Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Titandrake

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 84
Titandrake, the Smithy-Big Money players may be buying Duchies too early in the simulations. With two of them and one Gardens player, they can probably collectively improve their chances by holding off on Duchies to help empty the Provinces faster. Of course in an actual game they’d find it hard to coordinate in this way.

I tried this a bit and actually found the default rule of "Duchy when Provinces in supply <= 5" did best. Remember that it's a 12 Province game so this corresponds to buying Duchies after the 3rd-4th Province.

I doubt tweaking it is going to flip uncontested Workshop Gardens from 75% down to a fair fight of 33%.


We play casually with 3 to 4 people (only have the basegame) and the last times Workshop+Garden was in the kingdom
it was either only one person going for it and winning or multiple people going for it and placing last and second to last.
Is this a prisoner's dilemma where the options are either someone taking a very likely loss by contesting gardens or allowing the gardens player to win?
I'd appreciate advice on this an I am sorry if there are obvious resources on this I overlooked (most only dealt with 2 player games).

I'm not sure if Prisoner's Dilemna is the exact right word for it, but multiplayer does have this property.

For example, suppose the kingdom has a deck that supports an engine that beats a simpler treasure-based approach, but only if the engine gets to 7 Villages. In a 2-player game, if one player goes for the engine and the other player doesn't, the engine wins. In a 3-player game, if two players compete on the Villages, the 3rd player who doesn't compete on them gets the win instead.

Because of this, multiplayer tends to involve more posturing: buying cards that could lead into two possible strategies, and delaying which one you commit to until after you see what the other players are doing. The problem is that the later you commit, the worse your deck is.

There is a short series of articles about the difference between 2-player and multiplayer here:

For Workshop Gardens in particular, you really have to commit to it early for it to be good, so it's hard to do this posturing. I'm not sure if it's unbeatable if only 1 player goes for it. If only 1 player goes for it, try not contesting or barely contesting Gardens at all, and force them to empty all the Gardens and Estates on their own. This should give you enough time to get enough points from Provinces to win. This works pretty often in 2-player, the reason I'm not sure it works in 3-player is that the Gardens player gets 12 Gardens instead of 8.

EDIT: well I tried a few quick things in Geronimoo's Sim and in a 3-player game, one Workshop/Gardens vs two Smithy-BigMoneys wins ~75% of the time, even if the Smithy players avoid Estates. And then two Workshop/Gardens vs one Smithy-BigMoney wins almost none of the time. Of course the simulator isn't perfect, but it does suggest Workshop-Gardens is hard to beat if only one player plays it.

Dominion General Discussion / The dead can rise again
« on: July 03, 2019, 03:25:45 am »
You know what they say: no one's ever really gone. From the ashes of ill-advised VC funding and abandoned domain names comes a new company, taking up a mantle that's been dormant for years.

General Discussion / Re: roguelike games
« on: June 30, 2019, 08:59:10 pm »
I unlocked Aria.

I think I'm not going to play Aria until much, much later.

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 27, 2019, 04:11:31 pm »

Here's my entry.  Smelter is an odd trash for benefit card that offers a choice of either a Salvager/Beggar effect (trash a card, gain a bunch of Coppers to your hand) or a Forge-like gaining effect that works only on Coppers.  Early game, it's nice for turning clumps of Coppers into Silvers or engine parts, or occasionally for trashing Estates to hit a certain price point.  Later, the two options can work more closely in tandem (especially if you're able to play multiples per turn) for trashing expensive cards into Coppers and then the Coppers into Provinces.  Also be alert: Smelters can empty the Copper pile very quickly if you're not careful.

I'm sure this was unintentional, but this is actually the exact same design as one of the winners of the Mini-Set Design Contest rinkworks hosted back in 2012 (excluding the cost).

General Discussion / Re: Maths thread.
« on: June 27, 2019, 02:43:01 pm »
I need help figuring out the RNG reverse engineering described here

The paper deliberately skips over the number theory itself, so it's been tricky figuring out the exact problem they're considering. Here's my understanding so far.
  • Paper Mario's RNG is of the form RNG(t+1) = (a * RNG(t) + b) mod 2^32 where a, b are odd numbers.
  • This RNG is cyclic and visits each of the 2^32 possible RNG numbers in some order before repeating.
  • Let's define RNG(0) = 0. If we have RNG(0) = 0, then RNG(1) = b, RNG(2) = ab +b , RNG(3) = a^2b + ab + b, and in general RNG(n) = b * (a^n -1) / (a - 1) mod 2^32, so we can compute the RNG for arbitrary offsets in closed form. In practice the RNG is actually initialized to 1, but since the sequence is cyclic, we can simply redefine the start point as the point where the RNG = 0.
  • By inverting the RNG algorithm (solving RNG(n) = b * (a^n - 1) / (a-1) mod 2^32 for n), we can find exactly where in the sequence we currently are, and how many steps in the sequence we need to advance to manipulate desired RNG outcomes.

