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 - GendoIkari

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 254
1
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion:Cities
« on: April 18, 2018, 05:26:02 pm »
Matchmaking matches you with people of roughly the same skill level, so someone playing online does not mean they will necessarily play good opponents. There are lots of people who understand nothing about Dominion strategy and if you are someone who understands even basic Eurogame strategy, you will never be close to being matched against them.

It is obvious looking at Chase's post history that when his profile says he is 13 years old that this is accurate. I fully believe Chase has games against his parents where he gets to build up to buy his ludicrously expensive custom cards and still wins.

Chase, I enjoyed reading your cards, another great set along the levels of Dominion: Gunpowder.

I don't think I was around for the (in)famous Gunpowder expansion.  Where do I find that thread? I'd very much like to read it.

It's easy enough to search within the Variants thread on "Gunpowder". Based on a discussion from a while back; it's really best to not go around linking to that thread.

2
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Being sneaky
« on: April 14, 2018, 11:49:33 pm »
If both you and your wife do this; then presumably you are aware that the other person will do this if given the chance. That makes it so that you are no cheating; but you are playing a variant. If you did this with an opponent that is not aware that this is something you do, then you are cheating.

3
I think only Reserve cards and Duration cards (and Throne Room things that play Duration cards) can ever end up in play on other player's turns.
Currently, I think that's right.

But it sounds like the kind of observation that's not inherent to the game and might easily be violated by some future card. After all, it's the Reaction aspect of Caravan Guard which means you can play it on another player's turn; it's just a coincidence that it's also a Duration.

True. Given Donald's previous comment, I would expect a future rulebook (if there were ever a third edition) to update the Clean-Up phase to simply say "all cards in play". It should be possible to word it such a way that it doesn't have to call out other players; to avoid the confusion of someone reading the rules and wondering how it could be possible to have a card in play on another player's turn.

4
Cultist and Lost Arts.

Giant was on the board too, so at a certain point I had a Cultist engine running like mad and 2 Giants being played nearly every turn. From turn 14-21 I bought a Colony every single turn. After the second Colony I was playing against Rattington...

Amulet was the only trashing I used, and Worker's Village meant that I could continue to get more Cultists while getting those Colonies.

Welcome to the forum! I've seen the Cultist+Lost Arts = Village thing talked about before, in just a 2-card combo context: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=12757.msg634347;topicseen#msg634347.


5
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Losing streaks
« on: April 13, 2018, 02:10:51 pm »
Really? The RNG doesn't choose a new number each time its needed? Instead it repeats the same series of random numbers even after an undo?

That's right.

Undo would be insufferable if that wasn't the case.

Yeah I guess that makes sense. It seems like a surprising way to implement RNG; but I can see that if you want to allow unlimited undo, then you basically have to do it that way.

6
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Losing streaks
« on: April 13, 2018, 12:06:17 pm »
Say the 'quality' of a shuffle can be enumerated, and ordered. So like, of the 12! = 479001600 ways to arrange your 12 cards after your first shuffle (it's less than that but I don't know maths - the number is arbitrary), each arrangement got a number between 1 and 479001600 indicating the 'quality' of the shuffle.

In most cases you want to assign the same rank to hands that are indistinguishable (save dog-ears or scratches), so you have to divide the number by the permutations within the coppers and estates, repectively. This would lead to 12!/(7!3!) = 15840 different ranks. As the sequence of cards within a hand does not matter, this number can be brought further down but this is where my combinatorics skills fail me.

In this case, you don't want to assign the same rank to hands that are "indistinguishable" because they aren't indistinguishable; each card is treated as an individual card, not a generic copy of a card of its name. You can try this out by buying a Curse on turn 2, then playing a few turns until you draw that curse, then undo to turn 2 and buy an Estate instead and the Estate will appear exactly where the Curse did.

Really? The RNG doesn't choose a new number each time its needed? Instead it repeats the same series of random numbers even after an undo?

7
The intention was that all cards were discarded in the clean-up of the last turn in which they did anything - whoever's clean-up.
First, thanks for the answer. Whoever's. I see.

