Print

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

[def]

Geronimoo, can you test how well Chapel/only Fool's Gold does in your simulator?
I don't know what's better, fast trashing only or buying a Fool's Gold with 2 Coppers, 2 Estates and Chapel.
I suspect this to be very strong. How would this compete with Mountebank + Big Money?

[rinkworks]

Fool's Gold is great.  Such a simple idea, and yet so full of possibilities (and hazards).

I can't help thinking that if it had been proposed as a fan card, the universal reaction would be that it was priced too low.  But it goes to show how inexact a science the whole pricing thing is.  I love that we can trust that these cards have been tested so exhaustively and that they're basically the best incarnation of their ideas possible.

[Jimmmmm]

I can't help thinking that if it had been proposed as a fan card, the universal reaction would be that it was priced too low.

My reaction was similar but opposite: I thought $4 was too much. Although I suppose it's comparable to Treasure Maps, they can be pretty hard to match up, and you only need to do it once. And I suppose even when you do get two FGs together, they're only worth a little more than two Silvers. Although, of course, $5 is "a lot more" than $4.

I suspect Nomad Camp might cause a little AP if you open $4. Do I buy a NC in the hope that I might get a $5, but of course it's more likely that I'll get another $4, in which case I've essentially opened Woodcutter/$4. And then you have a Copper holding back your opening buys a little.

[Jimmmmm]

Sorry for the double-post, but I just realised something: is Fool's Gold the only card in the game that can get you a turn 3 Province after opening with 2 of them?

[Davio]

Hehehe, Fool's Gold.

I wonder what the average value of it is when used. Probably closer to $2 than $3, which makes it more like a Silver than Gold and makes the price more accurate.

I don't like the reaction part which is a lot less useful in Colony games.


I must say, I played a solitaire game with FG/Chapel and Worker's Village and cleared the Provinces in 17 turns. I think such a card with +Buy is pretty nice to have with FGs.

Much like Bank you have either underkill (only 1 worth $1) or overkill (4 worth $13 total), so you really have to make the most of the situations in which you are able to line them up nicely.

[ackack]

Sorry for the double-post, but I just realised something: is Fool's Gold the only card in the game that can get you a turn 3 Province after opening with 2 of them?

The "2 of them" seems like a pretty artificial restriction to an already sort of goofy category, but yes, since you're eliminating the 4s with this requirement, it is.

Simulating Chapel/FG is going to take a bit of changing to the standard Big Money rules. I'm inclined to think you should be going balls to the wall for 5+ Provinces and thus starting to buy Duchies somewhat later. Buying no treasure but Fool's Gold seems best if this is your plan, and so for a long time any <8 turn should be spent on FG, I think.

[Thisisnotasmile]

I think the focus here should be on Chapel/FG with a +buy. I'm not gonna feel too great about spending ~$5 on a $2 card all the time, even if it is the best choice. Buying 2 FGs a turn is where it's at.

[ackack]

If you can do it, sure. It's really not necessary, though. I've just played 3 test games on Isotropic, which while it isn't much of a sample, demonstrates just how fast this is. 4 Provinces in 12-14 turns seems about right. added: One of those was a Talisman game, I opened Talisman/Chapel instead of FG/Chapel. The Chapeling luck wasn't that great in that game, but I think that when that is possible it's probably good. Woodcutter might be a tough call, if you want one I think you want it reasonably late so that you don't have Chapel inefficiency.

[Jimmmmm]

Sorry for the double-post, but I just realised something: is Fool's Gold the only card in the game that can get you a turn 3 Province after opening with 2 of them?

The "2 of them" seems like a pretty artificial restriction to an already sort of goofy category, but yes, since you're eliminating the 4s with this requirement, it is.

True, and I'm certainly not recommending it. I just remember Donald pointed out I think 3 cards that could get you a turn 3 Province opening X/Silver (one of which was Smithy), and I thought this was some interesting trivia.

More pointlessness, but I think there are very few $4 or even $5 cost cards that could get you a turn 3 Province if you somehow managed two open with two of them. In fact, the only other cards I can think of that could do this are Gold itself and Expand (and, of course, Platinum. And Contraband if your opponent allows it).

I think the focus here should be on Chapel/FG with a +buy. I'm not gonna feel too great about spending ~$5 on a $2 card all the time, even if it is the best choice. Buying 2 FGs a turn is where it's at.

With a Watchtower in hand or a Royal Seal in play...

