my tier lists from last night. These are them.

[Seprix]

Curious what prompted you to make the list? Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of having a tiered list that helps people quickly identify key cards, but I thought you would be one of the last people to post one...

The 4 tiers would include an “S” tier, an “A” tier, a “B”, tier and a “C” tier.

We have Qvist rankings and now Adam rankings, do we need a third list? Just take Adam's rankings and tier those.

It's for fun mostly. 

[Seprix]

Seprix was aping off my tier lists from last night. These are them.

They're also absolutely wrong. 

[filovirus]

"This is a terrible idea, just drop it altogether." - Seprix

This was the response I got when I was trying to get a community tier list.

[Seprix]

"This is a terrible idea, just drop it altogether." - Seprix

This was the response I got when I was trying to get a community tier list.

The main difference is that I'm not doing this to create some standard. It was just something fun I wanted to do. But yes, I'm a jerk. I apologize for being rude.

[filovirus]

"This is a terrible idea, just drop it altogether." - Seprix

This was the response I got when I was trying to get a community tier list.

The main difference is that I'm not doing this to create some standard. It was just something fun I wanted to do. But yes, I'm a jerk. I apologize for being rude.

I still hold to my opinion that there is value in community perception of card strengths, and that on a whole it would be pretty accurate. I like this kind of thing, and value your opinions on your tier list.

[filovirus]

Here was Mic Qsenoch's rough and dirty list for Base cards

Cellar - C
Chapel - S
Moat - B
Harbinger - B
Merchant - B
Vassal - C
Village - A
Workshop - B
Bureaucrat - D
Gardens - D
Militia - A
Moneylender - A
Poacher - B
Remodel - B
Smithy - A
Throne Room – S
Bandit - B
Council Room - B
Festival - A
Laboratory - A
Library - B
Market - B
Mine - D
Sentry - S
Witch - S
Artisan - S

[filovirus]

We have Qvist rankings and now Adam rankings, do we need a third list? Just take Adam's rankings and tier those.

I did just that and have the list. If anyone is interested, PM me and I will get you the list.

[jsh357]

We have Qvist rankings and now Adam rankings, do we need a third list? Just take Adam's rankings and tier those.

I did just that and have the list. If anyone is interested, PM me and I will get you the list.

pastebin.com is a pretty cool site

[Commodore Chuckles]

Base:

You overrated Sentry... a bit. I know Sentry is everyone's new favorite card to bash and it's being undervalued as a result, but the fact that it can't trash from your hand really is a big problem.

Library should be in C.

Moat should be in D. It's rarely worth the space it takes up in your deck.

Man, why does everyone hate Cellar? That card can be a lifesaver. I'd put it in C.

Vassal could maybe be in C; it needs a lot of support for it to be worth the trouble.

Remodel is better than Workshop.

Also, when ranking a card, are you taking into account all of the expansions, or just the set it's in? Because Gold gets way better in Base-only.


Intrigue:

Minion is mid-tier wut.

I agree with everyone else on Wishing Well. Should be way lower.

Mill better than Swindler? I'd put it in B.

Lurker is definitely too low; maybe should be lower A.

Conspirator is better than Mining Village.

[werothegreat]

I like Mine.

[Jacob marley]

i'm not sure that I agree with Bridge being on S tier.  A, yes, but I have had a lot of games where I cannot support more than 1 bridge, and while it is useful, bridge really wants to be played in multiples to really shine.

[Seprix]

New list up. Alchemy. Man oh man Alchemy.

[humcalc216]

New list up. Alchemy. Man oh man Alchemy.

Based on what you did for Base, shouldn't Potion be on here somewhere?  I have no clue how it's possible to rank Potion, though.

[markusin]

If Bridge is S-Tier, what about Bridge Troll. Bridge Troll feels even stronger than Bridge, and the $5 price point becomes less of an issue once you start the cost reduction rolling.

[Commodore Chuckles]

New list up. Alchemy. Man oh man Alchemy.

Is the image broken for anyone else?

[chipperMDW]

New list up. Alchemy. Man oh man Alchemy.

Is the image broken for anyone else?

Yeah, it must be some kind of graphical glitch, because Transmute's showing up as though it got ranked all the way up at F.


(But seriously, the image is working fine for me.)

[Seprix]

New list up. Alchemy. Man oh man Alchemy.

Based on what you did for Base, shouldn't Potion be on here somewhere?  I have no clue how it's possible to rank Potion, though.

Shoot I forgot to rate Potion!

If Bridge is S-Tier, what about Bridge Troll. Bridge Troll feels even stronger than Bridge, and the $5 price point becomes less of an issue once you start the cost reduction rolling.

We'll get to Bridge Troll when we get to Adventures. 

[crj]

Bridge Troll feels even stronger than Bridge

Not so! The real killer feature of Bridge is the absence of that "while this is in play" qualifier on the cost reduction. If you play a Bridge twice, you reduce costs by $2.. If you play King's Court on a King's Court and play a Bridge on the second King's Court each time round, you reduce costs by $9...

That was basically so abusive it got "fixed" for Highway, Princess and Bridge Troll.

[markusin]

Bridge Troll feels even stronger than Bridge

Not so! The real killer feature of Bridge is the absence of that "while this is in play" qualifier on the cost reduction. If you play a Bridge twice, you reduce costs by $2.. If you play King's Court on a King's Court and play a Bridge on the second King's Court each time round, you reduce costs by $9...

That was basically so abusive it got "fixed" for Highway, Princess and Bridge Troll.

The throne variants are few and far between. You did forget Royal Carriage though. RC + Bridge is even more busted than the other examples.

But seriously, Bridge Troll brings its own goodness to the table when they can be played in multiples.

[schadd]

These are them.

i don't think i've seen this many bangers since the last time i listened to sufjan stevens' 2005 album illinois (yesterday)

[sudgy]

New list up. Alchemy. Man oh man Alchemy.

Is the image broken for anyone else?

The image is broken for me.

[Chris is me]

I’m gonna just rate cards and then complain about how your ratings are wrong for being different than mine. Like geez.

Rankings within tiers are in no particular order, also I’m not rating the base cards.

Base Set:

S: Chapel, Witch, Artisan
A: Village, Militia, Smithy, Sentry, Merchant, Lab
B: Throne Room, Council Room, Moneylender, Festival, Market, Poacher
C: Vassal, Library, Workshop, Remodel, Bandit
D: Moat, Harbinger, Mine, Cellar, Gardens
F: Bureaucrat

Differences:
Sentry in A: Look guys, Sentry is a good trasher and is not a game warping card. You’re gonna get like four or five cards trashed off of it. To really get clean you need two or more. This is not the same tier as Chapel or even Junk Dealer. It’s by no means bad, people think because I say it’s not top tier it’s bad, no, it’s just in the second tier from the top.

Merchant in A: Also look guys. It’s incredibly cheap cantrip payload, and the only cost is keeping a stop card you were gonna buy anyway. It’s gainable with Workshop. A deck fully trashed with Chapel with just Merchant and Silver can always at least buy another Merchant. It’s actually really rare that you don’t hit Silver with it: ultra thin decks draw themselves and fat decks have lots of Silver anyway. It’s actually one of the most impactful new cards.

Lab in A: yo dude nonterminal Draw is lit

Council Room in B: yo dude nonterminal Draw for your opponent is not as lit

Throne Room in B: this could be in A bit I don’t usually think Throne is very impactful in the base set. I should move it to A.

Library in C: honestly I should move this to D. Library is really hard to find a board where it’s the best draw option. You need a lot of thinning and disappearing Actions, which is just not that common. Still a good Money card and the boards where it’s good are Really Good

The rest of them: look I’m right ok I’ll defend these later

Stay tuned for the next installment of Totally Useful Bickering

[Oyvind]

New list up. Alchemy. Man oh man Alchemy.

Is the image broken for anyone else?

The image is broken for me.

