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 - jaketheyak

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12
1
General Discussion / Re: Punctuation matters
« on: July 07, 2015, 07:43:13 pm »
I agree with the woman's reading. Given that the restriction is for 24 hours, it's clear that it's not a traffic safety issue. I took it to mean that they don't want people parking RVs and camping in that location.

Forget about commas.
If that is what they were trying to achieve the sign should have read:

No Camping

3
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Dominion blessings
« on: June 28, 2015, 08:43:36 pm »
May your dogs be ever blue.

4
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Homage to the Best Card
« on: June 23, 2015, 09:15:30 pm »
To do it without IPA and have it make sense to all:  for non-NA English "can't" rhymes with "font" (approximately).

Um, what? I have never heard anyone, from any country, rhyme those two words.

I can't follow that IPA notation.

How do you learn to pronounce foreign languages then?

Either by ear, or through familiarity with the particular pronunciation rules of those phonetic languages I am actually slightly familiar with (Italian, German, Japanese).
If I am reading an unfamiliar foreign language word from any other language, I would not presume to know how to pronounce it.

5
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: June 23, 2015, 07:28:29 pm »
Funnily enough, if you write "a FAQ" I'll read it as "a fack", but if you write "an FAQ" I'll automatically read it as "an eff ay cue" instead.

6
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Homage to the Best Card
« on: June 23, 2015, 07:22:42 pm »
3/10 Does not work with my accent, would not read again.

How do you say "cantrip"?

I can't speak for qmech, but for me I think the issue is not so much that I pronounce "cantrip" differently, but that I pronounce "can't rip" differently.

It seems to me that the joke works best in an American accent.

I don't know how best to explain it, because I'm no linguist and I can't follow that IPA notation.
To me, Americans say "can't" as "KAANT" and I (an Australian) say "KARNT".

Cantrip to me is "KAANTRIP", so I can see how the joke works in American English.

7
Rules Questions / Re: Play area
« on: June 22, 2015, 02:15:12 am »
I am not. I agree with you that it is obvious. I was trying to prove to my opponent that she needed to show me her treasures when she bought a card.

If I was playing with someone who tried to pull something like that, they would quickly find themselves on my "people I don't play games with" list.

But you do not have to play (or reveal) all of your Treasures, just enough to generate the amount you want to spend.  It is often sensible to hide the fact that you drew into all of your Gold early in a shuffle.

Yeah, that is an important distinction.
As Donald said, she has to show you all the cards she plays, not all of her cards.

In my clean-up phase I make it a habit to scoop my played cards on top of my unplayed cards before putting them in my discard pile.
That way I don't reveal any of my unplayed cards.
You never want to give your opponent more info than you need to.

8
Rules Questions / Re: Play area
« on: June 22, 2015, 01:23:53 am »
The rules state that your "play area" is the area nearest to you on the table.
Actions and treasures are played face-up in your play area.

It is an impressive act of mental gymnastics to see a rule that tells you to play cards face up on the table and conclude that it doesn't actually require your opponents to see them.

You're not a lawyer by any chance?

9
Rules Questions / Re: A bajillion Possessions
« on: June 21, 2015, 07:50:19 pm »
I would prefer not having to read those names here. I don't know why you do it, maybe you think it's funny, but I am vaguely offended by it.

I just find it more interesting than "Alice and Bob".  And "Adolf" and "Eva" are still used as first names.  At least I didn't say "Hitler and Braun".

But Alice and Bob are used because it's easy to remember player order when the names start with A and B.
So you could have at least used Adolf and Benito.

10
Goko Dominion Online / Re: Payment models
« on: June 21, 2015, 03:35:34 am »
Sorry, Donald. You can't feed your kids, because Isotropic. :p

Man, this is exactly the kind of thing he's talking about.
Donald is here in this community giving up his time to discuss the game we love that he created.
He doesn't deserve to get sassed out.

11
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Homage to the Best Card
« on: June 21, 2015, 01:47:53 am »
Top 10 movies with clichéd twist endings.

12
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Homage to the Best Card
« on: June 20, 2015, 02:35:46 am »
You know, a spoiler tag is completely pointless if you don't say what you're spoiling.

It's a GoT spoiler in case anyone cares.

13
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: June 19, 2015, 01:46:57 am »
Ah, I think what I read said that he ended the game early due to the misapplication of the rule, which I suppose helped whoever was ahead at the time.

