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 - phoenix9797

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1]
1
Dominion League / Re: Season 27 - Signups
« on: March 20, 2018, 02:29:38 pm »
Hi, new to the league! 

Shuffle iT ID: phoenix9797
Time Zone: USA - Eastern (i.e., New York).

Thanks!

2
What exactly are you doing?

You should just click on Quick Match and wait. There are no tables or anything involved, the game directly starts as soon as you get an opponent.

EDIT: Or not. Either they changed it on purpose and the feature isn't ready yet, or they changed something by accident because it was working the way I described earlier this morning.

I click "Quick Match," and I instantly get whisked to a screen that is new (today compared to yesterday and all previous days).  There is an opponent in there, and I click "Ready," but they either do nothing or report that their "Ready" button is not working.

3
I don't understand the new matching system, I suspect.  I click "Good Match" and nothing happens; no one joins.  (I am not sure where I can put the settings for this.)  I try "Quick Match," and I am instantly put in a room with someone, but nothing happens.  I click "Ready," and they don't, or (in one instance) the other player was UNABLE to click "Ready," it was grayed out.

What gives?  I've been playing on there for a couple of months now, but I guess maybe I just don't understand the proper means of getting the matching to work now.  Is there a tutorial for the matching feature somewhere?

Edit: I've now had a second player tell me that they cannot click "ready."

4
Dominion: Empires Previews / Re: Teasers!
« on: May 07, 2016, 09:35:37 am »
Prediction: Bidding will be limited to a single card or event. Something that when played/bought makes people bid for some effect.

I also think it's limited to a single card/event, but I'll guess that the bidding is done in setup instead of when played/bought.

My guess is that the bidding goes as follows.  On my turn, I can place a "bid" on some card / event (by spending treasure or VP during my buy phase).   If it gets to my turn again and I'm the highest bidder, I get the card / event, and the losing bids are forfeited.  If not, I can supplement my existing bid to make it the highest.  This repeats until someone takes a turn that starts with him / her as the highest bidder.  Then the process can repeat.

5
Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Re: "Features" threads
« on: April 29, 2016, 03:25:23 pm »
3.  Ability to select "timed game" as an option.  One way to implement a "timed game" would be to enable the players to set a base time (i.e, 5 minutes, whatever), and an increment (i.e., 2 seconds).  Each player starts with the base time, and during his or her turn, it ticks down, while being increased by the increment with every action taken.  So the opponents' base time is the "dead time" I'm willing to invest in the game, since the increments offset the time spent by the opponent actually playing and taking action.  Players could even set separate (personal) base times and increments (perhaps as a profile setting), and the matching feature could enable the ability to accept only opponents meeting a chosen threshold for base time / increment.  In this way, players could be operating with different starting "base and increment" times, while all players are satisfied with the timing setting.

In my oppinion a timer should not be a standard feature for Dominion. It can be something like a special add-on, but the way Dominion is designed doesn't really fit a timer.
I think a lot of you are a bit influenced by chess, where timers work great since every move (not the thinking about it, but the move itself) takes almost the exact same amount of time. In Dominion, however, the difference between resolving Smithy and Scrying Pool can be huge. This means (and you've seen this with the Blitz feature in the MMF mod) that a timer greatly influences the strength of certain cards and the viability of certain strategies, which is not really the point of a timer.

Well, the idea is that *every* action you take during your turn would trigger the increment.  So every time you play Scrying Pool on your turn, you trigger the increment.  Every time you play Smithy, you trigger the increment.  This way, it does not matter which cards are in the kingdom; it just matters that play proceeds with reasonable flow, even if entire turns vary drastically in terms of their actual length.  Both a quick Smithy turn and a lengthy Scrying Pool turn would result in (approximately) the same time remaining in the bank, if the player plays both turns with the same pace.
Your turn:
Play Cartographer (+5 seconds), draw card, look at top 4 cards, decide which to discard, rearrange the rest (takes 8 seconds)
Play Scrying Pool (+5 seconds), decide on opponent's card, decide on own card, draw a shitload of cards (takes 5 seconds)
Net: -3 seconds

