Print

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

[GendoIkari]

It's been said that there's very little difference between $3 and $4 in terms of cost. The biggest difference is that you can open with 2 copies of a $3, but not with 2 copies of a $4 (Not counting Nomad camp or your opponent's Noble Brigand buys).

So, which 4s would be way overpowered at $3, specifically because opening 2 of them would be too good?

Top of the list, Sea Hag, probably.
Treasure Map would certainly be better, but would still need support.
Remake/Remake would probably be pretty great.

Things I'm not so sure about:
Quarry/Quarry on a Grand Market board?
Militia/Militia instead of Militia/Silver?
Same with Monument
Would Double-Jack be significantly better?

What other cards would be broken at $3?

I suppose another consideration would be not just opening 2 copies of a given card, but being able to open 2 different cards that cost $4 as well. Any combos of two $4s that would be great to open with if you could?

[blueblimp]

Tournament/Baron might be pretty good. It'd have a not-too-small chance of picking up a province and another tournament before the second reshuffle.

Oh, and Ironworks/Ironworks would obviously be insane with the right alt vp.

[GendoIkari]

Oh, and Ironworks/Ironworks would obviously be insane with the right alt vp.

Would it be all that much stronger than Ironworks/Workshop?

[WanderingWinder]

Oh, and Ironworks/Ironworks would obviously be insane with the right alt vp.

Would it be all that much stronger than Ironworks/Workshop?

Yes. Well, also, IW/Wshop is really strong there anyway.

[GendoIkari]

Oh, and Ironworks/Ironworks would obviously be insane with the right alt vp.

Would it be all that much stronger than Ironworks/Workshop?

Yes. Well, also, IW/Wshop is really strong there anyway.

That's my point though. I'm sure that IW/IW would beat IW/Workshop, but I would think it would still be extremely close. At the phase of the game where you are gaining more IW with your IW, it makes no difference (just play Workshop last, you don't need the extra action). Later, when you are gaining Gardens/Silk Roads/Estates, sure the +1 card from IW helps, but the IW/Workshop player probably has 5 IWs and 1 Workshop anyway (in a large deck). Meaning that it's pretty rare that he will end up using his Workshop to gain a victory card anyway. Perhaps only a couple times throughout the whole game. The IW/IW player will get an extra +1 card during those couple extra times, but that's it.

[DG]

Talisman. Potion. Remake.

[WanderingWinder]

Oh, and Ironworks/Ironworks would obviously be insane with the right alt vp.

Would it be all that much stronger than Ironworks/Workshop?

Yes. Well, also, IW/Wshop is really strong there anyway.

That's my point though. I'm sure that IW/IW would beat IW/Workshop, but I would think it would still be extremely close. At the phase of the game where you are gaining more IW with your IW, it makes no difference (just play Workshop last, you don't need the extra action). Later, when you are gaining Gardens/Silk Roads/Estates, sure the +1 card from IW helps, but the IW/Workshop player probably has 5 IWs and 1 Workshop anyway (in a large deck). Meaning that it's pretty rare that he will end up using his Workshop to gain a victory card anyway. Perhaps only a couple times throughout the whole game. The IW/IW player will get an extra +1 card during those couple extra times, but that's it.

Biggest difference, I think, is being able to hammer the IW pile even that much sooner. And the card or money isn't totally negligible.

[jonts26]

Feast/Feast would be fun.

[^_^_^_^]

Would throne room be much better?

[Tahtweasel]

Feast/Feast would be fun.

That sounds like one of the worst openings I've ever heard of, for virtually any set.

[jonts26]

Feast/Feast would be fun.

That sounds like one of the worst openings I've ever heard of, for virtually any set.

Governor, Minion, Dukes, Torturer (assuming village), Any engine that doesn't really want silver (Festival/watchtower for example), Vault into Grand Markets, Hunting Party. I'm sure it wouldn't be a regular occurrence but there are lots of times when you'd open double feast if you could.

[O]

It's been said that there's very little difference between $3 and $4 in terms of cost. The biggest difference is that you can open with 2 copies of a $3, but not with 2 copies of a $4 (Not counting Nomad camp or your opponent's Noble Brigand buys).