Same here. No Picture, just an X.

[Commodore Chuckles]

Base Set:

S: Chapel, Witch, Artisan
A: Village, Militia, Smithy, Sentry, Merchant, Lab
B: Throne Room, Council Room, Moneylender, Festival, Market, Poacher
C: Vassal, Library, Workshop, Remodel, Bandit
D: Moat, Harbinger, Mine, Cellar, Gardens
F: Bureaucrat

Ah yes, this is much closer to the list I would have. Though once again why is poor Cellar in D?

[Chris is me]

Base Set:

S: Chapel, Witch, Artisan
A: Village, Militia, Smithy, Sentry, Merchant, Lab
B: Throne Room, Council Room, Moneylender, Festival, Market, Poacher
C: Vassal, Library, Workshop, Remodel, Bandit
D: Moat, Harbinger, Mine, Cellar, Gardens
F: Bureaucrat

Ah yes, this is much closer to the list I would have. Though once again why is poor Cellar in D?

Nothing wrong with it, it’s just a really bad sifter in most cases since you need to already have the junk. It could plausibly be in C, but I would say it isn’t especially useful on most boards, and you’d often enough rather not have it.

I’m also fighting not to make every card a good ranking; F is the only ranking reserved for near-useless cards. D cards still have some utility in certain situations.

[kieranmillar]

My biggest surprise in this thread is multiple people thinking Artisan is not S tier. I would appreciate some enlightenment as to why the card isn't totally boss, just regular boss.

[Chris is me]

Intrigue:

S: Masquerade, Steward, Bridge, Upgrade
A: Torturer, Mill, Mining Village, Replace, Lurker, Patrol
B: Swindler, Conspirator, Wishing Well, Nobles, Ironworks
C: Duke, Courtyard, Trading Post, Shanty Town, Courtier, Diplomat, Minion
D: Baron, Pawn, Secret Passage
F: Harem

Again the only truly “bad” category is F, everything else is a combination of power and scope of utility.

Changes vs Seprix:

Lurker to A: Lurker isn’t frequently ignorable, and even its presence changes boards even if it’s not the focal point. The long list of strong synergies it has, combined with its flexibility, make it a really powerful card.

Wishing Well to B: I think it’s overstated the number of boards where you can get a bunch of Wishing Wells and reliably increase your hand size. Even a 50% chance at nonterminal draw is still good, but it’s not quite A level to me.

Swindler to B: This card gets overrated because of those times you remember it ruining the game for you. A solid percentage of the time it’s skippable, certainly not all or most of the time, but more than an A tier Attack normally would be.

Nobles to B: How do people not think Nobles is great? The right way to think about Nobles is that it’s a source of terminal draw, with a side effect to get you out of jams, and it gives you a points buffer so you can build longer without falling as far behind. So often this is just what the engine needs. It’s hard to call it C tier when I often buy Nobles over other 5+ terminal draw, and it pays off.

Secret Passage to D: This pains me, since I love Secret Passage, and when comboed properly it absolutely becomes essential. But when I think about other D’s, it fits right in as a limited utility card. It just doesn’t seem like it does a lot. Because it usually doesn’t. Remember, D doesn’t mean awful.

Minion: Minion is way more limited than anyone wants to admit, even though it’s cool and fun.

Gotta go, will cut this rebuttal short

[Awaclus]

My biggest surprise in this thread is multiple people thinking Artisan is not S tier. I would appreciate some enlightenment as to why the card isn't totally boss, just regular boss.

It's a bit difficult to hit $6.

[markusin]

My biggest surprise in this thread is multiple people thinking Artisan is not S tier. I would appreciate some enlightenment as to why the card isn't totally boss, just regular boss.

It's a bit difficult to hit $6.

Nobles helps you hit $6 more often at least.

[dedicateddan]

My biggest surprise in this thread is multiple people thinking Artisan is not S tier. I would appreciate some enlightenment as to why the card isn't totally boss, just regular boss.

Personally, I reserve S-tier for cards that totally change the way the game is played. Artisan is good payload, but "just" payload in some sense.

[markusin]

My biggest surprise in this thread is multiple people thinking Artisan is not S tier. I would appreciate some enlightenment as to why the card isn't totally boss, just regular boss.

Personally, I reserve S-tier for cards that totally change the way the game is played. Artisan is good payload, but "just" payload in some sense.

That sounds like a good metric, thinking about it more. So Witch and Chapel fit this the best in the base set.

[filovirus]

Found this on google:

A tier list should always start at A to indicate the top of the tier.

When something in this tier (in this case champions) become better than A tier, the A tier is not moved down to B. Because 1) the contents of A have not changed, other things have just gotten better. Or 2.) Just because the contents of A are not currently the best does not mean they have to move to B tier.

So, a tier is created on top of A. This is the S tier. Contents of the S tier are over the threshold of what should be the best of a given element (champions) in the game.

S is used to denote who needs to be modified/tweaked (nerfed in some cases) to bring them back down to the standard of game play.

A should always be top tier. When a champion exceeds A, they become S tier and are watched closely for balance issues etc.

Before season 1 starts, there will be no S tier. All champions in S will be rebalanced to place them in A or B. The season 1 tier list will start at A where it should be.

[Seprix]

S for me is just pretty much "you never skip this card", although you can just change it to A in your mind, A to B, B to C, etc if it helps you

[Cave-o-sapien]

Is Possession in S-tier because it’s unskippable, or because of its potential to warp the game?

[filovirus]

I don't think it matters. It would only matter in community assessment to make sure everyone is on the same page.

[Seprix]

New update. There will be a lot of scandal in this one. I know you're all staring at the Lookout in S.

[werothegreat]

Lookout is garbage, go home, you're drunk

Also, Sea Hag is easily A.

[Chris is me]

Lookout is garbage, go home, you're drunk

Also, Sea Hag is easily A.

2014 called, they want their relative perception of the power of various Dominion cards back.

Anyhow I’ll do my bitter rejection of these Seaside rankings with my own unjustified takes tomorrow, but for now: Tactician shouldn’t even be in B tier.

[Seprix]

Lookout is garbage, go home, you're drunk

Also, Sea Hag is easily A.

No and no.

Lookout is garbage, go home, you're drunk

Also, Sea Hag is easily A.

Anyhow I’ll do my bitter rejection of these Seaside rankings with my own unjustified takes tomorrow, but for now: Tactician shouldn’t even be in B tier.

WOAH. Now I will do my unjustified takes in response to your unjustified takes and it will devolve into a Bayless/Sharpe debate with namecalling, locked threads and burned apple pie.

[Beyond Awesome]

Lookout is good, but it's no Chapel, Ambassador, Steward, etc.

Outpost is great. A for me. Merchant Ship is actually worse than Navigator. I'm 100% confident in this.

[Awaclus]

Lookout is good, but it's no Chapel, Ambassador, Steward, etc.

Well, it's no Chapel or Ambassador, but it's pretty much as good as Steward.

[markusin]

Lookout is good, but it's no Chapel, Ambassador, Steward, etc.

Outpost is great. A for me. Merchant Ship is actually worse than Navigator. I'm 100% confident in this.

Navigator has to be better than Merchant Ship, yes.

[benedettosoxfan]

Lookout in the top tier is certainly controversial, but I understand the logic if you really REALLY value early trashing/sifting, but the one I don't understand is Explorer in a tier over Cutpurse and Merchant Ship. They're all iffy terminal payload, but cutpurse is cheaper with a useful early game attack, and merchant ship is obviously a duration, but explorer sticks you with a silver that you may or may not want, or possibly a gold that you may or may not want. What's the reasoning behind that distinction?

[Cave-o-sapien]

Smugglers in A?

[LastFootnote]

I'd bump Treasure Map up to D.

[faust]

New update. There will be a lot of scandal in this one. I know you're all staring at the Lookout in S.

I remember a wise man once said that Lookout is the best trasher in the game, so I am not at all surprised.