I missed yesterday that Duplicate could be more often called in other players' turns. I notice its FAQ from the Adventure 2nd rulebook p. 7, as well as 1st, explicitly refers:
Quote
Duplicate can be called during other players' turns when you gain cards; [...] Duplicate is discarded during the Clean-up of the turn you call it, whether or not it is your turn.
while it isn't implemented online either. Well, I hope this help the discussion and will be happy to see how it goes.

Ah, the Adventures rulebook also has a rule that says that Reserve cards are discarded on the turn they are called: "Reserve cards are discarded during Clean-up normally on the turn they are called.", page 3. Don't know if that's first or second edition.

So similar to the Duration rule in the Seaside rulebook; it looks like Reserve cards are special. Which makes sense, I think only Reserve cards and Duration cards (and Throne Room things that play Duration cards) can ever end up in play on other player's turns.

So we have consistent rules actually... the base rulebook says that you only clean up your own cards in Clean-Up phase, but later rulebooks add special rules for Durations and Reserves.

So the online implementation is in fact wrong.

8
Online when you play a Caravan Guard against an Attack in other player's turn and call a Coin of the Realm on the play, the CotR isn't discarded from play until the Clean-up of your next turn. Should it be discarded in the Clean-up of the opponent's turn? It doesn't replay the CG, so it has no reason to remain in play like you call it on a Duration in your turn.
The intention was that all cards were discarded in the clean-up of the last turn in which they did anything - whoever's clean-up. That doesn't matter though, if contradicted by the rulebooks. I know it means more if I read the rulebook for you, but I don't have the time. Go by the newest rulebooks, not the old ones. If a bit doesn't talk about it, or appears to make a blanket statement that couldn't work, well that's a basic problem of communicating the rules for a game with rules on cards - no blanket statements work, and yet you need blanket statements to communicate with the players who aren't poking at the rules.

I believe in this case, the Coin of the Realm FAQ in the rulebook can be read as contradicting the regular second edition rulebook.

From the section on Clean-Up phase in the base rulebook, second edition, it is clear that only the current player's cards are discarded during Clean-Up. (Because the only instructions given are for the current player to discard their in play cards). But Coin of the Realm FAQ says that it will be discarded at the end of the turn that it is called.

In this case, it sounds to me like Coin of the Realm FAQ isn't giving a rule or instruction, but rather explaining how it will work, in the general case. (It's says "it is discarded", not "discard it"). As far as I know, the FAQ is never intended to override any rules; only to clarify them.. is that right?

9
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Losing streaks
« on: April 12, 2018, 03:01:30 pm »
We can debate all day the psychological factors that play in to how you play. But until we know the pseudo random number generator algorithm that dictates shuffling, we cannot say one way or another that shuffles -- what we call "luck" -- are random.

Luck does come and go in streaks ... and I would love to be convinced otherwise
3 years later and I'm still not convinced.

I don't understand. We know that computers are not truly random; so it is using a pseudo-random number generator. But while such a thing could theoretically create detectable patterns in the random number being generated, there's no reason that the detectable pattern in that number would correlate to a detectable pattern in good/bad things happening to you during a game. It's not like a game involving dice where you always want higher numbers, and rolling low means you are unlucky. The generator giving a "10" one time might mean your important card misses the shuffle; while a "10" the next time might mean your cards lined up perfectly. As the game state changes; the random number you hope to get from the generator changes. So there's no way that any pattern in the randomness from the programming point of view would result in an unusual numbers of wins or losses due to luck.

Good point. But hypothetically, say it works like the following (it doesn't, but as a thought experiment):

Say the 'quality' of a shuffle can be enumerated, and ordered. So like, of the 12! = 479001600 ways to arrange your 12 cards after your first shuffle (it's less than that but I don't know maths - the number is arbitrary), each arrangement got a number between 1 and 479001600 indicating the 'quality' of the shuffle. E.g. after opening Chapel/Silver, this shuffle:

<--- bottom          top --->
Copper | Copper | Silver | Copper | Copper | Copper | Copper | Copper | Estate | Estate | Estate | Chapel

is closer to 479001600, while this shuffle:

<--- bottom          top --->
Silver | Chapel | Copper | Copper | Copper | Estate | Estate | Copper | Copper | Copper | Copper | Estate

is closer to 0. Then say ShiT chooses a random number between 0 and 479001600 and that's the shuffle you get. Then I'd hypothesize that that number isn't random. I'd say there are streaks when it gives you a lot of numbers close to 0, and streaks when it gives you a lot of numbers close to 479001600. And not just random streaks, but statistically significant and/or predictable streaks.