So, which 4s would be way overpowered at $3, specifically because opening 2 of them would be too good?

Top of the list, Sea Hag, probably.
Treasure Map would certainly be better, but would still need support.
Remake/Remake would probably be pretty great.

Things I'm not so sure about:
Quarry/Quarry on a Grand Market board?
Militia/Militia instead of Militia/Silver?
Same with Monument
Would Double-Jack be significantly better?

What other cards would be broken at $3?

I suppose another consideration would be not just opening 2 copies of a given card, but being able to open 2 different cards that cost $4 as well. Any combos of two $4s that would be great to open with if you could?

Treasure Map at 3$ probably comes close to BM-Smithy. Treasure map at 4$ beats BMU if optimized correctly, I believe.

[Davio]

I don't think double Jack would be any better.

In fact double Jack isn't even better than single jack. It's only better when there are interactions from your opponent, but single Jack and double Jack are 50/50. Maybe double Jack has more room for optimizations, but the gap is by no means gigantic.

[Geronimoo]

Single Jack is worse than doubleJack. Dominiate plays the Jack slightly worse than my simulator.

[Davio]

Single Jack is worse than doubleJack. Dominiate plays the Jack slightly worse than my simulator.

Ah, I used Dominiate for the sims. What's the key difference between your play rules?

[Geronimoo]

http://dominionsimulator.wordpress.com/play-rules/hinterlands/jack-of-all-trades/

I don't know Dominiate's play rules

[Glooble]

Caravan might not be broken at 3 because of the opening, but being able to pick up two with 6 and two buys would be a bit much, I think. Same with Conspirator.

[jomini]

Remember a biggie here: Throne room. A lot of the really powerful 4s are action deficient so we don't have to worry too much about high odds disparities that break games. However, something like TR/Bridge on a peddler/salvager board can make 3 peddlers for the guy who hits it, and jack all for the guy who doesn't. Likewise, TR/Cutpurse just destroys hands. Even something simple like TR/Smithy is pretty insane if you have it hit (gold in deck/hand on T4). This can create a lot of variance in games and make it the strongest move in multiplayer, every single time.

Another shot I think might be important is multiple kinds of attacks. For instance it I can play both handsize reduction and cursers it sucks for you on a 5/2 opening. Do you go library to fight hand size reduction or do you go for trading post to fight curses?

[ycz6]

Really anything with two strong opening cards would be good. Tournament/Monument, Caravan/Remake, and the like.

Quarry/Talisman could make for a pretty fast game.

Bishop/Bishop into a Chapel-less Golden Deck?

[eHalcyon]

Remember a biggie here: Throne room. A lot of the really powerful 4s are action deficient so we don't have to worry too much about high odds disparities that break games. However, something like TR/Bridge on a peddler/salvager board can make 3 peddlers for the guy who hits it, and jack all for the guy who doesn't. Likewise, TR/Cutpurse just destroys hands. Even something simple like TR/Smithy is pretty insane if you have it hit (gold in deck/hand on T4). This can create a lot of variance in games and make it the strongest move in multiplayer, every single time.

Another shot I think might be important is multiple kinds of attacks. For instance it I can play both handsize reduction and cursers it sucks for you on a 5/2 opening. Do you go library to fight hand size reduction or do you go for trading post to fight curses?

Would TR/X really be a good opening?  It's more likely for TR to miss the other action than to have them line up, isn't it?  In that case, TR is just a dead card.

Also, if you are working on a 4/4 opening, your opponent would have the same or 5/3, no?

[GendoIkari]

Remember a biggie here: Throne room. A lot of the really powerful 4s are action deficient so we don't have to worry too much about high odds disparities that break games. However, something like TR/Bridge on a peddler/salvager board can make 3 peddlers for the guy who hits it, and jack all for the guy who doesn't. Likewise, TR/Cutpurse just destroys hands. Even something simple like TR/Smithy is pretty insane if you have it hit (gold in deck/hand on T4). This can create a lot of variance in games and make it the strongest move in multiplayer, every single time.

