Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

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.

1776

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Dominion Online set selection

« on: March 24, 2014, 02:19:20 am »

I would be happy with any solution where: A) I could avoid a certain couple cards I don't like, and B) I can find someone to play with.
I don't care if this solution is implemented in casual or pro or unrated, but currently not many people with multiple sets seem to want to play casual games without exploiting their favorite combo, much less unrated ones. So I guess what I want is for casual and/or unrated games to be fixed so more people will want to play them, which woud mostly likely involve some way to be pretty sure that some jerk didn't craft the kingdom to exploit their favorite combo or whatever.

FWIW, I share LF's opinion about ratings: When playing a rated game, it's easier to get mad & frustrated if I lose. For this reason, unrated games can be more fun. Without ratings, Dominion is a game (unlike some others) where it can be just as fun to lose as it is to win, but ratings messes up that aspect.

Well, for the jerk issue, does highlighting picked cards do the trick? Obv. you can randomly generate lists repeatedly until you see what you like, but that doesn't seem so scary, how much preying on people is happening that way.

It would work for me, but I'm more concerned with whether it would work for other people so that other people would play casual games and I wouldn't have to play pro in order to find someone to play with.

What about if casual is just unrated? What are the merits of separate casual / unrated? "Casual" sounds to me like the kind of thing where I'm not worried about rating. Obv. people looking to get a high casual rating with KC/Masq would lose out but we are okay with that. People who aren't ready for pro humans but want a rating can play pro games against bots or rack up ratings of different kinds in adventures.

On one hand, I don't really care about rating. On the other hand, I would like to be matched with someone whose skill level isn't too far from mine, and I don't know how you'd do that without having a rating. So I think it's good to have separate casual and unrated types.

1777

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Dominion Online set selection

« on: March 24, 2014, 12:26:34 am »

I would be happy with any solution where: A) I could avoid a certain couple cards I don't like, and B) I can find someone to play with.
I don't care if this solution is implemented in casual or pro or unrated, but currently not many people with multiple sets seem to want to play casual games without exploiting their favorite combo, much less unrated ones. So I guess what I want is for casual and/or unrated games to be fixed so more people will want to play them, which woud mostly likely involve some way to be pretty sure that some jerk didn't craft the kingdom to exploit their favorite combo or whatever.

FWIW, I share LF's opinion about ratings: When playing a rated game, it's easier to get mad & frustrated if I lose. For this reason, unrated games can be more fun. Without ratings, Dominion is a game (unlike some others) where it can be just as fun to lose as it is to win, but ratings messes up that aspect.
(I did make a comment about 'too bad it wasn't a rated game' that time I played against Lastfootnote, but I was just joking about beating someone with a much higher rating than me...)

1778

Goko Dominion Online / Re: I really really hate tournament, but how do I avoid it online?

« on: March 23, 2014, 07:07:56 pm »

My 2 cents. Pro mode is pretty much fine as is, except that goko (or making fun, I guess?) really needs to implement automatch and a proper lobby system. There shouldn't be any kind of ban list or anything. In my mind "pro" means all-cards, full-random, no knowledge of the kingdom before hand. Obviously people having different set ownerships messes with this somewhat, but I don't really see any practical way to fix that. I don't think it's fair to exclude people who don't have all the cards from hosting pro (especially, what if they have all the sets, but not all the promos. Would that be enough?). Anyway, I don't see a practical solution to that issue. I do think that it makes sense that "pro" mode should be aimed at the interests of the competitive players though.

Being able to see what sets the host of the game owns beforehand might be good. And/or require that the host of a pro game have bought at least one expansion*. I'm a little disappointed when I join a pro game and it turns out to be base-only. Part of the reason I join pro games is that they tend to have more expansions than casual games.
(*Which I haven't yet but that's fine because the only time I ever hosted pro games is when I played bots to raise my rating. And the only reason I wanted to raise my rating is so I join games that said 3000+. I'm sure I'll get around to buying some online expansions eventually, but then I'll be hosting more casual games.)

I think the real problem, as mentioned in the OP is that playing casual "it'd be hard to find an opponent because all the better players seem to just play pro." I think if casual were fixed up a little bit then perhaps people would be more willing to play it too. I probably would still only host pro-mode matches, but I'd be willing to join casual games if it were possible to see what criteria someone used when picking the game (including what sets were drawn from). This would require goko implementing a server-side functioning kingdom generator. LF points out that someone could just keep generating kingdoms until they got, say KC/Goons/Masq, which I guess is an issue, but I think if you were only allowed to put in your parameters and then you didn't see the kingdom until you hit "create game," then generating kingdoms until you got the one you want would be a sufficiently large hassle that it wouldn't be that much of a problem.