At least that's how it feels to me sometimes. There's obviously no way this is how it works. If ShiT knew the difference between good and bad shuffles then I'm sure it would have a better computer opponent than it does. And even then, it still depends on the kingdom, player order, your opponent's shuffle, game theory stuff, etc. At the end of the day I don't doubt it's all just psychology at play. But I'm still curious what ShiT's RNG is.

You can't indicate the quality of the shuffle because that depends on the cards and the RNG doesn't. If you get the random seed that gives you the golden sombrero, you're going to get it regardless of whether you open Silver/Chapel or Estate/Curse.

Exactly. Even if the random number generator was bad and gave you the same exact shuffle order every time; the games would play out drastically different depending on the kingdom; which cards you buy; etc.

10
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Losing streaks
« on: April 12, 2018, 12:57:50 pm »
Aside from the psychological factors that might make you play worse if you are on a losing streak, there's also the psychological factors involved in detecting losing streaks in the first place. Imagine a game of 100% luck; like flipping a coin and winning if it is heads. people would likely notice that it feels like often when they win once, they also win several times in a row. And that when they lose, it is often several times in a row. This is because all the times where you won 2 out of 4 games were not memorable, while the times where you won 4 out of 4, or 0 out of 4, are. So it would feel like you are getting more streaks than you should.

11
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Losing streaks
« on: April 12, 2018, 12:53:45 pm »
We can debate all day the psychological factors that play in to how you play. But until we know the pseudo random number generator algorithm that dictates shuffling, we cannot say one way or another that shuffles -- what we call "luck" -- are random.

Luck does come and go in streaks ... and I would love to be convinced otherwise
3 years later and I'm still not convinced.

I don't understand. We know that computers are not truly random; so it is using a pseudo-random number generator. But while such a thing could theoretically create detectable patterns in the random number being generated, there's no reason that the detectable pattern in that number would correlate to a detectable pattern in good/bad things happening to you during a game. It's not like a game involving dice where you always want higher numbers, and rolling low means you are unlucky. The generator giving a "10" one time might mean your important card misses the shuffle; while a "10" the next time might mean your cards lined up perfectly. As the game state changes; the random number you hope to get from the generator changes. So there's no way that any pattern in the randomness from the programming point of view would result in an unusual numbers of wins or losses due to luck.

12
But we know an example a card which was discarded from play in other player's turn. 1st edition Outpost was discarded from my play area in the left player's turn when it failed to get its extra turn. I don't think there is difference.

That is due to special rules for Duration cards.

From the (I think first edition) Seaside rules:

Quote
Players do not discard Duration cards in Clean-up if they have something left to do; they stay in play
until the Clean-up of the last turn that they do something.

So Durations have special rules that cause them to be discarded outside of the rules for Clean-up phase that make you discard cards. It so happens that they still get discarded during Clean-up, but Outpost in that case is discarded due to the Duration rule telling it to be discarded, not the Clean-up rule.

13
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Losing streaks
« on: April 12, 2018, 09:39:57 am »
I remember this being discussed before, I think way back in the Iso days. It was (and probably still is) a pretty common phenomenon; due to the various psychological things Awaclus mentioned.

Here's ones such thread: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13507.0

14
Online is correct.

In the cleanup phase, you only discard your own cards (you being the player whose turn it is).

From the base game rulebook (second edition):
Quote
Take all of the cards you have in play (both Actions and Treasures), and any remaining cards in your hand, and put them all into your discard pile.

The other player(s) do not do anything during your cleanup phase.

15
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Only attack once with Legionary
« on: April 11, 2018, 03:06:35 pm »
Edge case: after the first Legionary, you used Cutpurse or Bureaucrat to see their hand, and they are holding the exact 3 cards they need to kick off their engine.