Another shot I think might be important is multiple kinds of attacks. For instance it I can play both handsize reduction and cursers it sucks for you on a 5/2 opening. Do you go library to fight hand size reduction or do you go for trading post to fight curses?

Would TR/X really be a good opening?  It's more likely for TR to miss the other action than to have them line up, isn't it?  In that case, TR is just a dead card.

Also, if you are working on a 4/4 opening, your opponent would have the same or 5/3, no?

Well TR/4 generally wouldn't be good, because it's not likely to hit.  But his point is valid; it would be bad for the game because some people would buy it anyway, then get lucky and have them hit. Same with opening 2 Treasure Maps, really.

[jomini]

Remember a biggie here: Throne room. A lot of the really powerful 4s are action deficient so we don't have to worry too much about high odds disparities that break games. However, something like TR/Bridge on a peddler/salvager board can make 3 peddlers for the guy who hits it, and jack all for the guy who doesn't. Likewise, TR/Cutpurse just destroys hands. Even something simple like TR/Smithy is pretty insane if you have it hit (gold in deck/hand on T4). This can create a lot of variance in games and make it the strongest move in multiplayer, every single time.

Another shot I think might be important is multiple kinds of attacks. For instance it I can play both handsize reduction and cursers it sucks for you on a 5/2 opening. Do you go library to fight hand size reduction or do you go for trading post to fight curses?

Would TR/X really be a good opening?  It's more likely for TR to miss the other action than to have them line up, isn't it?  In that case, TR is just a dead card.

Also, if you are working on a 4/4 opening, your opponent would have the same or 5/3, no?

TR/X would be a high variance opening. On average, it might lose, but it will give rise a to a lot of games that are essentially won or lost in the first 4 turns which generally sucks. I mean people (like me) dislike swindler games because in <10% of games swindler hits your power card (turning a good 4 into a potion or a 5 into a duchy) and burying it for this shuffle. TR/X would be much higher viarance than that.

Further in multiplayer you'd have the problem that high variance strategies are a much more likely way to win, so you'd expect them to dominate heavily there.

As far as 5/3 openings, well there are two ways to do this you can either change the starting cards to be 8c2e or you can reprice the 4's to 3 coin. I had assumed the latter. If we go with the former, then 5/2 isn't as much of a complete bust, but you still face the same problem - your opponent can play militia/hag and you still can only responde with traders (a 4) or library (a 5); or you can join the attack fight ... but only deal one type of attack.

This part of the reason why I think multi-player dominion is much less balanced than 2er. If you are the last guy, odds are good that you be attacked every turn (the first player normally gets at least one free turn) and that you will be attacked with multiple types of attacks. I really like that in 2er there are very few attacks that cost 3 and that most of the 3 attacks tend to be early game dominating.

[WrathOfGlod]

With the exception of drawers TR/X is less good in the early game than X/X openings because TR/X relies on a collision (~30% chance) while X/X relies on no collision (~70%)

[RisingJaguar]

Can't people already do TR/X? Sure the strength of $4 cards is much more than $3 cards on average, but I doubt 4/4 is going to see a sudden influx of TR/X starts.  Nobody buys TR/Masq like they wouldn't buy TR/YW or something like that. 

[jomini]

I understand that TR/X is generally weaker than X/X, excepting draw. The point is that TR/X is high variance and leads to games where the game is effectively over by T4. TR/Baron is crappy odds, but if it hits it can mean getting a Plat in play with the 2nd shuffle (T5). Likewise, TR/Coppersmith allows for an early plat. A number of other cards - like navigator, can make for high variance TR openings (TR-Navigator - leave 2 cards on top of your deck and look at playing a T4 gold).

Pretty much, these things mean that if a player goes for them and misses collision, he loses, which makes the game less fun for the other player as he is no longer challenged.

If they go and hit, it makes it very hard for the other player to come back.

Either outcome makes a for a game lacking in challenge and often fun.

In multi-player, say 4er, going for something like this might be your best odds of winning. A 30% chance of getting your TR/Smithy and getting first crack at the good cards (like goons) is much better than mirroring and taking your 25% odds.