[Seprix]

New update. There will be a lot of scandal in this one. I know you're all staring at the Lookout in S.

I remember a wise man once said that Lookout is the best trasher in the game, so I am not at all surprised.

I'll probably drop Lookout to high A. I'll redo all these lists once I release all of them.

On another note, that was a voice in the wilderness, but Silver slightly overplayed how good it is. It's not Ambassador good, but man few cards are.

[werothegreat]

Sea Hag is certainly not S, but cursing is still very powerful.

And I would put Lookout in B. It's good, but not a premier trasher.

[filovirus]

Lookout has a two problems that would make it not be tier S:

1) Too slow of a trasher. At best it trashes 1 card per turn.

2) It gets weaker as the game progresses, until it force trashes a good card from the deck at worst, to it just being a dead card in hand at best.

However, the sifting and trashing combo is great. A-/B+.

[Commodore Chuckles]

Salvager should be in B or even C. It's really not that good.

[Seprix]

Salvager should be in B or even C. It's really not that good.

Oh man, you can't really ever skip this guy. The ability to blow up your deck for a couple extra bucks and just pileout and win is insane.

[trivialknot]

Do Nocturne next!

[Seprix]

Do Nocturne next!

You know what? I will. 

[Commodore Chuckles]

Time to jump on the bandwagon. Here's the standard I'll be using:

S: Possibly broken.
A: Rarely skippable.
B: Good but sometimes skippable.
C: Okay.
D: Weak/niche.
F: Nearly useless.

Base:
S: Chapel
A: Witch, Artisan, Laboratory, Sentry,
B: Village, Militia, Throne Room, Smithy, Moneylender
C: Council Room, Festival, Merchant, Poacher, Cellar, Market, Vassal
D: Remodel, Bandit, Library, Gardens, Mine, Harbinger, Workshop, Moat
F: Bureaucrat

[Seprix]

Boom. Completely based off of barely any playing time. I'll change this up later, it's not official right now.

[ghost_of_jonts]

Do your rankings consider the heirlooms they come with or would those need to be ranked on their own?

Also you really think Pookah is unplayable? It seems strong to me.

[Awaclus]

I think you have accidentally switched up Pooka and Devil's Workshop.

[trivialknot]

Hard to believe Conclave deserves an S rank when it's a cheaper Festival.  I would swap it with Monastery, which is surely almost as strong as Lookout.

[faust]

Oh, Nocturne cards.

I think if anything is S-tier here, it's Vampire. Necromancer in D is super strange, I think that is a solid A. I don't know how Conclave is S-tier, that's just some middle ground between Squire and Festival, and those are not strong cards.

[crj]

Lookout has a two problems that would make it not be tier S:

1) Too slow of a trasher. At best it trashes 1 card per turn.

The +1 Action is a big deal in this respect.

[Awaclus]

Lookout has a two problems that would make it not be tier S:

1) Too slow of a trasher. At best it trashes 1 card per turn.

The +1 Action is a big deal in this respect.

The fact that it cycles three cards is an even bigger deal.

[crj]

Lookout has a two problems that would make it not be tier S:

1) Too slow of a trasher. At best it trashes 1 card per turn.

The +1 Action is a big deal in this respect.

The fact that it cycles three cards is an even bigger deal.

Maybe true, but I did say "in this respect" - i.e. considering the specific objection that Lookout is too slow a trasher. Just buy more than one! (Lookout/Lookout is actually a pretty nice opening for thinning quickly and being pretty likely to hit $5 before second shuffle on a board where that's important.)

[Awaclus]

Lookout has a two problems that would make it not be tier S:

1) Too slow of a trasher. At best it trashes 1 card per turn.

The +1 Action is a big deal in this respect.

The fact that it cycles three cards is an even bigger deal.

Maybe true, but I did say "in this respect" - i.e. considering the specific objection that Lookout is too slow a trasher. Just buy more than one! (Lookout/Lookout is actually a pretty nice opening for thinning quickly and being pretty likely to hit $5 before second shuffle on a board where that's important.)

The cycling makes it so that you actually play that Lookout more often than you would play a Trade Route, for instance, making it a faster trasher than most other cards that only trash one card.

[Limetime]

Having anything in S for nocturne is blasphemy.

[JacquesTheBard]

Having anything in S for nocturne is blasphemy.

This, honestly. It’s a balanced expansion, and I don’t think the average board is going to be “weak,” but the good cards are almost all in A or B range. There’s nothing here on the level of the Travellers, Donate, KC, Chapel. Masquerade, Ambassador, or Fortune.

[Donald X.]

Having anything in S for nocturne is blasphemy.

This, honestly. It’s a balanced expansion, and I don’t think the average board is going to be “weak,” but the good cards are almost all in A or B range. There’s nothing here on the level of the Travellers, Donate, KC, Chapel. Masquerade, Ambassador, or Fortune.

Thank you, I do my best. I certainly never think, "now, let's make a broken card."

[Chappy7]

Back to seaside, I feel like explorer should be much lower. I like cutpurse much better than explorer

[ThetaSigma12]

Thank you, I do my best. I certainly never think, "now, let's make a broken card."

maybe that's actually all you think but you're just really bad at making broken cards so they all come out balanced. we're on to you donald.

[aku_chi]

(Lookout/Lookout is actually a pretty nice opening for thinning quickly and being pretty likely to hit $5 before second shuffle on a board where that's important.)

Lookout + Lookout is a terrible opening for hitting $5 before the second shuffle.

[Seprix]

I think you have accidentally switched up Pooka and Devil's Workshop.

What?

[Awaclus]

I think you have accidentally switched up Pooka and Devil's Workshop.

What?

I'm just saying that Pooka is super good and Devil's Workshop is not.

[Commodore Chuckles]

Intrigue:
S: Masquerade
A: Steward, Bridge, Torturer, Upgrade, Minion, Swindler
B: Lurker, Conspirator, Mining Village, Nobles, Diplomat
C: Patrol, Mill, Secret Passage, Shanty Town, Wishing Well, Replace, Courtier, Courtyard
D: Ironworks, Trading Post, Pawn, Baron
F: Harem

Seaside:
S: Ambassador, Wharf
A: Ghost Ship, Fishing Village, Sea Hag
B: Tactician, Bazaar, Caravan, Lighthouse, Lookout
C: Warehouse, Native Village, Salvager, Treasury, Smugglers, Outpost, Cutpurse
D: Haven, Island, Merchant Ship, Treasure Map, Embargo, Navigator, Explorer
F: Pearl Diver, Pirate Ship

[schadd]

2014 called

DID U TELL THEM ABOUT 9/11 wait frick we're too late

[Seprix]

I think you have accidentally switched up Pooka and Devil's Workshop.

What?

I'm just saying that Pooka is super good and Devil's Workshop is not.

There is no universe in which that is true.

[Awaclus]

I think you have accidentally switched up Pooka and Devil's Workshop.

What?

I'm just saying that Pooka is super good and Devil's Workshop is not.

There is no universe in which that is true.

Except for the universe in which trashing and draw is good and stuffing your deck with terminal Actions is not.

[sudgy]

Seprix, could you try to figure out what's going wrong with the images (or use another image host)?  I haven't been able to see Alchemy or Nocturne.

[Kirian]

Boom. Completely based off of barely any playing time. I'll change this up later, it's not official right now.

This image would be useful if we'd been playing with these cards for years and knew the artwork.  But right now it's pretty useless...

[Awaclus]

Boom. Completely based off of barely any playing time. I'll change this up later, it's not official right now.

This image would be useful if we'd been playing with these cards for years and knew the artwork.  But right now it's pretty useless...

I have been playing with them for a day and I immediately recognize all but three.

[JacquesTheBard]

Having anything in S for nocturne is blasphemy.