Or, more simply, they bought a bunch of green last turn and haven't shuffled yet.

16
General Discussion / Re: TV shows
« on: April 11, 2018, 09:51:29 am »
What's wrong with The National Anthem?

I just read the plot summary on Wikipedia, and the answer is everything. Everything is wrong with that.

17
The first thing that jumps out to me about Shield is, you can't call it unless opponents play attacks.  So if the on-play effect is too strong, then opponents will be disincentivized from ever playing attacks, since they don't want to allow you to get Shield off your mat.  And if it's too weak, then it's basically useless when there aren't attacks.  I'm not sure where the happy medium is.

Good point. Maybe it needs to ability to also just call it for no benefit at the start of your turn or something.

18
Dominion FAQ / Re: Five or six players?
« on: April 08, 2018, 01:39:48 pm »
To me, and I know I'm not alone, two-player games can be kind of bland, too short and mostly uninteresting. Besides, attacks (which I really love) become too weak in most cases. Multi-player games fix these problems for me and my usual opponents. I know this is subjective, but even though I liked it and you made me smile, your reply wasn't particularly helpful. :)
Most attacks are about the same strength level at any player count. The exceptions tend to be cards like Jester and Pirate Ship where you can gain something from the attack.

I respectfully disagree. In games were your opponents have one attack card each, facing one of those every round is generally much better than facing five of them, which Iíve seen plenty of times with Torturer, Witch, and the like. Some attacks donít hurt when youíre attacked several times (e.a. Militia), and some actually help you (e.a. Margrave), but most are bad when youíre attacked several times a turn, and I think thatís how it should be. Of course, this is just my humble opinion, and you may disagree with me. :-)

Agreed. Even with something like Militia, a 4 player games greatly increases the chances that you will have a 3 card hand every turn compared to a 2 player game. At least near the beginning of the game, before your opponent has built up an engine that can play Militia every turn. And other than discard attacks, pretty much all the other attacks are worse when you have multiple per turn compared to 1 per turn.

I think attacks are weaker in multiplayer. In a 3 player game where the other two players are going to play a militia every turn, your own militia is useless. Similarly with junkers, if the other two players play witch more often than you, it's not as devastating as it is in a two player game since they also junk each other.

But you're talking about how good it is to get an attack of your own, whereas I and the previous posts were talking about how much they hurt you when others are playing them. Yes, with Militia if each opponent is playing a Militia every turn, then no reason to get one of your own. But it still hurts you more than you have 2 opponents playing a Militia than if only one was (until the point where that one opponent can consistently play one every turn).

So you end up with something of a paradox... the attack hurts more with more players, yet it's a weaker option to get one yourself with more players.

19
Dominion FAQ / Re: Five or six players?
« on: April 08, 2018, 01:31:31 pm »
To me, and I know I'm not alone, two-player games can be kind of bland, too short and mostly uninteresting. Besides, attacks (which I really love) become too weak in most cases. Multi-player games fix these problems for me and my usual opponents. I know this is subjective, but even though I liked it and you made me smile, your reply wasn't particularly helpful. :)
Most attacks are about the same strength level at any player count. The exceptions tend to be cards like Jester and Pirate Ship where you can gain something from the attack.

I respectfully disagree. In games were your opponents have one attack card each, facing one of those every round is generally much better than facing five of them, which Iíve seen plenty of times with Torturer, Witch, and the like. Some attacks donít hurt when youíre attacked several times (e.a. Militia), and some actually help you (e.a. Margrave), but most are bad when youíre attacked several times a turn, and I think thatís how it should be. Of course, this is just my humble opinion, and you may disagree with me. :-)

Agreed. Even with something like Militia, a 4 player games greatly increases the chances that you will have a 3 card hand every turn compared to a 2 player game. At least near the beginning of the game, before your opponent has built up an engine that can play Militia every turn. And other than discard attacks, pretty much all the other attacks are worse when you have multiple per turn compared to 1 per turn.

20
I like the decision that this gives to the other player. If my opponent has one of these on their tavern mat, and I have multiple attacks I could play, I can choose which one to play first, hoping that they use the shield so I can then play the better attack. Meanwhile, if your the one with a shield on your mat, and your opponent plays a weakish attack, you have to decide if you think they're going to play a stronger attack next. Good choices to make.

