Print

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

[McGarnacle]

I think Fishing Village is one of those cards that has gotten worse, but is still really strong. In the days before Villa, Port, Border Village and Wandering Minstrel, it used to be a lot harder to get a good engine with lots of actions. And Fishing Village was great at that. Its still a good card, just not as good.

[pacovf]

I am confused as to why you want to consider whether Fishing Village is as good as commonly thought if we ignore its greatest strength (reliability). To me, that’s kinda like asking how good Bridge is if you don’t reduce all prices to 0 with it.

[mameluke]

It's a great village. You don't draw your whole deck every game.

I seem to agree!:

So when you don't draw your deck, it's a great village.

I think my point here is that judging "how good is Fishing Village really?" based on scenarios that are somewhat rare (draw your deck engines while your deck is already entirely drawn) is disingenuous. Sure, does FV outlive its usefulness at some point? Yes, but so does every card except for payload. I can think of more times when I had two +3 Cards cards in my hand and a FV already in play than times when I was sad that I had too many Fishing Villages.

[JThorne]

A thought about villages: They're a means to an end, and none of us would buy them at all if we didn't have to. I can't think of a single draw card that I wouldn't simply rather put the +action token on instead of fiddling with villages.

The fact that FV does the main thing Villages do (grant extra actions) essentially twice as well as a normal village is a big advantage during the building phase, which is the most critical phase of engine play; when you don't yet have control. It allows you to overload more terminal draw, which gets you to the deck-drawing phase more quickly. And the duration effect mitigates half the draw-back, as it were. In addition, I always give cards that grant extra economy a value bump, because if it allows you to get away without buying early Silver, then the non-drawing is entirely mitigated because you've thinned your deck by another stop card. I'm a big fan.

[gloures]

It's also a lot easier to consistently draw your deck if you start every turn with one (or more) extra actions...

I seem to agree with that too!:

The advantage is that you still start your turns with +Actions, so you will pretty much never stall.

If it's great when you draw your deck and great when you don't draw your deck, why is it that Fishing Village isn't all that good?


I mean, sure I think there are better Villages, I'd say Wandering Minstrel and Port at least, there are lot's of decks where I would rather have a drawing village, but I personally think that in most cases the reliability factor given by Fishing Village trumps the fact that it does not draw a card, even when you're drawing your deck.

[popsofctown]

Uh..  If you're drawing your whole deck, then like by definition Fishing Village is better, because it's +2 actions +1 coin, and Village is +2 actions +1 oops I drew my whole deck.

So I'm really not understanding this line of discourse.

No, Village is better because it doesn't take up a stop card slot that could be another Bridge instead.

The way the question was posed, regardless of how many stop cards are in my deck, I am drawing my entire deck.  You are changing the premise.

When the question is posed correctly, then yes it is trivially easy.  "Should I buy a Village or a Fishing Village if the Village will draw my entire deck but the Fishing Village won't?" It seems rather clear that you should, the bottom card might be your best one.  If it's something like failing to play the Militia you'd like to play each turn, the chance of missing out on it doesn't have to be very high for you to be willing to pass up nonterminal abandoned mine.

[enfynet]

Doesn't FV effectively contribute +Actions equivalent to having 2 villages? Since after playing you have +2 Actions now and 2 Actions to start your next turn?

[Seprix]

Fishing Village is consistency, which makes it strong. You also don't want a whole ton of them unless it's the only village, since they are stop cards. Fishing Village isn't Villa/King's Court/Port/Border Village strong, but it is up there in strength. It is for sure overrated.

[Drab Emordnilap]

Doesn't FV effectively contribute +Actions equivalent to having 2 villages? Since after playing you have +2 Actions now and 2 Actions to start your next turn?

It does until you start being able to draw your whole deck every turn. Then, a normal Village provides an extra action each turn, and so does Fishing Village.

[enfynet]

At which point, the FV also provides coin, while most villages do not.

[Jeebus]

I am confused as to why you want to consider whether Fishing Village is as good as commonly thought if we ignore its greatest strength (reliability). To me, that’s kinda like asking how good Bridge is if you don’t reduce all prices to 0 with it.

But I didn't say that we should ignore it, quite the opposite. It was a question about how good it is considering everything, I don't know how I could have been clearer. I was pretty sure the answer was that it's still great to have at least 2 FVs after drawing you're deck, but you could ask, how many more FVs should you get while building if there are other villages? I think in the past, the answer would be FVs all the way, but I was thinking that it might be more nuanced now. In the game I referenced, I started bying Villages after I had 3 FVs, and I was wondering what people thought about this (FV vs. Village).

At which point, the FV also provides coin, while most villages do not.

I'm pretty sure this is accurate (when drawing your deck): Having 2 Fishing Villages, playing one every turn, is like having 2 Villages, a Copper and a Peddler - plus the added consistency.