This, honestly. It’s a balanced expansion, and I don’t think the average board is going to be “weak,” but the good cards are almost all in A or B range. There’s nothing here on the level of the Travellers, Donate, KC, Chapel. Masquerade, Ambassador, or Fortune.

Thank you, I do my best. I certainly never think, "now, let's make a broken card."

Oh, by no means was I complaining! I love all of the above cards, and find they make for very fun games. Especially Peasant. Peasant is brilliant.

[Chappy7]

Boom. Completely based off of barely any playing time. I'll change this up later, it's not official right now.

This image would be useful if we'd been playing with these cards for years and knew the artwork.  But right now it's pretty useless...

I have been playing with them for a day and I immediately recognize all but three.

Thumbs up.  Good job

[FemurLemur]

Not sure I'd have put Pirate Ship with Embargo and Navigator. I'd personally have it in D and Pearl Diver in F. Though I could be missing something there with Pearl Diver. It just seems like the utility gained from, say, Cutpurse is about on par with Pirate Ship, whereas Pearl Diver is a bit lesser. True it's cheap, but at some point it's not the Coin cost that makes something expensive, so much as it is the fact that you're wasting a perfectly good Buy/Gain on it.

My personal list would also put Treasure Map at D, but I kinda have an irrational love for Treasure Map, and it's not something I'd argue strongly about. I dunno, the only thing I would say is that, when sifting is there without trashing, and there's no other stellar actions in the Kingdom, Treasure Maps can be good (edge cases, I know), but I struggle to think of scenarios where Pearl Diver or Embargo can be just as good, even with support from other cards.

Boom. Completely based off of barely any playing time. I'll change this up later, it's not official right now.

This image would be useful if we'd been playing with these cards for years and knew the artwork.  But right now it's pretty useless...

Well, true as that may be, it would take away from the presentation for Seprix to make just this one be text. Plus, will it really take you very long to learn all of these cards? You haven't had Empires for years, and I'd be willing to bet you know all of the cards by their images. I feel like I already know roughly 1/3 of Nocturne by their images. Maybe not so well that I could recite the entire card text by memory, and I might make silly mistakes like forgetting a card grants +1 Action, but well enough that I could say "Oh yeah, that one is the village that gives a Hex on-gain"

[Jack Rudd]

I'm an old Isotropic player. What are these card images of which you speak?

[markusin]

Well like, we've known over half of the cards by their images for awhile now, namely the previewed cards. Taking a good few minutes to look at each card to assess their strength would get you to remember the rest.

[Limetime]

Also how is idol an A card whereas bard is a D card. Idol is basically a non-terminal bard. By the time idol curses the thrashers should be up. Raider should be a D/F because it does nothing for you this turn, and the attack is insignificant most of the time.
Pooka should be like a B because it is decent draw.
Cobbler should be an A because it is basically a slower and repeatable summon(- 1 action).
Tragic hero is real weak compared to any other draw.
Fool is good when lost in the woods can be utilized so probably like a C.
Necromancer is good when there are other cards that put actions in the trash which is surprisingly often. Getting one is often worth it for the mason.
Weaker festival for 4 is not an S.

[Awaclus]

Though I could be missing something there with Pearl Diver.

You're missing the fact that it's a cantrip.

[FemurLemur]

"This is a terrible idea, just drop it altogether." - Seprix
This was the response I got when I was trying to get a community tier list.

Yeah and it honestly wasn't just Seprix either. A lot of people (myself included) chose to make the discussion about whether or not Tier Lists were pointless. And Seprix got around that here by basically being like "I don't wanna hear it. That debate is off-topic here", which is kinda unfair to you since I'm sure you also didn't want your thread to get dominated by that debate, and it happened anyway. So, sorry you had that experience.

Not saying any of this to throw shade or start drama or anything (I found Seprix's apology mature and classy). I just know if I were in your shoes I'd still be kinda miffed about the whole thing, so I thought I'd mention it just to say I empathize with you and am sorry your thread got met with so much resistance while this one wasn't.

[FemurLemur]

Though I could be missing something there with Pearl Diver.

You're missing the fact that it's a cantrip.

Well, I didn't forget that it was a cantrip, I just don't feel that that fact makes up for the fact that you generally have to use your Buy to get a card that rarely does much for your deck. Even if it was just a gain, gainers can usually get you something better (Ironworks could get you a $4, if you're using Haggler you probably bought more than a $3 unless your deck is super junked, etc.) But point taken that Pirate Ship is not a cantrip while the Diver is. I just think that, even being non-terminal, the opportunity cost of buying that Pearl Diver makes it generally not worth it unless you open on a 5/2.

[FemurLemur]

I think you have accidentally switched up Pooka and Devil's Workshop.

What?

I'm just saying that Pooka is super good and Devil's Workshop is not.

There is no universe in which that is true.

Except for the universe in which trashing and draw is good and stuffing your deck with terminal Actions is not.

I hope this doesn't come across as a loaded question, because it's not meant to be one, but: doesn't Imp fit your definition of a Splitter? Like I thought I understood what your definition was, but then when reading the above, I'm left thinking that I don't understand it fully.



I'm kinda split between your's and Seprix's opinions. I certainly wouldn't consider Pooka an F, but I wouldn't put it at S or A because it costs $5. If it were $4 I'd put it in A or S. At $5 I consider it a solid B. Granted I haven't played much Nocturne yet and this opinion could change. I also wouldn't call Devil's Workshop an S or an F. Maybe more like A or B (but again, subject to change with more experience)

[Jack Rudd]

Pearl Diver is mostly good in the situations where you have a spare Buy but only $2 to use on it.

[Awaclus]

Well, I didn't forget that it was a cantrip, I just don't feel that that fact makes up for the fact that you generally have to use your Buy to get a card that rarely does much for your deck. Even if it was just a gain, gainers can usually get you something better (Ironworks could get you a $4, if you're using Haggler you probably bought more than a $3 unless your deck is super junked, etc.) But point taken that Pirate Ship is not a cantrip while the Diver is. I just think that, even being non-terminal, the opportunity cost of buying that Pearl Diver makes it generally not worth it unless you open on a 5/2.

But it basically never fails the Nothing Test. Usually you will end up with at least a couple of Pearl Divers in your deck just because you hit $2 or $3 and it's the only thing at that price point that passes the Nothing Test.

[Awaclus]

I hope this doesn't come across as a loaded question, because it's not meant to be one, but: doesn't Imp fit your definition of a Splitter? Like I thought I understood what your definition was, but then when reading the above, I'm left thinking that I don't understand it fully.

No. A splitter allows you to play two Bridges on the same turn. Imp might prevent you from being able to play one.

[FemurLemur]

Well, I didn't forget that it was a cantrip, I just don't feel that that fact makes up for the fact that you generally have to use your Buy to get a card that rarely does much for your deck. Even if it was just a gain, gainers can usually get you something better (Ironworks could get you a $4, if you're using Haggler you probably bought more than a $3 unless your deck is super junked, etc.) But point taken that Pirate Ship is not a cantrip while the Diver is. I just think that, even being non-terminal, the opportunity cost of buying that Pearl Diver makes it generally not worth it unless you open on a 5/2.

But it basically never fails the Nothing Test. Usually you will end up with at least a couple of Pearl Divers in your deck just because you hit $2 or $3 and it's the only thing at that price point that passes the Nothing Test.

Fair enough. I can agree with that reasoning. So for you, is the F Tier reserved for cards that nearly always hurt more than they help?

Or perhaps a better question: is it fair to say that a card which never fails the Nothing Test is a card that you would never put in the F Tier?

[Awaclus]

Fair enough. I can agree with that reasoning. So for you, is the F Tier reserved for cards that nearly always hurt more than they help?

Or perhaps a better question: is it fair to say that a card which never fails the Nothing Test is a card that you would never put in the F Tier?

Well, I wouldn't say that. If Pear Diver cost $5, then it would suck. Since it only costs $2, it's good enough that it's just a little bit beneficial.