21
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Tom Vasel's Top 10 (Favourite) Cards
« on: April 07, 2018, 11:38:48 am »
I'm pretty sure the censored card I first talked about in this thread was Giant.

Mine were probably Hireling, Champion, Teacher. Guessing.

22
I don't see a problem with having it generate $0 and cost $0
This means that  one turn you can bank your money in coin tokens but you have to pick up a dud card to do so. Without sufficient trashing it wont be hugely popular untill late game but it would really help people who fail to hit a certain price in one turn.
This seems a bit too good with stuff like Inheritance, as it guarantees you can hit $7 by turn 2.

At the cost of self-cursing, that might be ok.

Actually, if it were going to be that, it would probably be much better as an event that gains you a curse when you buy it. Having a second card that simply does nothing in your deck seems like a waste of space. I don't think there's any particular rules confusion involved in having overpay be on an Event instead of a Card.

23
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Crystal
« on: April 05, 2018, 04:58:47 pm »
What about something like this to buff it a little.

+1 Buy

You may turn over any number of treasures from play, only one of which may be Copper, that total at least $6, for $6

That sounds like convoluted wording. I don't see a good reason to restrict it to only 1 Copper; it's not like you want to have a bunch of Coppers when you activate this anyway. And "total at least $6" isn't defined Dominion terminology. Intuitively, we can say that 1 Copper, 1 Silver, and 1 Gold "total $6", but in terms of actual mechanics, how much does a Bank add to this total? Or what about Crystal itself?

24
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Crystal
« on: April 05, 2018, 03:45:15 pm »

Quote
Crystal
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
+1 Buy
You may turn a complete set of face-up Copper, Silver and Gold cards face down for the turn, for $6.

I wanted to do something that used the turn-face-down mechanic from Nocturne.  Does this work, do you think?

This card is missing some clarification. So you can just turn the top card of the supply piles face down?
If you mean cards in play, then that is a horribly weak variant of Bank, Merchant and Foolís Gold.

Bank would give you at least $4 if you have any three treasure cards in play before and even stacks, Merchant is a cantrip if you have no Silver in play (and again, you only need one Copper, even if you play 10 Merchants) and Foolís Gold only requires one specific Treasure in play and even has a consolation price and also can turn into Gold, if you lose the FG split. Crystal is rather weak, even if it would cost $1. (Edit: Okay, the +Buy pushes it into the same level as Pawn, so $2 is the correct price.)

My idea:
Quote
Crystal
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
+1 Buy
When you play this, it is worth $1 for each different-named Treasure card you have in play. (Counting this)

This is now a Bank ďlightĒ with +Buy (which does not combo with Venture and Counting House).

While it's quite possible I overestimated it, I'm pretty sure that you're underestimating the . That's more than you get from Fool's Gold or most Banks; a card that gives + and a buy by itself would be hugely better than a card that gives +.

25
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Crystal
« on: April 03, 2018, 03:45:22 pm »
This confused me at first, it doesn't actually say where the set of Treasures is to be. If you do mean your play area, I think when you have cards in play face down, they no longer count as 'in play'. There are certain rules questions that arise then, like what happens to the face down set at Clean-up? It's still your turn.

You could turn the set over in the Supply or of course the trash safely, but neither would be as interesting here. You could try turning the set in play sideways or something?

I'm almost sure he meant cards already in play, but I agree that it needs to be specified on the card, like how Necromancer specifies "from the trash".

However, there's no reason that a face-down card would no longer count as in play. A face-down card in the trash still counts as being in the trash (Donald confirmed that you could get a face-down card back with Lurker/Graverobber/Rogue).

I also realize that there's no real reason to use "face down" for this. You could just as easily say "you may play a Copper, a Silver, and a Gold from your hand. If you do, +. " Or, you could require them to discard those cards from play instead of turning them face down, which would be the same for most situations.

To avoid the beginners question of "do the other treasures still give you their regular money?", you could just make them reveal then discard a Copper, Silver, and a Gold, and give +$12.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 254

Page created in 0.325 seconds with 18 queries.