[DStu]

More pointlessness, but I think there are very few $4 or even $5 cost cards that could get you a turn 3 Province if you somehow managed two open with two of them. In fact, the only other cards I can think of that could do this are Gold itself and Expand (and, of course, Platinum. And Contraband if your opponent allows it).

Bank, Grand Market, Possession
and double-Forge could get you a Colony, but no Province...

[Kuildeous]

The next two are up: Nomad Camp and Fool's Gold.

Could some kind soul post the text of these cards? BGG is blocked where I am. Sad panda am I.

Also sad because I thought I posted this an hour ago, but I apparently did not click the right button. Dumb panda am I.

[ackack]

Could some kind soul post the text of these cards? BGG is blocked where I am. Sad panda am I.

Also sad because I thought I posted this an hour ago, but I apparently did not click the right button. Dumb panda am I.

Not the exact text, but the idea:

Nomad's Camp, $4: action, +2 +1 buy. When gained, put on top of the deck.

Fool's Gold, $2: treasure/reaction. First one played in a turn is worth $1, all subsequent ones are worth $4. As a Reaction, you may trash it when your opponent buys a Province and top deck a Gold.

[ackack]

So I played a test Chapel/FG 2p game (not on this account), and it's definitely interesting. I think the key question is how to balance early trashing with making sure you get your share of the Fool's Gold, as falling substantially behind in that is really bad. I won 5/3 Provinces in 17 turns with only 4 FG, but it was a Tournament game which gave me some options and my opponent converted half of his FG to Gold, which we decided was probably a mistake.

It's a very polarized card, which as DG says invites room for misapplication. But generally I think it's going to be pretty obvious when it works and when it doesn't, so it seems likely either both players will ignore it or go for it. I'm generally apprehensive about that sort of card, but we'll see how this one holds up.

added: I really like this model of leaking the cards out two at a time.

[jonts26]

It'll be interesting to see how Nomad's Camp affects gardens games. It should be faster than just woodcutter/gardens but how much I'm not sure. The higher price tag will interfere somewhat. And I imagine the 4/3 vs 3/4 opening will have a huge effect on chance to win.

[rinkworks]

One observation about Fool's Gold's reaction is that sometimes you might want to convert them to Golds even if you had a good Fool's Gold deck going.  The reason is that as you green, the Fool's Golds will start to get spaced out and connect up less often.  At a certain point, it might be a lot better just to have a Gold instead.  In particular, that tipping point will likely occur around when your opponents are buying Provinces also.

The top-decking part is important, because it might well be the last turn or two of the game.  You draw a hand of all green and a single Fool's Gold.  Either way, this hand is a bust, but if someone buys a Province you may have rescued your next turn from the same fate.

[rinkworks]

Someone on the BGG forums brought up an interesting idea:  a Mint/Fool's Gold opening.  Normally Mint openings are bad, but with Fool's Gold, you want to trash heavily and fast, and:

(1) The Fool's Gold is effectively a Copper for the moment, so you're down to $3 in your deck total, not $2.
(2) More Fool's Golds only cost $2.  Big difference from having to build back up to Silvers, which cost $3.
(3) You can Mint your Fool's Gold as part of your effort to rebuild your economy.

Thoughts?

[ackack]

Someone on the BGG forums brought up an interesting idea:  a Mint/Fool's Gold opening.  Normally Mint openings are bad, but with Fool's Gold, you want to trash heavily and fast, and:

(1) The Fool's Gold is effectively a Copper for the moment, so you're down to $3 in your deck total, not $2.
(2) More Fool's Golds only cost $2.  Big difference from having to build back up to Silvers, which cost $3.
(3) You can Mint your Fool's Gold as part of your effort to rebuild your economy.

Thoughts?

Yes, Mint/FG is probably very very strong.

added: Converting FG's in a devoted FG deck is very likely a bad idea. The Golds are better if you have other treasure floating around, but the only thing different that happens with Gold vs. FG in terms of number of treasures needed in hand to do something is that you can buy Estates. For that modest gain, you are really crapping on the value of the remaining FG's in your deck.

[def]

Now that you mention Mint, rinkworks, opening Fool's Gold/Mine could be great.

But this sounds all too good - a 2$-card that synergizes great with itself and good with many other cards (especially trashers). Would be interesting to know why it was priced so low. Maybe some kind of chapel-like argument?
Or to see how wrong we, especially I, are, by thinking how this and that would work..