My turn:
Play Village (+5 seconds), draw card (takes 1 second)
Play Smithy (+5 seconds), draw 3 cards (takes 1 second)
Net: +8 seconds

This is remedied by having *every decision acted upon* trigger the increment, as I've been trying to suggest.  (I think I've not been as clear as I should have been.)  When you make the decision on the 4 cards for Cartographer, that is 4 triggers of the increment.  Scrying Pool triggers it 3 times: when you play the card, when you decide about your top card, and when you decide about your opponents' top card.
Ok, that could work. But you'd have to define what exactly a decision is. Each single card you can discard with Cartographer, or the discarding as a whole? Each card you put back on top individually or the putting back in total?
The answers to most of those questions are probably trivial (of course you don't count each card you trash with Chapel individually), but it has to be done.

Generally, I'd say "individually" for basically all of the possibilities you would ask me.  The reason, again, is that I'm not trying to make timing a way to win a game; I'm just trying to make sure that the game proceeds, and all the possibilities you'd ask me would be possibilities where the game is proceeding.

6
Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Re: "Features" threads
« on: April 28, 2016, 08:48:41 am »
3.  Ability to select "timed game" as an option.  One way to implement a "timed game" would be to enable the players to set a base time (i.e, 5 minutes, whatever), and an increment (i.e., 2 seconds).  Each player starts with the base time, and during his or her turn, it ticks down, while being increased by the increment with every action taken.  So the opponents' base time is the "dead time" I'm willing to invest in the game, since the increments offset the time spent by the opponent actually playing and taking action.  Players could even set separate (personal) base times and increments (perhaps as a profile setting), and the matching feature could enable the ability to accept only opponents meeting a chosen threshold for base time / increment.  In this way, players could be operating with different starting "base and increment" times, while all players are satisfied with the timing setting.

In my oppinion a timer should not be a standard feature for Dominion. It can be something like a special add-on, but the way Dominion is designed doesn't really fit a timer.
I think a lot of you are a bit influenced by chess, where timers work great since every move (not the thinking about it, but the move itself) takes almost the exact same amount of time. In Dominion, however, the difference between resolving Smithy and Scrying Pool can be huge. This means (and you've seen this with the Blitz feature in the MMF mod) that a timer greatly influences the strength of certain cards and the viability of certain strategies, which is not really the point of a timer.

Well, the idea is that *every* action you take during your turn would trigger the increment.  So every time you play Scrying Pool on your turn, you trigger the increment.  Every time you play Smithy, you trigger the increment.  This way, it does not matter which cards are in the kingdom; it just matters that play proceeds with reasonable flow, even if entire turns vary drastically in terms of their actual length.  Both a quick Smithy turn and a lengthy Scrying Pool turn would result in (approximately) the same time remaining in the bank, if the player plays both turns with the same pace.
Your turn:
Play Cartographer (+5 seconds), draw card, look at top 4 cards, decide which to discard, rearrange the rest (takes 8 seconds)
Play Scrying Pool (+5 seconds), decide on opponent's card, decide on own card, draw a shitload of cards (takes 5 seconds)
Net: -3 seconds

My turn:
Play Village (+5 seconds), draw card (takes 1 second)
Play Smithy (+5 seconds), draw 3 cards (takes 1 second)
Net: +8 seconds

This is remedied by having *every decision acted upon* trigger the increment, as I've been trying to suggest.  (I think I've not been as clear as I should have been.)  When you make the decision on the 4 cards for Cartographer, that is 4 triggers of the increment.  Scrying Pool triggers it 3 times: when you play the card, when you decide about your top card, and when you decide about your opponents' top card.