[ghost_of_jonts]

Fair enough. I can agree with that reasoning. So for you, is the F Tier reserved for cards that nearly always hurt more than they help?

Or perhaps a better question: is it fair to say that a card which never fails the Nothing Test is a card that you would never put in the F Tier?

Personally, F tier for me is cards which are basically never bought and when they are, they do very little. Pearl diver escapes this because, while it does very little, you do end up buying it in a decent number of games. But that's only because of it's price point. A $5 pearl diver still usually passes the nothing test, but you would never buy it because now there's competition.

[Cave-o-sapien]

I think very few cards pass the "never" test. I claim that there is a situation for every card in which it is the best card to gain.

But for some cards, those situations are highly infrequent. It seems appropriate to consider probabilities of usefulness or card value when evaluating the tiers.

Something like:

S: 0.95 - 1
A: 0.9 to 0.95
B: 0.7 to 0.9
C: 0.3 to 0.7
D: 0.1 to 0.3
F: < 0.1

So cards in the S-tier are important or useful in 95% to 100% of the games they appear in. Cards in F-tier are useful less than 10% of the time. These are just percentages off the top of my head.

[markusin]

Fair enough. I can agree with that reasoning. So for you, is the F Tier reserved for cards that nearly always hurt more than they help?

Or perhaps a better question: is it fair to say that a card which never fails the Nothing Test is a card that you would never put in the F Tier?

Well, I wouldn't say that. If Pear Diver cost $5, then it would suck. Since it only costs $2, it's good enough that it's just a little bit beneficial.

There are several cards that can make use of do-nothing cantrips. Examples include throne variants, Adventures tokens, Conspirator, Vineyard, Imp, and Conclave.  Pearl River also technically has an ability that sometimes helps you.

Fair enough. I can agree with that reasoning. So for you, is the F Tier reserved for cards that nearly always hurt more than they help?

Or perhaps a better question: is it fair to say that a card which never fails the Nothing Test is a card that you would never put in the F Tier?

Personally, F tier for me is cards which are basically never bought and when they are, they do very little. Pearl diver escapes this because, while it does very little, you do end up buying it in a decent number of games. But that's only because of it's price point. A $5 pearl diver still usually passes the nothing test, but you would never buy it because now there's competition.

The Nocturne card that might come the closest to F-tier is perhaps Tormentor. The Imp gaining is most likely to be relevant in money-ish games where the Imp is not all that good anyway and where you'd rather give out the Hex. In an engine that dudded, Imp is a meh consolation prize.

The +$2 give out a Hex feels overcosted compared to Skulk and Militia, and Skulk gives more room for fancy play with the Gold gain ability (e.g. for trash-for-benefit). Bard helps you hit $5 at least before dropping in power. Tormentor is a $5 itself. It's a stacking attack, yes, but it feels very outclassed by Werewolf in terms of mass Hexing.

About Tragic Hero, I actually think it's pretty decent. In games with lots of draw, you can think of it as a delayed Gold that does something more useful than Gold when you play it the first time (before it trashes itself). Getting Tragic Hero is a good way to ramp up your economy as you try to bring the game to a close. And it's throneable. There are occasions where you can use it as more long term draw as well.

[markusin]

I think very few cards pass the "never" test. I claim that there is a situation for every card in which it is the best card to gain.

But for some cards, those situations are highly infrequent. It seems appropriate to consider probabilities of usefulness or card value when evaluating the tiers.

Something like:

S: 0.95 - 1
A: 0.9 to 0.95
B: 0.7 to 0.9
C: 0.3 to 0.7
D: 0.1 to 0.3
F: < 0.1

So cards in the S-tier are important or useful in 95% to 100% of the games they appear in. Cards in F-tier are useful less than 10% of the time. These are just percentages off the top of my head.

I think to really capture the spirit of S-tier, you want to restrict it to just the cards that feel unbalanced or overly oppressive. Cards that are widely considered to be in need of changing, even if it is not objectively strong every game.

My candidates (attempting to include one attack card and one non-attack card):

Base: Chapel, Witch
Intrigue: Masquerade, Swindler (more annoying than it is uber-powerful)
Seaside: Wharf, Ambassador
Alchemy: Possession
Prosperity: King's Court, Goons/Montebank (Mounty forces a horrible slog in all but the most trashing-heavy boards)
Cornucopia: Remake, Tournament (Familiar is an attack technically)
Hinterlands: *draws a blank*
Dark Ages: Rebuild, Urchin
Guilds: Butcher
Adventures: Gear(?), Page/Peasant, *possibly others*
Empires: Donate, *something I must be forgetting, but there are a lot of A's*
Nocturne: *dunno, might be too balanced for S-tier*

[Seprix]

Hinterlands: *draws a blank*

Nocturne: *dunno, might be too balanced for S-tier*

Let me help you.

Hinterlands: Margrave

Nocturne: Monastery

[markusin]

Hinterlands: *draws a blank*

Nocturne: *dunno, might be too balanced for S-tier*

Let me help you.

Hinterlands: Margrave

Nocturne: Monastery

I thought of Margrave. It's the closest thing to S-tier in the set probably. Thinking about it, it's so rare that you skip Margrave thanks to the +buy, but like it doesn't feel as brutal for some reason. Border Village and Highway are some other standout cards, but these feel more situational, or at least Highway does. Maybe Border Village can be S-tier, who knows.

Monastery is, like, Chapel if Chapel was balanced properly. It's what a $2 trasher should look like. Still very good, but not S-tier broken.

[JW]

I think to really capture the spirit of S-tier, you want to restrict it to just the cards that feel unbalanced or overly oppressive. Cards that are widely considered to be in need of changing, even if it is not objectively strong every game.

My candidates (attempting to include one attack card and one non-attack card):

Base: Chapel, Witch
Intrigue: Masquerade, Swindler (more annoying than it is uber-powerful)
Seaside: Wharf, Ambassador
Alchemy: Possession
Prosperity: King's Court, Goons/Mountebank (Mounty forces a horrible slog in all but the most trashing-heavy boards)
Cornucopia: Remake, Tournament (Followers is an attack technically)
Hinterlands: *draws a blank*
Dark Ages: Rebuild, Urchin
Guilds: Butcher
Adventures: Gear(?), Page/Peasant, *possibly others*
Empires: Donate, *something I must be forgetting, but there are a lot of A's*
Nocturne: *dunno, might be too balanced for S-tier*

Remake and Butcher are not unbalanced, overly oppressive, or widely considered to be in need of changing. There may not be any cards in some sets that fit this description. And surely Cultist is far more deserving of this status than either of these two. As Donald X said about a different attempt to identify overpowered cards that also (for a different reason) found too many cards to be overpowered.

I think using a flat 25% cut-off point is obviously going to give you bad results. Man. I had four strips of bacon yesterday. Was one automatically undercooked, one automatically overcooked? No, let's put a stop to that right here, all four strips were excellent.

You then compound this by considering the cards ranked by cost. What if I made more weak $4's than $3's? In fact things just like that actually happened.

You would be better off picking what cards you thought were actually weak or strong, and then looking at where they fall in the different sets. Use Qvist's lists as a guideline if you want, but make the hard calls yourself.

And if you do that, you may want to include Scout somewhere.

[Limetime]

I have no idea why good cards need changing as long as they contribute to the strategic depth of the kingdoms that they are in.

[markusin]

I have no idea why good cards need changing as long as they contribute to the strategic depth of the kingdoms that they are in.

In this sense, I think that Cultist adds more strategic depth than Mercenary/Urchin. Mercenary just has the players beeline awkwardly to a thin deck with people getting pissed at shuffle luck. Cultist has that too, but I feel like Cultist has more counters, and the game gets into a weird but interesting slog afterwards. Cultist is probably an S-tier card though, I shouldn't have given it a pass.

Remake and Butcher, like, you get those cards almost every game. Usually when you skip them, it is because you had to prioritize some other S-tier card. They really push the power boundary I feel.