[rinkworks]

Only guessing here, but I suspect two things:  One, that the gameplay value is more interesting if you can pick them up with extra Buys; two, that you really have to work to get three or more in your hand at the same time, which, despite the modest bump over Silver when you have two, is really probably where a Fool's Gold strategy starts to pay off.

That said, I would not be surprised to discover that Fool's Gold becomes the new second-best $2 card.

[DStu]

But this sounds all too good - a 2$-card that synergizes great with itself and good with many other cards (especially trashers). Would be interesting to know why it was priced so low. Maybe some kind of chapel-like argument?

The argument for Chapel is especially that it can be so cheap because you anyway will only buy 1 of it usually, even if it would cost 0. Don't see that it works here.

I think we all think to much on the best-cases. You draw your whole deck, you trashed your whole deck, you have +buys. In a "usual" deck it will not be very strong, it is not very strong at the start, which takes a lot issue out of the whole pricing-debate, esp. if it's $2 or $3 or $4.  And there are lots of decks where you don't want an expensive copper...

But I also think that it is probably one of the cards with more variance, in the sense of how it value differ depending on the board. It may be a lot weaker than say Pearl Diver, and it may be a lot stronger than say Hamlet...

[guided]

Ah-ha, yes! With Fool's Gold/Mint I think we finally have the very first actually-strong Mint opening There have been some marginally-sort-of-OK-I-guess-if-there-are-no-good-5s-available Mint openings explored in the past (Mint/Secret Chamber, Mint/Embargo), but I think Mint/Fool's Gold is genuinely strong.

Nomad Camp's ability to mess with opening strategy completely blows my mind, though I suspect it will introduce a lot of variance when starting deck order is not constrained to be identical between players. Nomad Camp/Treasury (for example) could be stupidly strong, while the other player gets stuck with a 4/2+2 or 3/4 opening even if they had 4/3 if they didn't get the $5 at turn 2 (since failure to convert the Nomad Camp into something awesome at turn 2 downgrades it into a $3 value Woodcutter).

[ChaosRed]

Not a huge fan of either card unveiled today, although both are well designed.

I see Fool's Gold as mostly cumbersome, two of them gets you one past two Silver and you can't Mine them into gold. If you could trash for a Gold on other types of VP purchases, I'd be very intrigued, but cards that require two or three in your hand to really pull off, generally don't enthuse me much. I think once again the preview put two cards together that complement each other well, Nomad can be used to keep your deck full of Fool's Gold on the second buy.

Nomad seems fun as a buy in the first turn on a 4/3 split, as it bumps you to 5 on the second turn, which as we all know is really useful. Other than though, I don't see it as compelling, gaining it late in the game via a Feast or something might be useful when you are staring at 13+, and can draw it right into your hand. I see the card's utility as narrow, but when the circumstance is there, its a compelling card.

[guided]

I will say that on reflection Nomad Camp interests me as an endgame card as well. There are many situations where you'd love to have a top-decked Woodcutter for $4 in the final turns of the game.

[mborda]

Fool's Gold + Council Room deck... wouldn't it be a good strategy?
And if you can add Border Village... (and gain more Fool's Gold and Council Rooms...)

[play2draw]

I hope this expansion has some important $3 cards. Recently it seems $3 is the price where, excluding the few really useful cards at $3, a card is too weak (read: boring) to be priced at $4 but not so strong that opening 5/2 is a disadvantage. I take this back, my memory of $3 cards is patchy.

Fool's Gold definitely has an allure, but there are certainly flaws with it. Drawing a Fool's Gold alone in the late-game is worse than drawing a lone gold in the late-game, as doing so reduces the likelihood of getting 2 Fool's Golds together. The chance of trashing it for a gold helps this card, but as we learned from playing Tournament games this occurrence is hardly a reliable one (and, of course, trashing one makes any other Fool's Gold in your deck weaker). Might be interesting in a tournament game where Province buys are plentiful and early.

Nomad Camp is interesting, but you need to remember that it is still a Woodcutter at its heard. Now Woodcutter isn't necessarily a bad card; just downright inconvenient at times. The ability to buy a $5 on turn 2 is nice (especially in a Mountebank/Witch game), but I suspect that the card would have better use if there are strong $2 and $3 cards on the board (similar to one instance where Contraband is useful). It *might* be useful in the end-game if you want to buy a tie-breaking estate, but if you're at the point where you're buying estates it'd probably be more useful to buy the estate outright than go through a Nomad Camp to do it.