The idea here is NOT to make time / speed a way to win a game.  The idea is to ensure that when I start playing a game, I will ACTUALLY be playing a game, not sitting there after each of my turns until my opponent decides to return from surfing the web while I'm playing my turn.  Since each person chooses his or her own base time + increment, and chooses an acceptable threshold for his/her opponent's base time and threshold, the result would be a game that flows according to a pace both players are happy with.  If it's not flowing at that pace, the player causing the delay will end up losing once time runs out, which is exactly the point.  If you've caused the game to drag on longer than the amount of dead time agreed to by your opponent, then that is the very reason the timer is in place, so your opponent should be credited with a victory and both can go their separate ways, either to finish whatever random task you were trying to accomplish while playing Dominion, or to play a game with an opponent who will remain attentive and active during the game.

This would be a setting ("Timer" or something) just like the current setting regarding the point counter: you could set it to "Always," you could set it to "Prefer to use it," you could set it to "Prefer not to use it," and you could set it to "Never."  If you choose any of the first 3 settings, you'd need to specify your base time and increment, as well as the acceptable level for your opponents' base time and increment.

Thus, for those saying that it would slow down your ability to get an automatch, you would just set it to one of the "Prefer..." settings, which would match you as you prefer (if available), or against whichever opponent is ready to play if your preference is not available.

7
Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Re: "Features" threads
« on: April 27, 2016, 11:03:25 pm »
3.  Ability to select "timed game" as an option.  One way to implement a "timed game" would be to enable the players to set a base time (i.e, 5 minutes, whatever), and an increment (i.e., 2 seconds).  Each player starts with the base time, and during his or her turn, it ticks down, while being increased by the increment with every action taken.  So the opponents' base time is the "dead time" I'm willing to invest in the game, since the increments offset the time spent by the opponent actually playing and taking action.  Players could even set separate (personal) base times and increments (perhaps as a profile setting), and the matching feature could enable the ability to accept only opponents meeting a chosen threshold for base time / increment.  In this way, players could be operating with different starting "base and increment" times, while all players are satisfied with the timing setting.

In my oppinion a timer should not be a standard feature for Dominion. It can be something like a special add-on, but the way Dominion is designed doesn't really fit a timer.
I think a lot of you are a bit influenced by chess, where timers work great since every move (not the thinking about it, but the move itself) takes almost the exact same amount of time. In Dominion, however, the difference between resolving Smithy and Scrying Pool can be huge. This means (and you've seen this with the Blitz feature in the MMF mod) that a timer greatly influences the strength of certain cards and the viability of certain strategies, which is not really the point of a timer.

Well, the idea is that *every* action you take during your turn would trigger the increment.  So every time you play Scrying Pool on your turn, you trigger the increment.  Every time you play Smithy, you trigger the increment.  This way, it does not matter which cards are in the kingdom; it just matters that play proceeds with reasonable flow, even if entire turns vary drastically in terms of their actual length.  Both a quick Smithy turn and a lengthy Scrying Pool turn would result in (approximately) the same time remaining in the bank, if the player plays both turns with the same pace.

8
Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Re: "Features" threads
« on: April 26, 2016, 11:17:07 am »
Quote
In my opinion, it would be good to have threads individuated for the discussion of options like these (and, I'm sure, many others that we can come up with collectively).  I'm simply not sure whether it would be better for us to each start threads for the topics, or whether it would be best for SCSN / Stef to create "official" ones that they could format in the way that would be most useful for them regarding future reference / implementation as they work on Shuffle iT's version.

I think SCSN has said they want to hold off announcing too many features because there's always a chance one doesn't get implemented on release. Remember when Goko promised Tournaments? MF promised Adventures?  Yeah...

Ah--yes, I did not mean to imply that these would be endorsements or official "acceptances" for features in the new version; I just wanted to foster discussion (in an organized fashion) about features we'd like to see.  What I meant by the part you quoted was that there might be a specific means of discussion (separate threads, as I've suggested, or perhaps "clumped" threads, each of which contains all discussion about a general topic like social features (for example)) that Shuffle iT might prefer for ease of reference *in the event that* they decide to work on implementing a certain feature.

