Weak Cards Banlist Discussion!

[cranesflyhigh]

I think the community is still a bit too lenient, especially on the minors. Removing unexciting cards barely working even in strats they supposed to be good in, or way overpriced cards that are at best a weak gamble, makes drafts more interesting. I am honestly happy with any banlist that expands on what is already there, as I would probably ban even more than anything that gets proposed in a consensus post :3 So good list Alex, thanks for your work of summarizing the community's thoughts up!

[JustYellow]

I think the community is still a bit too lenient, especially on the minors. Removing unexciting cards barely working even in strats they supposed to be good in, or way overpriced cards that are at best a weak gamble, makes drafts more interesting. I am honestly happy with any banlist that expands on what is already there, as I would probably ban even more than anything that gets proposed in a consensus post :3 So good list Alex, thanks for your work of summarizing the community's thoughts up!

Exactly my thoughts.

[MasN]

How about strictly worse cards?

Recently, I was given a draft, where one card was "on play: gain 1 sheep, this card can hold 1 sheep per occ", and another occ was strictly worse, not giving 1 sheep I believe only counting certain occs even.

It was really funny but also sad to see them both as draft options.

[alexwjb]

How about strictly worse cards?

Recently, I was given a draft, where one card was "on play: gain 1 sheep, this card can hold 1 sheep per occ", and another occ was strictly worse, not giving 1 sheep I believe only counting certain occs even.

It was really funny but also sad to see them both as draft options.

This is Pet Broker (gives a sheep) and Sheep Agent (doesn't). I think it's silly both cards exist, but Sheep Agent isn't bad enough to be in the weak banlist.

IMO the existence of things like this is an argument in favour of the banlists in general, because they reveal that there was not enough effort put into making sure all the cards in the game make sense together. See also: "Greengrocer"/"Green Grocer", Beer Stein/Baking Sheet etc etc. So it's not surprising the game has cards as extreme as Catcher is bad and Hayloft Barn is good.

When the decks are based on proper playtesting by the community you get a much better result. The obvious example is the E deck which was based on play-agricola decks. If Blackberry Farmer is unbanned (as is proposed), there will be no E deck cards on the weak banlist, and the only E deck card on the strong banlist will be a card that was made stronger than it was on play-agricola (Guest Room, which didn't used to let you get an action the round you play it).

[MasN]

Is a rebalance list possible? I understand pulverizer plow is too strong and needed to be banned, but also I do think the idea of having a clay counterpart to the forest plow does sound very cool.
Similarly, on the topic of weak cards, I think that i would be nice for certain card roles to be filled in the game (eg. food for building clay rooms, to complement the occs that give discounts for clay rooms), but everyone can agree that Roughcaster simply does not given enough reward to be wroth the effort.

If the numbers were adjusted, then it seems possible that these niches could be filled by cards, while still being balanced with the other cards.

Also, perhaps now that there is BGA playtesting, perhaps there could be a revised (revised revised?) deck that has a more curated selection of cards, so we don't get into situations like Pet Broker/Sheep Agent, and Greengrocer / Green Grocer?

I have a friend who was reading the stats thread, and they were frustrated because they couldn't tell whether the stats of Market Stall were for Market Stall, or whether those stats were instead those of Market Stall. Of course, I'm good enough an Agricola player to tell them that since Market Stall is substantially better than Market Stall, the stats for Market Stall are for Market Stall and not Market Stall, but it would be nice if that wasn't needed.

[George Smiley]

I would prefer to see the following remain off the ban list. There's no statistical rationale, but I like these cards circulating around because when I see them in a draft sometimes I say "is this the game I can make X card work?". Usually I come to my senses and say "Nah, can't be" but I continue to hold hope and occasionally take them into my hand and evaluate them during the game like many edge case cards. The ones with the * I've played with some value ... but for the record, not sure if I won those games or not.

Co-op Plower*
Culinary Artist
Interior Decorator
Dutch Windmill*
Cattle Farm*
Social Benefits (Graey backed this card as I recall)

[-MightyW-]

This mindset is just anti weak banlist. I think we really shouldn't be too nitpicky and focus more on the fact that we are going to smooth out the draft experience this way.