I like this suggestion and the one about unrated becoming casual, and casual becoming an intermediate level. The intermediate could have the kingdom generator that you suggest here.

In the meantime before MF/Goko gets around to doing this, I wonder if Salvager could be made to let people know that its kingdom generator was used to create a game in casual or unrated mode and maybe show the parameters to anyone looking at the card set. Would more people play casual if it did this?

PS: Thanks to Geolib for getting back to the topic of the thread.

1779

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Goko Dominion Salvager Discussion

« on: March 23, 2014, 01:18:32 am »

I checked the possible causes, and didn't find anything. I'm sure I'm not zoomed in in any way. I don't have low resolution. I can't find the setting for oversized fonts, but I'm sure I didn't turn it on and I'm the only one who uses this computer. Maybe it has something to do with the black areas on either side of the game display area. I don't know why those are there.

It's not a big deal at all, especially since it only happens when the isotropic level is more than 5 characters.

1780

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Goko Dominion Salvager Discussion

« on: March 23, 2014, 12:20:11 am »

Screenshot attached

1781

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Goko Dominion Salvager Discussion

« on: March 22, 2014, 11:41:49 pm »

using Chrome and Salvager 2.5.0.1 (the beta version)
Taking a screenshot is more trouble (since I don't remember how offhand). Maybe I'll post that tomorrow.

1782

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Goko Dominion Salvager Discussion

« on: March 22, 2014, 08:53:26 pm »

I've installed the beta and it looks good, but I've only played one or two games since then.  The only weird thing I've noticed is that sometimes the isotropish rating is put on top of the next person's username on the list of players in the lobby.

Aha.  It seems that this can happen if you're zoomed in in Chrome.  Are you at 120%+ by any chance?

nope

1783

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Goko Dominion Salvager Discussion

« on: March 22, 2014, 07:54:41 pm »

I've installed the beta and it looks good, but I've only played one or two games since then.  The only weird thing I've noticed is that sometimes the isotropish rating is put on top of the next person's username on the list of players in the lobby.

EDIT: It happens whenever the isotropic level is more than 5 characters, eg -10.48

1784

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: YACI: a literal loan card.

« on: March 22, 2014, 07:14:07 pm »

ok, that version was bad. let's see if I can salvage the idea:

Loan
cost $2 - Treasure - Victory
You may add up to two tokens to your loan mat or remove one. If you remove a token, this is worth $0. Otherwise, this is worth $1 + the number of tokens you added.
At the end of the game, -1VP for every token on your loan mat beyond the first, even if this is no longer in your deck.

1785

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: YACI: a literal loan card.

« on: March 22, 2014, 01:38:59 am »

I was considering have it also be worth -1VP like a curse which should fix those problems. Then maybe I could make it $-1 ?

1786

Variants and Fan Cards / YACI: a literal loan card.

« on: March 21, 2014, 11:01:02 pm »

A more literal loan card:

Loan (b)
Cost $0.  Treasure.
Worth $-2. When you play this, trash it.
When you buy this, +$2 and +1 buy. You may not buy multiple loans in one turn.

1787

Goko Dominion Online / Re: I really really hate tournament, but how do I avoid it online?

« on: March 21, 2014, 07:45:20 pm »

How would people feel about a short banned cards list for Pro games? Let's say you can pick three cards, and those won't be picked in Pro games you play, whether you generate the game or someone else does.

This would make me very happy.

1788

Goko Dominion Online / Re: I really really hate tournament, but how do I avoid it online?

« on: March 20, 2014, 01:36:55 am »

Yo momma's so stupid she bought a Feast in order to get a Mint when Tournament was on the board. When she finally did get a Tournament, I had already lined a Province up with Mine.

1789

Goko Dominion Online / I really really hate tournament, but how do I avoid it online?

« on: March 19, 2014, 11:57:35 am »

I really really hate tournament so I decided not to play with it anymore, but that's kinda hard online when hardly anyone wants to play casual and you can't veto cards in pro.
Yesterday I got a pro game using automatich, saw it had tournament, so I said "Sorry I don't play with tournament" and resigned. Got matched up with the same guy again and he declined the match.
So frustrating that it's so hard to avoid playing with one certain card when playing online... <deleted some whining about being poor here>. Even if I paid to have all sets, I'd never play pro games again to avoid tournament, so it'd be hard to find an opponent because all the better players seem to just play pro.
I don't even know if you can see the kingdom beforehand when playing casual if you use automatch, can you?

