Generally speaking, at the start of the game (the first several rounds), is it better to use Amulet to gain those silvers (valuable for buying better cards earlier on), or to trash those useless Estates (thinner deck = more coins and other actions in each hand). Obviously, certain decks will make this decision easy. As is when you'd clearly use the +1 coin option instead, to buy that valuable card. But I'm asking about what's better strategy in general, in the beginning stages of a given game...more useful coins in your deck, or fewer 'dead' cards in your deck?
I struggle to think of situations where I would want the Silvers before most of my Estates and Coppers were gone. Seems like you'd have to design a kingdom to get me to want to do that.
Quote from: josh bornstein on 17 October 2021, 11:27:29 PM
Generally speaking, at the start of the game (the first several rounds), is it better to use Amulet to gain those silvers (valuable for buying better cards earlier on), or to trash those useless Estates (thinner deck = more coins and other actions in each hand). Obviously, certain decks will make this decision easy. As is when you'd clearly use the +1 coin option instead, to buy that valuable card. But I'm asking about what's better strategy in general, in the beginning stages of a given game...more useful coins in your deck, or fewer 'dead' cards in your deck?
Generally speaking, trashing or exiling estates and coppers is the best thing you can do to start just about any game.
To me the obvious question is: You can't strip down until you have just 2 Amulets in your deck, then start to build up again. So when do you go from "trash with no regard to build up" to a selective process?
If you get a 4 Copper, 1 Amulet hand, is it it worth going for a good $5, like non-terminal draw (Laboratory, Hunting Party, Stables) over trashing one Copper (and possibly another one next turn)?