[alexwjb]

I would prefer to see the following remain off the ban list. There's no statistical rationale, but I like these cards circulating around because when I see them in a draft sometimes I say "is this the game I can make X card work?". Usually I come to my senses and say "Nah, can't be" but I continue to hold hope and occasionally take them into my hand and evaluate them during the game like many edge case cards. The ones with the * I've played with some value ... but for the record, not sure if I won those games or not.

Co-op Plower*
Culinary Artist
Interior Decorator
Dutch Windmill*
Cattle Farm*
Social Benefits (Graey backed this card as I recall)

Thanks George for the input, it really helps

One thing to remember is the cards are still available in games without the weak banlist option, so they are always available if you want them. But the weak banlist has proved popular for people looking to avoid these kinds of cards.

My thoughts on these:

Co-op Plower: The stats on this card really are impressively bad. It's played quite often as bad occs go - almost 10% of the games in which it is dealt. But it still has the 4th worst PWR of all occs (including banned occs!). 68 plays, 4 wins!! I don't see any argument for it continuing to be out of the weak banlist.

Culinary Artist: The stats are not quite as bad as Co-op Plower, but still very bad. PWR under 0.3, decently negative elo/play (suggesting it's not a good niche card). The whole point of the weak card banlist is to catch cards like this IMO.

Interior Decorator: I actually didn't include this in my most recent suggestion, though as Lumin pointed out the stats would lead you to include it. But on this one I have some sympathy with Lezurichois' point - it does just feel like a card that can be reasonable in early-ish reno to stone strategies. But it's possibly telling that the stats don't agree...

Dutch Windmill: I gave my thoughts on this above, but the fact it has 2 points on it does not stop it being a very bad card. I really think there should be more minors on the list and this fits the bill (8th worst PWR of all minors).

Cattle Farm: Was banned before and continues to have awful stats (5th worst PWR of all minors, including banned minors). No reason to bring it back.

Social Benefits: By all means experiment in non-weak banlist games, but it really is a terrible card! Food is critical in Agricola and having to stay close to the breadline is punishing. Add the 1 reed cost and awkward pre-req and you have one of the worst minors in the game (12th worst of all minors).

[alexwjb]

Is a rebalance list possible? I understand pulverizer plow is too strong and needed to be banned, but also I do think the idea of having a clay counterpart to the forest plow does sound very cool.
Similarly, on the topic of weak cards, I think that i would be nice for certain card roles to be filled in the game (eg. food for building clay rooms, to complement the occs that give discounts for clay rooms), but everyone can agree that Roughcaster simply does not given enough reward to be wroth the effort.

If the numbers were adjusted, then it seems possible that these niches could be filled by cards, while still being balanced with the other cards.

Also, perhaps now that there is BGA playtesting, perhaps there could be a revised (revised revised?) deck that has a more curated selection of cards, so we don't get into situations like Pet Broker/Sheep Agent, and Greengrocer / Green Grocer?

I have a friend who was reading the stats thread, and they were frustrated because they couldn't tell whether the stats of Market Stall were for Market Stall, or whether those stats were instead those of Market Stall. Of course, I'm good enough an Agricola player to tell them that since Market Stall is substantially better than Market Stall, the stats for Market Stall are for Market Stall and not Market Stall, but it would be nice if that wasn't needed.

I would love for us to experiment with card rebalancing, but it's not part of what BGA does I believe.

I have been pleading with Awaken Realms, who are publishing the new Agricola Special Edition, to engage with the community and make sure the cards they release are properly playtested and thought through. If you are reading this Awaken Realms, don't repeat the mistakes of the past: reach out! You will find a lot of people willing to do a lot of the work to make some amazing, interesting decks


(edit: changed "don't repeat the mistakes of the past and reach out!" to the grammatically clearer, and seemingly opposite meaning, "don't repeat the mistakes of the past: reach out!". Reaching out has never been a mistake )

[cwgordon7]

I object to banning:
- Growing farm
- Brotherly love
- Dutch windmill

Growing farm is quite good if you can play it, fine as a late draft pick if you plan on fencing early. Stats are likely hurt because it's situational and can be a noob trap.

Brotherly love is a fun combo card that only requires you to get to 4 people.

Dutch windmill is a great food boost for baking games. If you trigger it twice, it's 2 stone -> 2 points and 2 wood -> 6 food, which are very reasonable rates.