The part where I'm lost is inverting the RNG algorithm. If you look at the pseudocode of the algorithm, it eventually reduces to solving a^n = c mod 2^32 for an a = 1 mod 4. This is discrete log which is hard in general, but is apparently solvable in mod 2^32 as follows.

  • Let v2(x) = the 2-adic valuation of x (the largest k such that 2^k divides x and 2^{k+1} does not divide x. Commonly v2(0) = infinity
  • Assume v2(a-1) = v2(c-1) (code does not work if this is not true).
  • Let n_guess be our current guess of the exponent with n_guess = 0.
  • For each power of 2 (from 2^0 to 2^31), compare v2(a^{n_guess + 2^k} - c) to v2(a^{n_guess} - c). If the 2-adic valuation is larger with the power of 2, add 2^k to n_guess.
  • After doing so we have n_guess = the n that solves a^n = c mod 2^32.

The video says you prove this works using the Lifting the Exponent Lemma but I don't understand how you apply it.

General Discussion / Re: roguelike games
« on: June 27, 2019, 02:07:28 am »
For Binding of Isaac in particular, I've always felt like the intention is to have a few super-strong items that can carry your entire run, because it gives the feeling that you can always salvage a run if you get lucky, which gets people to keep playing even if they don't have a lot of skill in the game.

Brimstone is definitely very very strong, but I think it's one of the funner strong items.

General Discussion / Re: Random Stuff Part IV
« on: June 24, 2019, 03:06:04 pm »
Turns out the Windows calculator issue wasn't because of floating point error, it was because the calculator internally represents all numbers as the quotient of really big integers.

Newer versions likely did it in a different way. Standard floating point numbers are accurate enough that sqrt(4) just works out to 2.0 which can be represented exactly.

General Discussion / Re: roguelike games
« on: June 23, 2019, 10:32:09 pm »
I'm really astounded at how quickly I went from "Zone 4 has too much going on" to "Zone 4 is totally doable if I don't make dumb mistakes". Once I got basic patterns figured out I was taking way less damage early on. I suppose that's every roguelike though.

General Discussion / Re: roguelike games
« on: June 22, 2019, 02:25:30 am »
I bought Necrodancer since it went on sale the week Cadence of Hyrule was coming out. So far I like it. I just beat Zone 3 for the first time today - I felt I was hitting a brick wall with dying on level 1 almost all the time, then I got a really good run and just steamrolled to the end of the zone.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Strictly Better
« on: June 19, 2019, 09:31:58 pm »
For future reference these arguments are exactly why you should stop using the Lab analogy Awaclus.

I even think Awaclus is right here, people are way too scared of Cathedral trashing a Silver or something. If there isn't a discard attack, Cathedral trashing a Silver is a *good* sign, it means your worst card is a Silver. Do you know how long that takes normally? Really really long in most kingdoms! Oh no, I had to trash a Silver because I trashed 5 of my Coppers and all my Estates. That's like the definition of a Dominion first world problem.

The Lab analogy has been memed to high heaven and no longer means anything outside of that meme. The fact that you keep using it is part of that meme, and feeds its irrelevance. It's actually really funny now that I think about it.

Dominion Articles / Re: Notes on Castles
« on: June 12, 2019, 01:54:48 pm »
I'm wondering why no post takes into account the fact that there's two of Humble/Small/Opulent/King's Castle except in two-player games.

EDIT: Actually all the posts appear to assume two players, which I've never enjoyed as much as with 3-4.

In general, expect all strategy discussion on this forum to assume a 2 player game. That tends to be the setup most people play here.

The main reason is that 2-player games tend to be easier for online matchmaking, and 2-player games don't have kingmaking. From a competitive standpoint, it can be really frustrating when you lose because of someone else's decision rather than your own.

That isn't to say there's no skill in 3-4 player games, and that isn't saying 3-4 player games can't be fun. A lot of official paper Dominion tournaments use 3-4 player setups, and the winner is almost always a solid player. Not always the best, but definitely not the worst. But in 2-player, the better player is more likely to win, and that's what people like about it.