WoG: yes I get that, TR/X is worse on average, but it is high variance. For many cards, when it works ... it REALLY works. It decides the game very early on.

RJ: None of 3 cards can draw better than +4 cards with TR/X - leaving you with a net +2 cards; further most all of the +2 cards options are stuff that tends to be weak - wishing well, shanty town, moat etc. Even with an early gold and some cycling, you still have a weak deck. That is not true with the 4's where payouts can be much bigger (I see multiple ways for TR/X with 4's to hit 9 coin) and much more useful late game.

Currently the highest variance TR/X openings are TR/swindler (2 chances to turn a starting buy into something useless) and TR/Chancellor. Both have a shot a buying a T3 gold, but both are pretty weak. Variance is just not as high for TR/X with 3s as with 4s.

[RisingJaguar]

I understood that, and I know there is a ton of variance that can produce crazy results with TR/X.  BUT, you now have to compare it to other 4/4 results.  MV/MV, tournament/coppersmith both produce platinums.  Navigator by itself can produce T4 Gold.  Then if we think about smithy/TR, it's actually not that strong, pretty sure TR/Masq would be better.  Cursers get no boost with TR.  Better chances just buying two sea hags. 

So with the higher results of TR/X in 4/4, the bar for 4/4 is also just higher overall.  So my point was that it will not create a huge influx of TR/X players because really, 4/4 is pretty strong. 

I could be wrong of course, and a huge influx of TR/X comes about with 4/4.  But the upside with TR/X seems like a moot point with the potential of a 4/4 start.  TM/TM seems like the biggest change. 

[jomini]

TR/Masq is a six card hand with two of the cards being among the worst in play between you and your opponent (assuming respectable opponent, that means you get their worst card and a card no better than their second worst card). You might be able to snag a gold, but it won't show until T4 and to do so comes at the opportunity cost of trashing something. In short, virtually of the 3 (or lower) high variance openings are weak with only chancellor/TR being really high variance and having the skew needed to beat x/x.

If smithy/tr (when it hits) isn't powerful, I don't know what is. It gets you a gold. It cycles the entire deck (11 out of 12 cards on T3) or let's you go for other high power cards. This is a pretty huge boost for a BM type deck.

Cursers can get a boost with TR. TR/Curser can drop two curses into this shuffle (e.g. P2 plays TR/Curse on T3, P1 plays same on T3 or T4); curser/curser cannot put two curses in before the shuffle.

TR/YW would be better than YW/YW. You have a 36% of having YW's collide in your starting hand and the latter being just as dead as a TR without an action. You then have a 29% chance of colliding your YW's during the draw. All told, YW/YW has an almost even collision chance in a draw deck and sifts only 2 cards. In short, in the first shuffle you'd expect to give out 1.45 curses; you'd expect TR/YW to give out 1.36. So, like with other cards, YW/YW has a higher mean, its distribution is not as wide as TR/YW.

So again, I'm just saying that TR/X has to be considered here when looking at the variance 4/4 introduces. Yes MV/MV can be a plat, however MV/TR can be a plat and a TR for later use. It is another reason that 4/4 can be more powerful than 4/3. And yes, TM/TM is the biggest change.

[O]

So again, I'm just saying that TR/X has to be considered here when looking at the variance 4/4 introduces. Yes MV/MV can be a plat, however MV/TR can be a plat and a TR for later use. It is another reason that 4/4 can be more powerful than 4/3. And yes, TM/TM is the biggest change.

TR/MV doesn't allow you to trash mining village twice.

[Cheese]

Like RJ touched on with Sea Hag/Sea Hag vs TR/Sea Hag, there are other considerations than just how early you can get a gold.

I think TR/X looks attractive when it is analyzed in the short term, which is normally pretty reasonable, because big gains early lead to stronger decks mid and then late. But I don't think that adequately shows what's going on, because after the next reshuffle you now have 2 more cards in your deck, making collision less likely. Every card you add to your deck makes X/X better while making TR/X worse.