I don't think that happened. When Wil explained the game, he said (wrongly) that the game ended once any player had used up all his/her settlements. But when that actually happened (Wil was 3rd player and used up his settlements), they still finished out the turn order (the 4th player got his turn), which is correct according to the rules.

The guy who won (Yuri), won because he prioritized Citizens and Merchants, which dovetailed well together in this game. It was not a particularly close game.

The fact that the errors were minor makes it even more bizarre that he would throw his producer under the bus.
Although I guess part of what he is saying is that it has been an ongoing problem all season.
I get the feeling Wil is something of a perfectionist, so I suppose it's a case of the straw that broke the camel's back.

14
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: June 19, 2015, 12:49:29 am »
Do you have any thoughts on the controversy around the Kingdom Builder episode of Tabletop?

I haven't watched the episode yet, but from what I have read [needless-spoiler]Wil wins the game as a result of an incorrect rules interpretation.[/needless-spoiler]

Do you feel that this sort of thing might be harmful to your product?
Or is any publicity good publicity?

In the comments, someone suggested inviting games developers to come on the show to help avoid this sort of thing (although why they thought it reasonable to dictate who should pay the associated costs is beyond me).
Would you be interested in being involved with shows that feature your products, either on-screen or off-screen?

Does it generally annoy you when people get the rules wrong when posting playthroughs and reviews online?
From what I have seen, it's pretty common for people to get at least a few details wrong.

Wil didn't win, and without analyzing their game too closely, the rules mistake they made (using extra Actions on the same turn they obtained them) didn't seem to help any one player specifically.

Yeah that blog post really surprises me. He says they "completely butchered the rules"; that didn't happen at all. Unless there's something else I'm not aware of, they had one small detail incorrect; something that could be easily missed your first time playing. And they had a thing pop up in the video explaining the correct rule. So there shouldn't be concern over viewers learning it incorrectly.

Man most of these games aren't ever good to learn from reading the rules alone. You want to learn by playing with someone who has played and have them teach you. Then if necessary you read the rules after you play. It's very difficult to get everything right the first time. I'm disappointed that Wil would get so angry about this, and feel bad for the producer who I would assume was fired based on the post.

Ah, I think what I read said that he ended the game early due to the misapplication of the rule, which I suppose helped whoever was ahead at the time.
I should probably have watched the episode before I commented on it.

The thing that is really weird to me, and to a lot of people who have even a passing interest in Tabletop/Geek & Sundry, is that the unnamed producer in charge of the rules is easily identified as Boyan Radakovich.
Boyan isn't just some lowly intern paid to look after the rules, he is a games designer, an expert in what makes a good game and is the producer responsible for doing all the legwork to find suitable games to play on the show.

More importantly, he and Wil have previously described themselves as friends.
It seems odd to me that Wil would just throw him under the bus like that.
Looks like it seems odd to Boyan too.

Now, for a review on BGG, if they blow it and use abilities the turn they get them in KB, well someone will set them straight but it will certainly lower the value of the review. You're not watching the game in action, just hearing some opinions warped by wrong rules. So that's more annoying. And you can't necessarily tell. But when you can, people are immediately on it.

That's one of the big benefits of an active community like this or BGG.
If someone says something wrong, there is always someone who knows better that can set them straight.

Of course, as you know, the downside is that many things that are "wrong" are subjective and people can argue for hours about really petty crap.

15
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: June 18, 2015, 11:01:15 pm »
Do you have any thoughts on the controversy around the Kingdom Builder episode of Tabletop?

I haven't watched the episode yet, but from what I have read Wil wins the game as a result of an incorrect rules interpretation.

Do you feel that this sort of thing might be harmful to your product?
Or is any publicity good publicity?

In the comments, someone suggested inviting games developers to come on the show to help avoid this sort of thing (although why they thought it reasonable to dictate who should pay the associated costs is beyond me).
Would you be interested in being involved with shows that feature your products, either on-screen or off-screen?

Does it generally annoy you when people get the rules wrong when posting playthroughs and reviews online?
From what I have seen, it's pretty common for people to get at least a few details wrong.

16
I voted $10 because there wasn't an option between $5 and $10, but I probably wouldn't actually pay $10 for a large expansion.
What do you think a more appropriate option would be? I was thinking of $10 as being something like $8-$12, but I guess there's a pretty big difference between $8 and $12.