I have a new prediction: everyone trying to come up with a Cathedral variant is going to be wrong.

I think there's a good chance this doesn't have anything to do with trashing, but here's a trashing-based guess.

Set aside a card from your hand.

At the start of each of your turns, if this is in play, choose one: set aside a card from your hand (on this), or trash all set aside cards, +$1 per trashed card, and discard Schwerin Cathedral.

There's probably a better wording for this. This seems mega-busted so it's probably wrong.

Dominion Articles / Re: Notes on Castles
« on: May 13, 2019, 03:52:30 pm » is a Castles article I wrote from last year. It's interesting to see how the perception has changed in the past year.

Overall, me + ehunt are saying the same things and then aku_chi replies with the same comment, except this time with more stats. I think the main update from last year is recognizing the Crumbling Castle is genuinely really, really bad to pick up. It's both a weak effect and it exposes Small Castle. You want to trash your Crumbling Castle to Small Castle, but if you buy Crumbling without buying Small, your opponent buys Small Castle and you're sad.

Between 2 threads and 2 years, there surely has to be enough content to combine into a Castles article for the main strategy blog.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: New Player-Strategy Question
« on: April 25, 2019, 02:04:49 pm »
One thing I'm not great at is playing with Lurker. I think given the strong kingdom here, and the ability to load up early on with cheap and powerful $3 cards like Fishing Village, Swindler, and Forager, I would be tempted to skip Lurker and go straight for those. You can buy the key $5 cards outright fairly easily with those cards. However, there is the possibility of an "arms race." If one player skips Lurker, the other player can play a single Lurker on his or her turn to trash a key $5 without fear that it will get snapped up, then pick it up for free a turn or two later. If you end up with only one Lurker in hand but are worried about the opponent having one for the following turn, you are forced to trash a less powerful card. So on this board given how powerful the early $3 buys are, I'd be tempted to skip Lurker but maybe that would be a mistake? Anyone else have thoughts?

If you have the draw and buys to support playing 2 Lurkers a turn (which you do with Wharf), then it's a free action gain every turn at the cost of not drawing, which I think is good enough here because there are so many good $5 actions, you definitely won't run out of targets. Also it increases your 3 pile threat. I don't think you want Lurker early, you want it more towards midgame (early on you should be focusing on Fishing Village with your $3 buys)

The other things pushing towards Lurker here are:
* Swindler is going to be trashing actions and you want Lurker as defense (to take them back) / offense (to steal them before they can take them back)
* If you get a Haggler early enough, it's easy to pick up Lurkers on a $3 buy.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: New Player-Strategy Question
« on: April 24, 2019, 04:37:50 pm »
There's a Game Reports / Help! section where these posts are supposed to go, although it looks like they haven't been used in a while.

It might help if you could explain how you lost - what did your opponent do, what did you do? If you have trouble answering these questions, then it's a sign you should be paying more attention to what they're doing.

In the specific kingdom here, there's a lot of fancy stuff you can do but the core is going to be using Fishing Village for actions, Wharf + Torturer for cards and attacks, and then some mix of Haggler, Lurker, Swindler, Upgrade, Forager. This kingdom is complicated because you plausibly want almost every card in the Kingdom at some point (except for Death Cart).

The other option for cycling through your deck is going heavy on Minion, combining it with Fishing Village, Swindler, Haggler, and Forager to get use of each of your 4 card hands, but I think this will be worse than the Wharf and Torturer route.

I would open Forager/Swindler, get Fishing Village and Wharf from there, then pick up Lurker and Haggler once the deck is going a bit. If you get a good Swindler hit or if your opponent buys Lurker, consider buying Lurker sooner. The Forager is to get early trashing in, the Swindler is to add early disruption and to get a source of +$2 because you want to hit $5 soon for Wharf or Torturer.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Competitiveness
« on: April 07, 2019, 10:24:29 pm »
For me, Dominion hits that sweet spot where I find it fun to play, and find it even more fun to play when I'm winning. So that's why I care about getting better.

Not all games are like this. I actually sorta like the beginning of Monopoly, especially when I play with a group that doesn't use free parking house rules and correctly puts things up for auction. We play with trading rules which makes the game a lot more Catan-like in figuring out who it would be good or bad to trade with. But when the game devolves into who lands on a monopoly first, it becomes sad if you have bad properties and boring if you do. Similarly I don't like Catan that much anymore because it feels like the endgame of Catan just drags on and on when you have no chance of winning.