And TR/Masq...you do have a seven card hand instead of the nine with TR/Smithy, but you are also very likely to end up with two fewer estates than you started with. Now your deck has Silver instead of Gold, but two fewer estates. It's probably comparable chances for hitting $6 next hand, but because your deck is trimmed, every Gold you add is more useful. Now you can continue to trim your deck and even toss some coppers. So it's probably better. But even if you don't think it is, TR/Oracle is more similar to TR/Smithy and nobody does that.

[blueblimp]

These examples only convince me further that TR/X is awful.

TR/Baron: Okay, in the unlikely event that you draw TR/Baron/Copper/2xEstate, then you get a plat. The probability of this is really low though: only 2 * (1 * 1 * (7 choose 1) * (3 choose 2) / (12 choose 5)) = 5.3% to draw this on either T3 or T4. Given that if you don't draw TR/Baron/2xEstate/X, your TR is a dead card, this does not seem like a good bet even in 4-player.

TR/Coppersmith: Even if this works and gets a platinum, you now have a TR and a Coppersmith in your deck in addition to that plat. I think I'd rather have silver/silver/gold on most boards.

TR/Navigator: Has the same chances of playing a T4 gold as Navigator/Silver. (If TR is played on the Navigator, it's only giving you $2.)

TR/Smithy: Even if these collide before the 2nd reshuffle, this is not a good opening for big money, because TR is awful for big money! To have this outperform Smithy/Silver, you'd not only need good shuffle luck in the first reshuffle, but for subsequent reshuffles too (to have Smithy and TR continue to collide).

TR/Curser is the only TR opening that seems reasonable to me (because sneaking in two curses before your opponent's second reshuffle is nice), but even then your TR is going to draw dead often as your deck fills with curses, so I'm really not convinced it's any better than Curser/Curser.

[RisingJaguar]

My point was horribly written earlier so I'll keep this short.

If the RELATIVE variance (variance from TR/4 to 4/4 and TR/3 to 4/3) doesn't change, because 4/4 is so strong when TR gets a boost, then there's no reason to think there's going to be a sudden influx of new people trying out TR/4 that wouldn't have tried TR/3. 

I will say your examples only consider the first shuffles.  Take your T3 Gold but your throne room is a super dead card which offsets the upside of the cycled through T3 Gold.  All your examples are like that, and the throne room still operates like a dead card (if played like BM).  So the early bonus, isn't as pretty now.  Again, relative variance hasn't really changed (at least from what I see). 

I know Jomini doesn't actually think TR/X is playable.  He's just trying to argue that TR/X causes more variance btw which is a relatively fair point, i just don't think it'll become a problem.

[blueblimp]

I know Jomini doesn't actually think TR/X is playable.  He's just trying to argue that TR/X causes more variance btw which is a relatively fair point, i just don't think it'll become a problem.

It's just that I'm not even convinced it causes damaging variance. For that to be true, then roughly, the best case for TR/X should be quite a bit better than the best case for X/X or Silver/X. But in fact the best cases usually seem similar.

(Also, if the best case for TR/X is less likely than an opening buy missing the second reshuffle, then it's probably not unacceptably high variance.)

[chesskidnate]

I feel I should note that wishing well/ coppersmith can allow you to buy a platinum with the same speed as throne room/ coppersmith and doesn't have a possibly dead throne room

[DStu]

Throne Room: For most of its life this card cost 3. My feeling was that you didn't want to buy two on turns 1 and 2, and probably didn't want to buy one on either of those turns (except with the Feast combo). Later in the game it doesn't matter as much whether it costs 3 or 4. So why not 3? In general, if a card can be cheaper, I make it cheaper. I want the cards as cheap as possible without breaking the game, rather than as expensive as possible without going unplayed. So, I knew Throne Room was good, but it seemed like 3 was okay.