If you want each price point to represent a range, wouldn't it be better if the poll choices reflected that?

17
Goko Dominion Online / Re: Payment models
« on: June 18, 2015, 07:54:48 pm »
no way in hell would an arcade system work. i learned this from my background in fighting games - american arcades pretty much died in the late 90s-early 2000s.  they've lasted a lot longer in japan due to various geographical & cultural factors, but even there it's reaching the same point the US was at in the mid-90s.  pretty much the only american arcades that make money these days are the dave & buster's types (all casual carnival-esque games where you can win prizes, full restaurant & bar) and the "barcades" (actual good retro arcades that serve overpriced drinks & nostalgia).

it's just not an attractive prospect with a game you plan on playing a lot, which is why so many top players in fighting games now prefer to get their practice online and deal with the game-killing input lag that offers.  notice that the places i mentioned are meant to be one-time or occasional experiences, not stuff you grind on the regular.  for a while arcades could survive with games that offered an experience you couldn't get at home.  dance dance revolution was a big deal for a while...then guitar hero & rock band happened. gg arcades~

tl;dr i would compare it to renting movies/games as a fundamentally outdated model



Are you trying to tell me that Noah's Arcade is not still going strong in Aurora, Illinois?

18
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Homage to the Best Card
« on: June 17, 2015, 07:14:43 pm »
So are we going to get a split off?

Apparently not.  It's madness!  Mass hysteria, cats and dogs living together!

You forgot human sacrifice.

19
Goko Dominion Online / Re: Payment models
« on: June 17, 2015, 03:04:36 am »
Comparing to a freemium model like Hearthstone is problematic though.
Getting one specific card costs $16?
Well, sure, if you just want to pony up the cash.
On the other hand, if you play often enough (and are good enough) you can get that card for free.

Freemium games have a really perverse economy where only a tiny fraction of the player base ever actually pays anything.
According to an article from a couple of years ago, it was estimated that 70% of the players who had made it to (what was then) the final level of Candy Crush Saga had never paid a cent.
So, you're probably looking at maybe 10% of the total player base who ever put any cash into it.

These games make money only because 10% of 93 million daily Candy Crush players is still nearly 10 million people.
Hearthstone has 20 million players.

Anyway, my point is that you just can't compare Dominion to Hearthstone, because I just can't see a Hearthstone-style freemium model working for Dominion and you can't compare any fixed-price model to a freemium one.

20
Goko Dominion Online / Re: Payment models
« on: June 17, 2015, 02:36:02 am »
FTW, Magic also has a Steam game that costs $10 with lots of cards aimed at casual players. So, they are tapping both the casual market and hardcore market. I do think LF was 100% right with everything he said in his earlier post. The casual market is where the money is to be made and that is going to be through app purchases. iOS is a big thing these days with a huge, huge market, but people are used to paying a certain price point and that ain't $90.

I think going after the "app" market is probably where the biggest pitfall lies in coming up with a working payment model.
As LF said, the app market is used to paying less than $10 for a game and certainly less than that for add-ons.
And for a truly casual iOS or Android gamer, Dominion won't hold a lot more appeal than any other momentary diversion on their morning train.
So they aren't going to be willing to pay double figure amounts for expansions.

And, frankly, as a multiplayer game it's never going to work very well on mobile devices.
The intermittent nature of mobile coverage and the pick-up and put-down nature of playing on mobile devices mean that it has to be asynchronous multiplayer.
And, for Dominion, that is going to make games take an eternity.

So, really, as I and others have said, the focus really should be on getting the game working on Steam.
That's a platform where gamers are going to be more serious and much more used to paying a reasonable amount for a game.
$10-$20 per expansion would not be excessive and, if the game works well, you could end up selling huge volumes.

21
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Homage to the Best Card
« on: June 15, 2015, 11:54:36 pm »
Man, I knew Darth Vader was evil, murdering children, blowing up planets... but that signature is just a step too far.

22
Goko Dominion Online / Re: Payment models
« on: June 15, 2015, 07:25:58 pm »
A:  I think the ideal model is where you have to buy the expansions (for the prices they were at before the Beta or possibly lower than that) and also have to pay a nominal yearly fee once you reach a certain games played threshold.  This keeps the active players funding the site.