[JW]

I have no idea why good cards need changing as long as they contribute to the strategic depth of the kingdoms that they are in.

To give a counterexample, Possession is interesting strategically but also often makes the game horrible. It’s also way too complex rules wise. And it leads to terrible kingmaking in 3 or more player games.

[Willvon]

A couple of observations from this:

1) First of all, I really like this idea. Thanks for doing it and thanks to everyone for the good , civil discussion in this thread. There are lots of good points being made by everyone to support their opinion

2) I am really impressed with how this shows the huge difference in the 2nd edition cards versus the ones that were replaced. Most of the replaced cards would have been F or at best D, but the majority of the new cards are rated A to C. That is pretty cool!  I wish all of the people who rejected base Dominion because they felt it was too simple or predictable would have started with 2nd edition. Perhaps their opinions would be different now.

3) The last Qvist ranking had Wishing Well at 26 and Smugglers at 33. So how are they possibly worthy of an A ranking? Wouldn’t a card worthy of an A ranking at least be in the top 15 of its cost group?

4) Lookout is a card I like to buy early, but, of course, I never buy a bunch of them. It doesn’t take that long for them to possibly do more harm than good. It only ranked 20 in the last Qvist ranking. To me a card ranked S would have to be a card so fundamentally powerful, you don’t dare ignore it. If there are other good thrashers, I have no problem ignoring Lookout. Personally, I would not have any trouble with Lookout as a B, though I can see a case for it as an A.

5) Like many, I would definitely put Cutpurse at least on the same level, if not above Explorer rather than the other way around. In Qvist rankings, Explorer ranked 87 out of 96, but Cutpurse was 45 out of 73. So Cutpurse ranks much higher among 4’s than Explorer does among 5’s. I pretty much always buy a Cutpurse, but Explorer is very ignorable.

[Chris is me]

I hope this doesn't come across as a loaded question, because it's not meant to be one, but: doesn't Imp fit your definition of a Splitter? Like I thought I understood what your definition was, but then when reading the above, I'm left thinking that I don't understand it fully.

No. A splitter allows you to play two Bridges on the same turn. Imp might prevent you from being able to play one.

It’s frankly amazing that you consider Royal Carriage an unconditional splitter, a card that literally won’t let you play two separate actions if you don’t have a cantrip, but Imp is never a splitter because it doesn’t let you do your favorite thing easily.

[markus]

Imp is definitely not a "splitter". In the bad case Imp is terminal, in the good case it gives +1 Action.

But Conclave is a village, even though by itself it only allows playing 2 Bridges.

[Awaclus]

It’s frankly amazing that you consider Royal Carriage an unconditional splitter, a card that literally won’t let you play two separate actions if you don’t have a cantrip, but Imp is never a splitter because it doesn’t let you do your favorite thing easily.

You are making it sound like Imp somehow lets you play two separate Actions. It never does.

[markusin]

I hope this doesn't come across as a loaded question, because it's not meant to be one, but: doesn't Imp fit your definition of a Splitter? Like I thought I understood what your definition was, but then when reading the above, I'm left thinking that I don't understand it fully.

No. A splitter allows you to play two Bridges on the same turn. Imp might prevent you from being able to play one.

It’s frankly amazing that you consider Royal Carriage an unconditional splitter, a card that literally won’t let you play two separate actions if you don’t have a cantrip, but Imp is never a splitter because it doesn’t let you do your favorite thing easily.

Royal Carriage can stack on the same action card though, as seen in the Royal Carriage / Bridge combo. It's still a weird case though.

Imp is sometimes a laboratory. Since when did we ever consider lab a village or splitter?

[FemurLemur]

I wish all of the people who rejected base Dominion because they felt it was too simple or predictable would have started with 2nd edition. Perhaps their opinions would be different now.

A few years back, my Mother-in-law bought Base Set to try relating to my wife (Mother-in-law does enjoy other lighter board games like Splendor, Kingsburg, and 7 Wonders, so we had no reason to think Base Set Dominion would be a bad fit). After having played a couple rounds with my Sister-in-law, MiL calls up my wife and complains "the game is just too easy. It's so obvious what you have to do and one strategy is easily the best". I assume they're talking about Chapel, because you know, it's Base Set.

Next time we're over at MiL's house, we ask to play a game of Dominion with her. Much to my horror, her "obvious winning strategy" is the Village Idiot. She just buys Village after Village, then only once the pile is empty does she start buying other Action cards and/or Treasures. Needless to say, one of us beats MiL by a significant amount despite intentionally playing a little sub-optimally. So we politely try to tell her between games that the Villages gain you no benefit if they're the only Action cards in your deck. She's skeptical. So I explain to her that, yes, you will have tons of Actions now, but after playing all of those Villages your deck is still just 7 Coppers and 3 Estates, so "what are you going to do with all of those extra Actions? You only have Treasure and Victory cards." Her conclusion: "You're just trying to get into my head so you can get all of the Villages first!"

We played a few more games, in which she stuck to her guns and lost every time. Despite my constant assurance that Chapel was in fact the strongest card in the box, she kept saying it was a worthless card. I even demonstrated a typical chapel Big Money deck in a game for her. No dice, Chapel is super weak and you only won because you got the Golds first. I couldn't get her to realize that the reason I was able to get those Golds first was because of Chapel.

So I'm not so sure that many of the people who were convinced that Dominion is too simple or predictable really know what they're talking about


While I'm ranting: I also have a brother who rolls his eyes every time he hears there's a new Dominion Expansion and says something along the lines of "Jeez, they're gonna have to start a rotation soon like all the other CCGs if they want players to be able to keep up". I try explaining to him that the core mechanic of Dominion is basically a rotation- as in you rotate 10 cards every game, and that you don't have to have the entire card pool memorized to play it, because thinking on the fly is a key part of the game. He doesn't see it that way. He also feels that Arctic Scavengers is a better Deck Builder because of how much smaller the cardpool is.

...I don't like to talk about Dominion with most of my family...

[ghost_of_jonts]

I wish all of the people who rejected base Dominion because they felt it was too simple or predictable would have started with 2nd edition. Perhaps their opinions would be different now.

A few years back, my Mother-in-law bought Base Set to try relating to my wife (Mother-in-law does enjoy other lighter board games like Splendor, Kingsburg, and 7 Wonders, so we had no reason to think Base Set Dominion would be a bad fit). After having played a couple rounds with my Sister-in-law, MiL calls up my wife and complains "the game is just too easy. It's so obvious what you have to do and one strategy is easily the best". I assume they're talking about Chapel, because you know, it's Base Set.

Next time we're over at MiL's house, we ask to play a game of Dominion with her. Much to my horror, her "obvious winning strategy" is the Village Idiot. She just buys Village after Village, then only once the pile is empty does she start buying other Action cards and/or Treasures. Needless to say, one of us beats MiL by a significant amount despite intentionally playing a little sub-optimally. So we politely try to tell her between games that the Villages gain you no benefit if they're the only Action cards in your deck. She's skeptical. So I explain to her that, yes, you will have tons of Actions now, but after playing all of those Villages your deck is still just 7 Coppers and 3 Estates, so "what are you going to do with all of those extra Actions? You only have Treasure and Victory cards." Her conclusion: "You're just trying to get into my head so you can get all of the Villages first!"

We played a few more games, in which she stuck to her guns and lost every time. Despite my constant assurance that Chapel was in fact the strongest card in the box, she kept saying it was a worthless card. I even demonstrated a typical chapel Big Money deck in a game for her. No dice, Chapel is super weak and you only won because you got the Golds first. I couldn't get her to realize that the reason I was able to get those Golds first was because of Chapel.