Well late in development there was a game where no-one fought me for the Throne Rooms and I had a turn where I chained 6 of them. "I play Throne Room. First I Throne Room a Throne Room; for that one first I Throne Room a Smithy, then a Throne Room; for that one first I Throne Room a Throne Room..." I had a big cloud of actions on the table (we use a binary tree in these ridiculous situations). It's not just powerful; it's messy. I thought, hmm, maybe this could stand being 4 after all. It makes it just a bit harder to get a million of them; you don't go, "Market, buy two Throne Rooms" nearly as often. There was some worry that now there weren't enough 3's, but we decided we could live with just having four. There's Silver at 3, so it's fine to sometimes deal out a random 10 and not get a 3.

[jomini]

Well, as thrilling as this is, I remain unconvinced that TR/X doesn't greatly increase variance. I get that TR/X (3 or 4) are both crappy strategies in the main. I'm not actually saying I'd play a TR/X strategy unless we are talking scenarios where my odds of winning have dipped below 20% in a mirror, but it does increase the variance.

Yes I know, there are currently high variance strats, like TR/Chancellor, I'll even play them from 4th position if I lose the distribution (e.g. I have an opponent or two ahead of me who hit 5/2 with a witch out and I get 4/3). There just aren't as many of them.

Now BB makes a good point, if we compare the best outcome from X/X or silver/X; TR/X needs to be substantially ahead. I think he's wrong in downweighting the play the big card sooner aspect of things; we pay 2 coin more for a royal seal which saves us, on average 2x as many hands till play as a forced shuffle. Half the jump from a 3 coin treasure to a 5 coin treasure is nothing to dismiss. Also, note that while I'm using golds & plats as handy big value cards, there are other ones out there that can have more pronounced effects - e.g. bank, goons, hoard (say with great halls), forge, etc.


We can disagree about how much variance TR/X adds to the game, but it is there and it is another thing that makes 4/4 openings higher variance than 4/3.

[RisingJaguar]

We can disagree about how much variance TR/X adds to the game, but it is there and it is another thing that makes 4/4 openings higher variance than 4/3.

I'm not going to add any more arguments here.  Just going to say that I also disagree with second portion that TR/$4 adds more variance than TR/$3.  Just because the payoff is higher doesn't mean there's higher variance. 

Edit: realized that second portion relates to first portion, so i just disagree overall. 

[mDuo13]

Dismissing talk of Throne Room for now...

obv. most combinations of the top $4 cards (maybe not especially Jack?) makes for a pretty broken opening. Tournament/Monument, Monument/Sea Hag, etc. 2x Remake is peculiar. If we're talking an actual $4/$4 opening, it's great because if they collide you can turn one into a $5. If we're talking Remake costs $3, then who knows.

Sea Hag/Sea Hag is probably brutal, although if they collide, you almost certainly have no real buying power that turn. Given how good double Ambassador openings are, I sorta doubt it matters much in the long run.

I agree that Talisman definitely gets a lot crazier at $3, although not necessarily that much BETTER.

I wonder if maybe Pirate Ship and Thief would be less terrible at $3 since both benefit from being used over and over again. Maybe if also in the presence of villages.

Trader/Trader is also a fascinating opening concept. Although if they're $3, you get one less silver when you Trader your Trader.

[MasterAir]

Thief/pirate ship at $3 could lead to some horrible situations in a 4 player game.  Pirate ship is already a very strong card on some multiplayer boards.  I don't think that would be a good idea.

[GendoIkari]

Trader/Trader is also a fascinating opening concept. Although if they're $3, you get one less silver when you Trader your Trader.

[blueblimp]

Trader/Trader is also a fascinating opening concept. Although if they're $3, you get one less silver when you Trader your Trader.

I like this. When drawing Trader/Trader/Estate/whatever, I'd play one Trader on the Estate, buy a Copper, and reveal the other Trader to gain a Silver. With Trader/Trader/3xCopper, could either Trader a Trader or trash a Copper and use the other Trader to gain a Silver.

[Ozle]

Trader/Trader is also a fascinating opening concept. Although if they're $3, you get one less silver when you Trader your Trader.

I like this. When drawing Trader/Trader/Estate/whatever, I'd play one Trader on the Estate, buy a Copper, and reveal the other Trader to gain a Silver. With Trader/Trader/3xCopper, could either Trader a Trader or trash a Copper and use the other Trader to gain a Silver.