You have to pay for the game, pay for the expansions and pay an ongoing subscription.

Man, I feel like I'm flogging a dead horse here, but you're describing the payment model of WoW.
A payment model that WoW itself is increasingly shifting away from as more players reject it.

You seriously think this payment model would work for an online card game?
I am seriously struggling to find words to describe just how effective this model would be at driving away potential players.

Quote
B:  I imagine Blizzard already has servers devoted to their MMOs and can just use that infrastructure for StarCraft, so there's less cost associated with running servers for SC because they already have to run them for other stuff.  StarCraft is like Dominion in that it's a game that has taken on a very competitive life of its own, and to take that away for a cash grab would be sort of silly.  The thing is that Blizzard makes other games that they can promote this way through StarCraft.  I don't think MakingFun does.

Okay, I need to stop using megolithic companies like Blizzard as a comparison.

Seriously, look through this list of multiplayer games on Steam.
There's a huge number of multiplayer games from developers big, small and tiny.
How many of them require a monthly or yearly subscription to play multiplayer?
Aside from maybe a handful in the MMO category, the answer is basically none of them.

This is the space in which Dominion is competing.

You have to put aside your own love of Dominion.
Obviously most people on this forum would be willing to pay a monthly fee to play a game they all love.
But we're a captive audience.

If MF actually want to make money, I say again, the way to do it is to fix the game, slash the price and sell a million copies on Steam.

23
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: June 15, 2015, 10:09:01 am »
I am sure people would ask you about that, but I interpreted your "you" in "you might never realize" and my "common" in "common wisdom" in the context of this board. Incidentally, I possibly didn't realize up to now that "gain a silver" counters Thief/Noble Brigand/Pirate Ship and in a way Knights/Rogue attacks.
Yes I wasn't talking about this board, you guys know all about Jack.

I dug up someone not seeing the connection in a Hinterlands review: "But other cards like Jack of All Trades just feel weird. He gives you silver, refills your hand, lets you look at the top card of your deck and lets you trash a non-treasure card. How are any of those connected?" http://castlesandcooks.com/2012/02/09/arena-review-dominion-hinterlands-impressions/

Really, it's like it does a little bit of everything.  At the very least it could have a name that somehow fits that.

Yeah, that's not just a case of not understanding how the different effects relate to each other, that's obliviousness to the meaning of a pretty common idiom.

24
Dominion General Discussion / Re: About kingmaking
« on: June 15, 2015, 10:00:53 am »
...1st is "infinitely better" than 2nd which is "infinitely better" than 3rd.

Don't get me wrong, I feel very strongly that you should play as if this is the case...

What I really meant to say is that a competitive player who can't get first place should be playing as if second place is the greatest possible glory.
If you can get first, playing to try and get second is lame, but if first is unattainable you shouldn't act as though the game no longer matters because you have already "lost".
If second place is little more than a consolation prize, and that is reflected in the ranking system, then a lot of players will get to the point where first is no longer attainable and then just give up.
And in my experience, playing a multiplayer game with someone who is sitting there not trying very hard because they are too busy grumbling about not being able to get first place is not very much fun.

The scenario described playing Powergrid where the end-game involves those who are not in the running for first sitting around just waiting for the game to end, sounds like the most horrible board-gaming experience possible.
Seriously, it doesn't just suck for the losers in this scenario.
It kills a lot of the fun for the winners too.

25
Dominion General Discussion / Re: About kingmaking
« on: June 15, 2015, 02:31:51 am »
Well, even if you are convinced that a 9-21-0 player is better than a 10-20-0 player, my point still stands, that any rating system which reflects this will encourage players to NOT play as if first is infinitely better than second, and second infinitely better than third, etc., which you seem to agree should be how players should play.  If you want players to play this way, the rating system needs to give them a reason to.

But the whole point is that a rating system that devalues second-place finishes doesn't give players a reason to play hard for second!
Your system says you need to get first, or you might as well not bother.
Which is the exact opposite of believing that first > second > third.
It basically means that first > second and second = third.

Yes, under your system 0-10-0 is better than 0-0-10.
But if 0-10-0 is trumped by 1-0-9, why would you ever bother to try and get second?

And as I said at the beginning, this is going to be an agree-to-disagree type thing, so I don't even know why I am still trying to explain my position.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12

Page created in 0.227 seconds with 19 queries.