So I'm not so sure that many of the people who were convinced that Dominion is too simple or predictable really know what they're talking about


While I'm ranting: I also have a brother who rolls his eyes every time he hears there's a new Dominion Expansion and says something along the lines of "Jeez, they're gonna have to start a rotation soon like all the other CCGs if they want players to be able to keep up". I try explaining to him that the core mechanic of Dominion is basically a rotation- as in you rotate 10 cards every game, and that you don't have to have the entire card pool memorized to play it, because thinking on the fly is a key part of the game. He doesn't see it that way. He also feels that Arctic Scavengers is a better Deck Builder because of how much smaller the cardpool is.

...I don't like to talk about Dominion with most of my family...

So your MiL saw this video and took it seriously?

[FemurLemur]

I hope this doesn't come across as a loaded question, because it's not meant to be one, but: doesn't Imp fit your definition of a Splitter? Like I thought I understood what your definition was, but then when reading the above, I'm left thinking that I don't understand it fully.

No. A splitter allows you to play two Bridges on the same turn. Imp might prevent you from being able to play one.

It’s frankly amazing that you consider Royal Carriage an unconditional splitter, a card that literally won’t let you play two separate actions if you don’t have a cantrip, but Imp is never a splitter because it doesn’t let you do your favorite thing easily.

Royal Carriage can stack on the same action card though, as seen in the Royal Carriage / Bridge combo. It's still a weird case though.

Imp is sometimes a laboratory. Since when did we ever consider lab a village or splitter?

We didn't. I was just in a hurry, so I accidentally conflated soft terminal with pseudo-village (or "splitter" as Awaclus prefers) in my head. I was mentally comparing Imp to Herald as cards which sometimes play an additional action card. Which is wrong of course- Herald will be a Cantrip at worst and a Splitter at best, Imp will be card draw at worst and a Cantrip (Lab Variant) at best. Imp will get you 0 Actions or 1 pseudo-action, whereas Herald will get you 1 Action and maybe also 1 pseudo-action.

The real question shouldn't be "What is your definition of Splitter", it should be "When you say that Devil's Workshop is bad because it fills your deck with terminals, is that accounting for them being soft terminals?" My mistake for the mixup.



I think I get what Chris is me is trying to say about Awaclus' stated definition of Splitter. Awaclus, would you consider the following card a Splitter even though it would never help you play two Bridges in one turn (and would proactively prevent such a thing for the rest of the turn)?

Picky Village
+1 Card
+2 Actions
You may not play additional copies beyond the 1st copy of any Action card except Picky Village for the rest of the turn.

Edited card text for clarity. Card's wording probably still sucks, but you get the idea of the thought experiment.

[Cave-o-sapien]

While I'm ranting: I also have a brother who rolls his eyes every time he hears there's a new Dominion Expansion and says something along the lines of "Jeez, they're gonna have to start a rotation soon like all the other CCGs if they want players to be able to keep up".

I think there is some truth to this. If attracting new players to competitive Dominion was important for the business model (as it is for CCGs both paper and virtual) then I think there would be value to a "season" approach.

I try explaining to him that the core mechanic of Dominion is basically a rotation- as in you rotate 10 cards every game, and that you don't have to have the entire card pool memorized to play it, because thinking on the fly is a key part of the game.

You can be a good player without being familiar with every card, but I don't think you can be an excellent player. I stopped playing online frequently during the Goko/MF years and my skill level suffered for it. It took awhile to get back up to the level I felt I was at before.

[JThorne]

would you consider (Picky Village) a Splitter even though it would never help you play two Bridges in one turn (and would proactively prevent such a thing for the rest of the turn)?

Wait, let's see if I can be a straw-Awaclus. Royal Carriage on the mat, Picky Village, Royal Blacksmith to draw, extra action from PV allows Throne Room on King's Court, call RC on King's Court, triple Highway, Bridge and Wine Merchant. Play a Counterfeit. $16, 8 buys, piledrive Provinces.

Looks like a splitter to me! Imp/Royal Blacksmith would have just made sadness.

P.S. Gives me more appreciation for how hard it is to write card text without rules issues. Would Picky Village prevent calling RC to re-play an action? A card like that would call for a clarified definition of what "play" means.

[FemurLemur]

While I'm ranting: I also have a brother who rolls his eyes every time he hears there's a new Dominion Expansion and says something along the lines of "Jeez, they're gonna have to start a rotation soon like all the other CCGs if they want players to be able to keep up".

I think there is some truth to this. If attracting new players to competitive Dominion was important for the business model (as it is for CCGs both paper and virtual) then I think there would be value to a "season" approach.

Well, no doubt there could be business value in a rotation. But I don't think my brother's position is that they need to do it for business reasons so much as it is that the game needs it for balance similarly to how CCGs do. So like, if your position is "it would be good business to rotate" or "it would help players gain familiarity", then I agree. But if your position is "you have to be able to know the cards in the card pool to play a game of Dominion well", then I don't.

The way I think of it is like this: Donald X could release 10,000 new cards tomorrow and it wouldn't fundamentally change the way I think about any one specific round of Dominion, only in how I tackle meta analysis or general Dominion discussion. In every case, I am presented with 10-11 Kingdom Cards (and possibly some Events/Landmarks), and it is my task to figure out the best path to victory under the circumstances. The fact that I currently have familiarity with most of the cards in the card pool is very convenient, but I don't view it as relevant to any specific match itself, because the 10 cards in the supply don't really care about the rest of the cards in the card pool.

In a CCG, you need to know the card pool because you need to know what could possibly be in your opponent's deck (which is hidden information) and use predictions to guide your decision making process. That's not a thing in Dominion. I know what's available to my opponent. It's the same stuff available to me. So there's this specific reason (among others) for CCGs to have rotation that isn't a factor with Dominion, and I believe my brother is overlooking that to some extent.

[filovirus]

A couple of observations from this:

1) First of all, I really like this idea. Thanks for doing it and thanks to everyone for the good , civil discussion in this thread. There are lots of good points being made by everyone to support their opinion

2) I am really impressed with how this shows the huge difference in the 2nd edition cards versus the ones that were replaced. Most of the replaced cards would have been F or at best D, but the majority of the new cards are rated A to C. That is pretty cool!  I wish all of the people who rejected base Dominion because they felt it was too simple or predictable would have started with 2nd edition. Perhaps their opinions would be different now.

3) The last Qvist ranking had Wishing Well at 26 and Smugglers at 33. So how are they possibly worthy of an A ranking? Wouldn’t a card worthy of an A ranking at least be in the top 15 of its cost group?

4) Lookout is a card I like to buy early, but, of course, I never buy a bunch of them. It doesn’t take that long for them to possibly do more harm than good. It only ranked 20 in the last Qvist ranking. To me a card ranked S would have to be a card so fundamentally powerful, you don’t dare ignore it. If there are other good thrashers, I have no problem ignoring Lookout. Personally, I would not have any trouble with Lookout as a B, though I can see a case for it as an A.

5) Like many, I would definitely put Cutpurse at least on the same level, if not above Explorer rather than the other way around. In Qvist rankings, Explorer ranked 87 out of 96, but Cutpurse was 45 out of 73. So Cutpurse ranks much higher among 4’s than Explorer does among 5’s. I pretty much always buy a Cutpurse, but Explorer is very ignorable.

The Qvist rankings are good for getting an rough idea of card power. However, it is difficult to compare different costing cards with each other using the Qvist rankings. I like Seprix's idea of a tier system better for comparing between price points.

[Awaclus]

We didn't. I was just in a hurry, so I accidentally conflated soft terminal with pseudo-village (or "splitter" as Awaclus prefers) in my head. I was mentally comparing Imp to Herald as cards which sometimes play an additional action card. Which is wrong of course- Herald will be a Cantrip at worst and a Splitter at best, Imp will be card draw at worst and a Cantrip (Lab Variant) at best. Imp will get you 0 Actions or 1 pseudo-action, whereas Herald will get you 1 Action and maybe also 1 pseudo-action.