And the award for using the word Trader the most times in a single post goes too....

[eHalcyon]

Thief/pirate ship at $3 could lead to some horrible situations in a 4 player game.  Pirate ship is already a very strong card on some multiplayer boards.  I don't think that would be a good idea.

If you were going to do that, I think double Pirate Ship would be better.  Opening Thief isn't all that attractive to me... I don't really want so much copper in my deck, especially if we're playing with Pirate Ships.  Using Thief is just making it harder for your Pirate Ship to hit, and making it easier for theirs.

[wildfire393]

Thief/pirate ship at $3 could lead to some horrible situations in a 4 player game.  Pirate ship is already a very strong card on some multiplayer boards.  I don't think that would be a good idea.

If you were going to do that, I think double Pirate Ship would be better.  Opening Thief isn't all that attractive to me... I don't really want so much copper in my deck, especially if we're playing with Pirate Ships.  Using Thief is just making it harder for your Pirate Ship to hit, and making it easier for theirs.

Pretty sure he meant double Thief or double Pirate Ship. Not opening Thief + Pirate Ship.

[GendoIkari]

I think this should be bumped now that Baker exists.

[Awaclus]

I think this should be bumped now that Baker exists.

I was about to reply to one of the old posts with "Duh, obviously we're talking about the 4/4 opening because that's actually possible". Then I read your post.

[zporiri]

one 4/4 opening that i don't think people talk about very often is marauder/marauder. what do you gys think of it? if they don't collide, you can give your opponents a junk card on turn 3+4, as well as getting 2 one-shot golds in your deck, pretty strong imo, but i could be wrong. if they collide, then that turn is pretty shot in terms of buying anything, buy you still get the spoils. if they miss the shuffle, it doesn't matter what you bought, you're probably in trouble hah

[florrat]

In my experience, when playing with Baker, a 5/3 opening is usually better than a 4/4 opening. A 6/2 opening could also be awesome in some cases, but I haven't had the opportunity yet to open 6/2 with strong 6's and 2's. So opening 4/4 can be very strong, but 5/3 is just stronger most of the times.

[Jorbles]

In my experience, when playing with Baker, a 5/3 opening is usually better than a 4/4 opening. A 6/2 opening could also be awesome in some cases, but I haven't had the opportunity yet to open 6/2 with strong 6's and 2's. So opening 4/4 can be very strong, but 5/3 is just stronger most of the times.

on 6/2:
You can always open Gold/strong $2. Gold/Lighthouse maybe on a Seahag board? It's that or Seahag/Lighthouse probably.

[sudgy]

In my experience, when playing with Baker, a 5/3 opening is usually better than a 4/4 opening. A 6/2 opening could also be awesome in some cases, but I haven't had the opportunity yet to open 6/2 with strong 6's and 2's. So opening 4/4 can be very strong, but 5/3 is just stronger most of the times.

on 6/2:
You can always open Gold/strong $2. Gold/Lighthouse maybe on a Seahag board? It's that or Seahag/Lighthouse probably.

Gold/Chapel would be good, on a Sea Hag board too.

[hsiale]

I think the strongest opening possible is Goons/Chapel.

[Warfreak2]

Or Goons/Embargo, Embargoing the Silvers.

[Davio]

Gold/Courtyard is at least pretty decent as far as BM-alternatives go.

[ycz6]

Hoard/Chapel seems pretty strong too.

How about Stonemason/Bridge/Bridge/Native Village or Stonemason/Fool's Gold/Fool's Gold/Stonemason/Fool's Gold/Fool's Gold? Or Masterpiece/Silver/Silver/Silver/Beggar in a slog?

[Awaclus]

Hoard/Chapel seems pretty strong too.

How about Stonemason/Bridge/Bridge/Native Village or Stonemason/Fool's Gold/Fool's Gold/Stonemason/Fool's Gold/Fool's Gold? Or Masterpiece/Silver/Silver/Silver/Beggar in a slog?

Fool's Gold isn't an action. Stonemason/Bridge/Bridge/NV is probably very good.