I wouldn't say I'm competitive in all things, but I'm certainly competitive when it comes to board games. I would say the distinction is that some people like trying to win within a single game, but aren't looking to go to the point of mastery. This is stuff like the "play 3 games of Dominion ever" crowd. They're trying to win, but aren't going to play a kingdom over and over until they figure out why they're losing.

In casual Dominion playgroups, I'll go all out, but if it's clear that I'm the best one there, I'll start seeing if I can win with weirder conditions, or I'll try to avoid playing attacks too often. My IRL Dominion tends to be 3 player or 4 player, so if I'm the only one getting mass Torturer to work, then it's making 2 or 3 other players really sad. I mean, if I can win without it, why bother adding it?

The last time I played IRL Dominion with new players, I played the 1st game engine, minus Militia, and still blew all their minds.

Dominion Articles / Re: Chariot Race
« on: April 01, 2019, 10:12:21 pm »
It's a reference to Kaiji, an anime about gambling.

I don't even know what Kaiji is, all I did was search for the full quote to see what turned up.

Dominion Articles / Re: Fool
« on: April 01, 2019, 10:04:42 pm »
Fool is super underrated. It really makes me pity it.
I already did that one. :-p

Please check the source of the first Donald X quote, then report back to me. I take pride in doing due diligence in my joke articles.

I think you're seriously underselling the 3 Boons you get from playing it the first time. If you get River, Field and Forest, that's a friggin Grand Market!

Don't you mean Sea's Gift instead of River's Gift?

Dominion Articles / Fool
« on: April 01, 2019, 03:07:43 pm »

Fool is my greatest creation, and my worst mistake.

Fool is one of the strongest $3 costs in recent memory, and has a tendency to take over games, especially if multiple players decide to pick it up.

Most of its power comes from the passive effect of the Lost in the Woods state. Getting to discard a card for a Boon every turn is powerful enough to deserve contesting it heavily - the 3 Boons you get when playing Fool the first time are simply a rounding error.

Due to the power of Lost in the Woods, it's important to pick up as many Fools as possible. Not only does this protect you from other players taking the Lost in the Woods effect, it also gives you plenty of fodder to feed to Lost in the Woods. A Fool's a Fool, but you could discard that Fool to to Lost in the Woods and get The Sea's Gift to get +1 Card. You could draw anything! It could even be another Fool. This was strong enough that Donald X ended up pairing Fool with Lucky Coin to slow down the game.

In the end though I decided maybe I could pair it with Lucky Coin and the Silvers you gained would slow down how often you played Fool enough to avoid problems.

As everyone knows, Silvers are the same as Curses. It's only thanks to this Lucky Coin balancing that Fool doesn't take over games quite as strongly as Ambassador or Masquerade do. Strategy-wise, there isn't much more to say, besides

1) You should open Fool (Fool/Silver is a common choice).
2) You should try to pick up a 2nd Fool before your 2nd shuffle.
3) It's important to check the date of all strategy articles, as many old articles are no longer relevant in the current age.

Dominion Articles / When Should I Start Greening?
« on: March 30, 2019, 04:29:12 am »
If you're not familiar with Dominion slang, "greening" is when you start buying VP cards for points.

You should start greening based on how quickly you can improve your deck and your buying power. The faster you can improve it, the longer you should delay buying VP. The reasoning's simple: buying VP cards slows down your deck. Part of the problem is adding a junk card. The bigger problem is that $8 spent on a Province is $8 less that could have gone to more money or Action cards. If the Kingdom supports faster growth, you're better off investing into your deck now and buying points later.

If you're playing a Gardens rush, then, well, for one Gardens rushes are not as strong as we thought they were 5 years ago and a lot of Big Money baselines compete with it. But something they're right, and in these cases you start greening right away. It's not like your deck is going to do much better than hitting $4 for Gardens.

If you're going for Duchy-Duke, then you want to start greening a bit later, late enough that you can somewhat reliably hit $5. But still much earlier than you would in a Province game.

If you're playing a 1 buy a turn deck, you don't have any reason to hit more than $8 for Province (or more than $11 for Colony), so you start greening when you think your deck can usually hit $8.

