51
Game Reports / Re: A lesson in watching your piles.
« on: August 14, 2012, 06:33:01 pm »
Why the three copper buys at the end?
Chicken chicken chicken: Chicken chicken.Chicken chicken chicken!
WHY did I thumbs up this!?
http://isotropic.org/papers/chicken.pdf
I wish I could look at the ending deck composition of my first ever game of dominion. It was with intrigues and I think most of my decks was a terrible hodge-podge consisting of the majority of scouts and probably very little silver, no gold.
Fun times.
This card is like having a victory card based on a die roll, or the number of cards costing $6, or any other arbitrary measure that isn't part of gameplay.Tangent: How is 'number of cards costing 6' more arbitrary than 'number of cards with different names'?
The discussion is much more relevant in Magic, where strictly better cards exist (and are being added all the time).
Even in Magic, you can find the same edge cases if you are pedantic enough. You have a 2/1 creature that costs 1 red, and I have a 1/1 creature that costs 1 red? Well, I play this card that kills all creatures with power power 2 or greater.
This card deals 3 damage for 1 red, while this other card deals 3 damage for 2 red? Well I play something that discards a card from my hand and gains me x life, where x is the converted mana cost of the card I discarded.
But I guess maybe we should come up with a community definition of "strictly better" that is useful to use, so that we can be consistent in discussions.
We have yet to see a discard Attack where the attacker chooses what card to discard rather than the victim; I'd love to see one but suspect it's too nasty to balance.
I'm sorry - which of those is strictly better than the other? Council room gives you more cards. Margrave has the attack. So, the attack is USUALLY better, but not always.
Hence, the word STRICTLY is important here.
This is the point at which, if we were discussing Magic, and a strictly better card actually existed, some asshat would point to Possession and say "nuh-uh, it's not strictly better because if you were possesed, you'd rather have the worse version."
But, yeah, there has yet to be a Dominion card that's strictly better than another Dominion card. Well, except Scout, which is strictly better than Smithy because you can draw 4 cards with it and get +1 Action.
I'd say Copper is strictly better than Curse.
I'm sorry - which of those is strictly better than the other? Council room gives you more cards. Margrave has the attack. So, the attack is USUALLY better, but not always.
Hence, the word STRICTLY is important here.
There is an interesting article on Slate that wonders what full legalization in America of marijuana would look like -- unlike, say, Netherlands, where growing and wholesale distribution is still illegal. The conclusion is that it would be so incredibly, unbelievably cheap, that it would be priced around the same as ketchup packets and would be given away basically for free.
Whether you consider this an argument for or against legalization is up to you, but it is something that I had never considered before.
That people think it's more important than the constitution/legal code in no way makes it political; I care about my mother far more than those pieces of paper, and that hardly makes her political. As for inserting it into other peoples' lives, this is not prima facie different than those other people trying to insert the lack of it into those peoples' lives - and by this argument, absolutely everything is political.I think he meant in the context of normally non-political message boards. Isn't there like a whole board on BGG dedicated to religion/politics flame wars just to keep it separate from everything else?I mean it in that context too. I don't know why people think that the bible is significantly more political than most anything else.
Um... because politicians in the US think it's as important and sometimes more important than the Constitution and the US Code, and keep trying to insert it into the lives of those who have a different or no religion? But this is only applicable to the US and a few other countries. (Obviously the Qu'ran has a similar status in some Middle Eastern countries.)
But really, that this is the politically controversial topic is incredibly ironic in a thread about stoners.