For the record, I don't really care about what term is being used very much, but to the very small degree that I do care, the term I prefer is "anti-terminal" (but as I have stated before, I can call them villages or splitters or +actions or bananas or tacos or whatever else other people are calling them). Way more importantly than that, I prefer that the concept of "pseudo-"villages doesn't exist.

The real question shouldn't be "What is your definition of Splitter", it should be "When you say that Devil's Workshop is bad because it fills your deck with terminals, is that accounting for them being soft terminals?" My mistake for the mixup.

In that case, the answer is no. But they do very quickly become full-on terminals if you have too many of them.

I think I get what Chris is me is trying to say about Awaclus' stated definition of Splitter. Awaclus, would you consider the following card a Splitter even though it would never help you play two Bridges in one turn (and would proactively prevent such a thing for the rest of the turn)?

Picky Village
+1 Card
+2 Actions
You may not play additional copies beyond the 1st copy of any Action card except Picky Village for the rest of the turn.

Edited card text for clarity. Card's wording probably still sucks, but you get the idea of the thought experiment.

It still allows me to play a Bridge and a Bridge Troll so it's good enough.

[Willvon]

A couple of observations from this:

1) First of all, I really like this idea. Thanks for doing it and thanks to everyone for the good , civil discussion in this thread. There are lots of good points being made by everyone to support their opinion

2) I am really impressed with how this shows the huge difference in the 2nd edition cards versus the ones that were replaced. Most of the replaced cards would have been F or at best D, but the majority of the new cards are rated A to C. That is pretty cool!  I wish all of the people who rejected base Dominion because they felt it was too simple or predictable would have started with 2nd edition. Perhaps their opinions would be different now.

3) The last Qvist ranking had Wishing Well at 26 and Smugglers at 33. So how are they possibly worthy of an A ranking? Wouldn’t a card worthy of an A ranking at least be in the top 15 of its cost group?

4) Lookout is a card I like to buy early, but, of course, I never buy a bunch of them. It doesn’t take that long for them to possibly do more harm than good. It only ranked 20 in the last Qvist ranking. To me a card ranked S would have to be a card so fundamentally powerful, you don’t dare ignore it. If there are other good thrashers, I have no problem ignoring Lookout. Personally, I would not have any trouble with Lookout as a B, though I can see a case for it as an A.

5) Like many, I would definitely put Cutpurse at least on the same level, if not above Explorer rather than the other way around. In Qvist rankings, Explorer ranked 87 out of 96, but Cutpurse was 45 out of 73. So Cutpurse ranks much higher among 4’s than Explorer does among 5’s. I pretty much always buy a Cutpurse, but Explorer is very ignorable.

The Qvist rankings are good for getting an rough idea of card power. However, it is difficult to compare different costing cards with each other using the Qvist rankings. I like Seprix's idea of a tier system better for comparing between price points.

I get what you’re saying. They are two different measures of the cards. However, I still don’t see how a card can be considered middle of the pack in one list, and in another list, though a different rating system, they are somehow among the best cards in Dominion, which is what a card in the A tier should be.

So my question was how can Wishing Well and Smugglers be A tier in these rankings if they are not even close to that in other rankings.  Did we come up with some new use for them over the past year that suddenly made them better? Or what is it that makes them A tier cards? I must be missing something because I just don’t see them as outstanding as I would expect an A tier card to be. They both have their situations where the shine, but they are often quite ignorable.

[Gazbag]

A couple of observations from this:

1) First of all, I really like this idea. Thanks for doing it and thanks to everyone for the good , civil discussion in this thread. There are lots of good points being made by everyone to support their opinion

2) I am really impressed with how this shows the huge difference in the 2nd edition cards versus the ones that were replaced. Most of the replaced cards would have been F or at best D, but the majority of the new cards are rated A to C. That is pretty cool!  I wish all of the people who rejected base Dominion because they felt it was too simple or predictable would have started with 2nd edition. Perhaps their opinions would be different now.

3) The last Qvist ranking had Wishing Well at 26 and Smugglers at 33. So how are they possibly worthy of an A ranking? Wouldn’t a card worthy of an A ranking at least be in the top 15 of its cost group?

4) Lookout is a card I like to buy early, but, of course, I never buy a bunch of them. It doesn’t take that long for them to possibly do more harm than good. It only ranked 20 in the last Qvist ranking. To me a card ranked S would have to be a card so fundamentally powerful, you don’t dare ignore it. If there are other good thrashers, I have no problem ignoring Lookout. Personally, I would not have any trouble with Lookout as a B, though I can see a case for it as an A.

5) Like many, I would definitely put Cutpurse at least on the same level, if not above Explorer rather than the other way around. In Qvist rankings, Explorer ranked 87 out of 96, but Cutpurse was 45 out of 73. So Cutpurse ranks much higher among 4’s than Explorer does among 5’s. I pretty much always buy a Cutpurse, but Explorer is very ignorable.

The Qvist rankings are good for getting an rough idea of card power. However, it is difficult to compare different costing cards with each other using the Qvist rankings. I like Seprix's idea of a tier system better for comparing between price points.

I get what you’re saying. They are two different measures of the cards. However, I still don’t see how a card can be considered middle of the pack in one list, and in another list, though a different rating system, they are somehow among the best cards in Dominion, which is what a card in the A tier should be.

So my question was how can Wishing Well and Smugglers be A tier in these rankings if they are not even close to that in other rankings.  Did we come up with some new use for them over the past year that suddenly made them better? Or what is it that makes them A tier cards? I must be missing something because I just don’t see them as outstanding as I would expect an A tier card to be. They both have their situations where the shine, but they are often quite ignorable.

I wouldn't put much stock in the Qvist rankings beyond the top and bottom 5 or so cards. I mean Smithy is at 15 and Envoy at 30- they're pretty much the same card!

[Commodore Chuckles]

Prosperity:

S: King's Court
A: Goons, Mountebank, Grand Market, Quarry
B: Peddler, Watchtower, City, Worker's Village, Monument, Rabble
C: Loan, Bishop, Bank, Forge
D: Vault, Talisman, Trade Route, Expand, Mint, Hoard, Venture, Contraband
F: Royal Seal, Counting House

Prosperity is the Gilded Age set. A lot of really good cards and a lot of really bad ones.

[Commodore Chuckles]

Hinterlands:

S: Probably nothing.
A: Margrave, Border Village, Highway, Haggler
B: Fool's Gold, Spice Merchant, Stables, Jack Of All Trades, Scheme, Embassy,
C: Crossroads, Ill-Gotten Gains, Inn, Cartographer, Tunnel
D: Oasis, Develop, Trader, Oracle, Silk Road, Nomad Camp, Farmland, Mandarin
F: Noble Brigand, Cache, Duchess

[Commodore Chuckles]

Dark Ages:

S: Cultist, Rebuild
A: Urchin, Ironmonger, Wandering Minstrel, Count, Altar, Counterfeit,
B: Junk Dealer, Forager, Hunting Grounds, Hermit, Knights, Marauder, Market Square, Catacombs, Fortress
C: Bandit Camp, Squire, Mystic, Procession, Storeroom, Scavenger
D: Vagrant, Armory, Band of Misfits, Graverobber, Poor House, Rats, Pillage, Feodum, Sage, Death Cart, Rogue
F: Beggar

[ipofanes]

Prosperity:

S: King's Court
A: Goons, Mountebank, Grand Market, Quarry
B: Peddler, Watchtower, City, Worker's Village, Monument, Rabble
C: Loan, Bishop, Bank, Forge
D: Vault, Talisman, Trade Route, Expand, Mint, Hoard, Venture, Contraband
F: Royal Seal, Counting House

Prosperity is the Gilded Age set. A lot of really good cards and a lot of really bad ones.

Generally I agree although I would nudge Loan and Venture one tier up. I am a sucker for cards that trash cards not in my hand, and Venture becomes better than Gold in so many kingdoms.

[Seprix]

Time to redo these.