9
Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / "Features" threads
« on: April 26, 2016, 10:59:32 am »
Hi all--

The "main thread" has gotten long and meandering, and it chiefly contains discussion of the pricing model (and recently music / graphical effects).  I thought it might be productive to have separate threads dedicated to hashing out specific features we'd like to see in Shuffle iT's new version of the game.  Ideally, we could have a "hub" thread that provides links to individually-dedicated threads, each of which could contain discussion specific to that feature (and how it might be best implemented).  For example, some features (and thus, threads) that I would like to see under discussion concerning the "pace of game" for the new version would include:

1.  Ability to see opponents' ranking, stats, etc., during the game.  I need something to do while waiting for my turn!
2.  Ability to force a resignation after a very short waiting period (< 30 seconds?) when an opponent has connection issues.
3.  Ability to select "timed game" as an option.  One way to implement a "timed game" would be to enable the players to set a base time (i.e, 5 minutes, whatever), and an increment (i.e., 2 seconds).  Each player starts with the base time, and during his or her turn, it ticks down, while being increased by the increment with every action taken.  So the opponents' base time is the "dead time" I'm willing to invest in the game, since the increments offset the time spent by the opponent actually playing and taking action.  Players could even set separate (personal) base times and increments (perhaps as a profile setting), and the matching feature could enable the ability to accept only opponents meeting a chosen threshold for base time / increment.  In this way, players could be operating with different starting "base and increment" times, while all players are satisfied with the timing setting.

In my opinion, it would be good to have threads individuated for the discussion of options like these (and, I'm sure, many others that we can come up with collectively).  I'm simply not sure whether it would be better for us to each start threads for the topics, or whether it would be best for SCSN / Stef to create "official" ones that they could format in the way that would be most useful for them regarding future reference / implementation as they work on Shuffle iT's version.

Thoughts? 

10
Goko Dominion Online / Does this mean anything (good) for us?
« on: August 08, 2013, 10:21:51 pm »
It looks like there is some sort of shakeup at Goko:

http://pockettactics.com/2013/08/08/goko-reverses-course-and-ditches-html-5-settlers-of-catan-and-dominion-coming-to-ios/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PocketTactics-MobileStrategyGameReviewsForAndroidIpadAndIphone+%28Pocket+Tactics+-+Mobile+Strategy+Game+Reviews+for+Android%2C+iPad%2C+and+iPhone%29

I didn't see this posted anywhere else in the forum (though admittedly my search was brief).  Could this mean that some of the severe deficiencies in the Goko implementation are on the way to being fixed (looking at you, 1000-room system), or do you just expect more of the same?

11
Goko Dominion Online / Re: 50 people rooms should help us find games
« on: July 26, 2013, 03:45:36 pm »
Alas, while I wholeheartedly agree with all of this, I am not holding out hope: https://getsatisfaction.com/goko/topics/one_room_to_find_games.

The standard response seems to be: "That is a good idea."  Followed by the same (wrong) explanation that having scads of rooms actually helps people find games.

12
Tournaments and Events / Re: International Dominion Team World Cup
« on: July 24, 2013, 01:26:52 pm »
Mixing in some 4-player matches--2 players from each country in the matchup--would really be interesting.  It would give it a "Ryder Cup"-like feel, where the players participate in formats different from (but including) straight 2-player.  When the 4-player games happen, I imagine that some quite unique tactics might develop regarding attacking, defending, etc.  The turn order would alternate countries; teammates would not "sit" next to each other. 

Scoring here could be either team total victory points or by individual, and then results for the overall matchup could be calibrated accordingly.  (So perhaps a full point is awarded to the team if the 4-player matchup is scored as team total victory points, or a half point is awarded to each of 1st place and 2nd place if the players are scored individually.)  Obviously I don't have the details worked out, but if the Team World Cup were truly to emphasize creativity and skill *as a team*, then it should include some 4-player matchups in my opinion.  So every team member would partake in 1-on-1 matchups with a player from the other country (as outlined in the earlier posts), and then there are, say, four 4-player matchups (or something like that).

The total team performance--in both 2- and 4-player games--determines which team wins the overall matchup.

Pages: [1]

Page created in 0.045 seconds with 19 queries.