If you're playing a reasonable engine, one that draws a lot of cards but not always your entire deck, you start greening around the point where you're hitting $13 (Prov + Duchy), $16 (2 Provinces), or $18 (Province + 2 Duchies, a useful option to have in endgames). Two Provinces a turn is a sweet spot where the game ends very soon if both players decide to start greening - 8 Provinces goes away in 4 turns, or 2 turns each.

However, if you're playing a Kingdom with a strong engine, something like Wharf + Village + trashing, you may want to build even more. $24 for triple Province, $28 for 2 Province + 2 Duchy, maybe even $32 for 4 Provinces. On these boards, it's common for high-level play to turn into a game of chicken that eventually ends in a low-scoring 3 pile. When both players believe detouring for points will cost them the game, they both buy actions instead, bringing the game closer to a 3 pile.

And then there are Bridge boards and Bridge Troll boards, where you play for the megaturn and buy all your points on the final turn, because these cards grow quadratically and there's really no reason to pick up points unless you have to in order to avoid a 3 pile.

Here are some toy examples. In these examples, when I say a deck hits $N, I mean it always hits $N, even as Victory cards are entering their deck.

Both decks can hit $8, takes 2 turns to build deck into one that hits $16

Let's say first player goes for Provinces, and 2nd player tries to build

P1: Province
P2: build
P1: Province
P2: build
P1: Province
P2: Province + Province
P1: Province
P2: Province + Province, both players have 4 Provinces, tie at game end.

So it isn't any worse at hitting 4 Provinces. But in a real-life version of this scenario,
1) P2's deck is more reliable because they buy Provinces later, and
2) if P1 misses $8 once, P2 can punish that bad luck more severely.
If P2 gets unlucky, then well, they lose. But if they didn't build and got unlucky, they would have lost anyways, and P2 is less likely to get unlucky if they build their deck a bit more.

If we reverse the roles, and have P1 build, then P1 wins.

P1: build
P2: Province
P1: build
P2: Province
P1: Province + Province
P2: Province
P1: Province + Duchy (P1 has 3 Prov 1 Duchy, P2 has 3 Prov)
P2: "If I buy Province, P1 wins on Province. If I buy Duchy, P1 wins on 2 Provinces." P2 loses.

Both decks can hit $16, takes 1 turn to build deck to one that hits $24

Say P1 goes for double Provinces and P2 goes for building.

P1: Province + Province
P2: build
P1: Province + Province
P2: "If I buy 2 Provinces, P1 wins on Province + Province". Buys Province + 3 Duchies (costs $23)
P1: Province + Province (P1 has 6 Provinces, P2 has Province + 3 Duchies)
P2: loses

In this example, P2 loses because they don't have time against a double Province player.

If we reverse the roles, P2 still loses.

P1: build
P2: Province + Province
P1: Province + Province + Province (P1: 3 Province, P2: 2 Province)
P2: "If I double Province, P1 wins on Province + Duchy. If I don't buy any Provinces, P1 wins anyways on triple Province." P2 loses. (In a real game I would buy Province + Duchy and hope P1 has a dud and hits less than $16.)

In fact, P1 wins even if both players go for double Provinces.

P1: Province + Province
P2: Province + Province
P1: Province + Duchy (P1: 3 Prov + 1 Duchy, P2: 2 Province)
P2: "If I double Province, P1 wins on a single Province. If I Province + Duchy, P1 wins on double Province". P2 loses.

In this setting, P1 wins because they have first mover advantage. But what if we can build to $24 while picking up some points along the way?

Both decks can hit $16, takes 1 turn to build deck to one that hits $24, on the building turn you can afford buying 1 Province

P1 goes for double Prov, P2 builds

P1: Province + Province
P2: builds + Province
P1: "If I double Province, then P2 ties on triple Province. Can I win if I don't allow the tie?".
    (P1 hypothetical)
    P1: Province + Duchy (P1: 3 Provinces + 1 Duchy, P2: 1 Province)
    P2: "If I buy 2 Provinces, P1 can end the game." Province + 3 Duchies (P1: 3 Provinces + Duchy, P2: 2 Provinces + 3 Duchies)
    P1 "Only 3 Provinces are left, so P2 can end the game no matter what I do. I should get as many points as possible." Province + Province
    P2: Province + 3 Duchies (P1: 5 Provinces + Duchy. P2: 3 Provinces + 6 Duchies. P2 wins)
P1: "Okay, I can't, I take the tie". Province + Province
P2: Province + Province + Province

If we give the option of picking up a Province while building towards $24, then P2 can turn a losing situation into one where they can get a tie instead, as long as P1 goes for the double Province strategy. But, if P1 builds, then P2 will once again lose no matter what they do.

P1 builds, P2 does double Province

P1: builds + Province
P2: Province + Province
P1: Province + Province + Duchy
P2: "P1 can end the game no matter what I do and I can at most get 4 Provinces, while they have 3 Provinces + 1 Duchy". P2 loses.

P1 builds, P2 builds

P1: builds + Province
P2: builds + Province
P1: Province + Province + Duchy (P1: 3 Provinces, 1 Duchy. P2: 1 Province)
P2: "A 6-2 Province split is not beatable. If I buy a single Province, P1 can end the game on Provinces. Therefore I should deny all the Provinces I can." Province + Province + Province
P1: Province + 3 Duchies (P1: 4 Provinces, 4 Duchies. P2: 4 Provinces)

These toy examples are far enough from reality that I would not follow them religiously. In particularly, they're missing a model of how your deck becomes less reliable as you add VP cards to it. But, they do show how the decision of when to build and when to green isn't just "stop at $8" or "stop at $16". It's dependent on the context of how quickly your deck can become better, how many VP cards are left in the pile, and how well your deck can handle Victory cards.

Even though these examples aren't perfect, they do show off the emergent complexity of Dominion endgames. It's quite tricky to play them correctly, and there aren't really any shortcuts besides thinking about the possibilities and seeing what happens in each one. But that's a subject for another article.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Dominion current Popularity?
« on: March 21, 2019, 12:59:59 pm »
I'm not saying it's a good game; I'm saying it's a successful game.

Although I do think there are times in which a game that isn't really much of a game is just what I need. Those moments aren't common; I'd usually much prefer to play an actual game. But they exist, and Exploding Kittens is one of the games that does a good job then.

We Didn't Playtest This At All is a good non-game for this that I found much more fun than Exploding Kittens.

General Discussion / Re: Random Stuff Part IV
« on: March 04, 2019, 01:26:44 am »
(For those who haven't heard about it yet, GPT-2 is OpenAI's big project. It can write essays responding to a textual input (like two paragraphs). I'm not quite sure what it has as input here, maybe it can also respond to images.)

1. Seed GPT-2 with a bunch of anime keywords to get it to generate text that looks like an anime synopsis

The seed is
Code: [Select]
"Anime ai nani arigatou gomen \
        sayonara chigau dame Madoka jigoku kami kanojo mahou magical girl youkai 4koma yonkoma Japan Oreimo baka \
        chibi gakuran schoolgirl school uniform club Funimation Gainax Khara Ghibli Hayao Miyazaki Saber Fate \
        Stay Night Pop Team Epic Japanese Aria Escaflowne Kanon Clannad comedy itai manga Shonen Jump pocky \
        tsundere urusai weeaboo yaoi yuri zettai harem senpai otaku waifu weeb fanfiction doujinshi trope \
        Anime News Network Anime Central Touhou kanji kaiju Neon Genesis Evangelion Spice and Wolf Holo Asuka \
        kawaii bishonen bishojo visual novel light novel video game story plot Fruits Basket Toradora Taiga \
        Aisaka tiger Detective Conan Pokemon Osamu Tezuka cat ears neko romantic comedy little sister character \
        plot drama article nekomimi bunny isekai tanuki catgirl moe manga manga manga anime anime anime review \
        plot summary. An exciting cute kawaii new anime series based on a light novel shoujo manga called  \
        \"I Can't Believe My Alien Visitor Is My Little Sister\" or \"MAVISM\", a sequel to \"Raccoon Girl\", \
        is the latest hit. In the first episode of this anime, "

The output is some gibberish that looks like an anime synopsis.

2. To improve quality, take a synopsis outputted by GPT-2 and feed it as the new prompt to get a further elaboration on that fake anime - this is the final output used.

[Misery] is the top-ranked Hex in the stats by a comfortable margin.

I think this is enough to make me question how useful these "stats" are. Unlike the other hexes, it's trivial to know whether Misery caused you to lose. I've only had one game where that has happened, and I play online a lot.

Is it? I've had a few games where I got an early Misery and was forced to buy a Duchy in a later turn, or had it such that a 3-pile was no longer in play. I think it's very nontrivial to figure out all the follow-on effects of -2 VP. Often it doesn't matter, but there are cases where it cascades into just enough slowdown to get you to lose.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 84

Page created in 0.102 seconds with 18 queries.