1790

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Which of these more powerful attack cards is your LEAST favorite?

« on: March 18, 2014, 11:26:18 pm »

If I could vote for one inidividually, I'd vote for Sir Michael (which I replaced with a fan-made knight card for when I play IRL). The Knights' attack is nasty enough and Sir Michael adds another attack on top of it instead of doing something for its player.

Ended up voting for Sea hag though. Knights are interesting with each one being different, but Sea hag is annoying to get hit by and annoying to play because it doesn't do anything for the person playing it. I probably would've voted for Familiar if it was on the list (Familiar really should be up there). For the same reason as Sea hag except worse.
I have nothing against any of the others on the list, but I also hate Saboteur (you can guess why).

Saboteur is bad though. Sure it can be annoying, but 90% of the time it's just bad. Also, Sir Micheal only seems OP, but he's not. Again, his down side is being terminal that doesn't help you this turn.

Exactly, Saboteur is bad for everyone. That's why I hate it. Bad for the player playing it, bad for the person getting hit by it. I didn't say Sir Michael was overpowered, I just said I hate that card. Two nasty attacks on one card is bad. It's bad for the person playing it and bad for the person getting hit. Those are the attack cards I hate most.

1791

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Which of these more powerful attack cards is your LEAST favorite?

« on: March 18, 2014, 07:31:22 pm »

If I could vote for one inidividually, I'd vote for Sir Michael (which I replaced with a fan-made knight card for when I play IRL). The Knights' attack is nasty enough and Sir Michael adds another attack on top of it instead of doing something for its player.

Ended up voting for Sea hag though. Knights are interesting with each one being different, but Sea hag is annoying to get hit by and annoying to play because it doesn't do anything for the person playing it. I probably would've voted for Familiar if it was on the list (Familiar really should be up there). For the same reason as Sea hag except worse.
I have nothing against any of the others on the list, but I also hate Saboteur (you can guess why).

1792

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Least favorite card?

« on: March 16, 2014, 04:11:09 pm »

I'm there for you. Chapel is about how unimportant material things are. Band of Misfits is about how who you pretend to be becomes who you are. Woodcutter is one of those canvases that just has a red stripe on it.

And Harem is...?

My mom's favorite card.

1793

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Goko bot strategy?

« on: March 16, 2014, 04:04:55 pm »

I'm seeing that it could be pretty difficult to program a bot to play realistically mediocre. I'm thinking how could they make it play more like me?  Well, what do I tend to do badly?  hmmm.  I don't usually think ahead much when looking at the kingdom at the beginning of the game. I have a strong aversion to buying terminal draw without having plenty of villages (I'm still not really convinced that that's a bad thing...). It's hard to think of much that I do badly because if I knew what I was doing wrong, then I'd wouldn't be doing it (as much...).

1794

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Goko bot strategy?

« on: March 16, 2014, 01:18:59 am »

This thread kinda makes me ashamed to have about a 50% win rate against the weaker bots (I mean villager bot and warlord bot, not serf bot).

1795

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: YACI: Yet another crazy idea for a fan card(s).

« on: March 16, 2014, 12:43:24 am »

I like the idea. While it's not very typical for Dominion because it's so wacky, i think the theme is fun as are most of the ideas.

I'd replace the one with Harem though, and if just because not every player who owns physical Dominion owns Harem (unless the cards come with an additional Harem).

It's would be just as easy to make a homemade Harem card as it would be to make the rest of the inheritance cards if anyone else ever uses them. How would unpublished cards come with anything?

I'd also replace the 7-turn duration, because it's very hard to keep track of. Adding tokens or something like this just for one card seems like overdoing it, honestly.

Tally the turns with paper and pencil?  I've already established that these use unorthodox mechanics...

Also they are not balanced that well, but maybe that's the idea. I'd maybe consider giving some of them more standard VPs, so you have to decide whether you really want to play them. Could even out the cards a bit if you want to do that.

Balance is mainly what I could use help with because I want to use them at home. They're not supposed to be completely even with each other, but I don't want them to be too far off and it's hard to tell which ones are significantly weaker or stronger than others.
I realized that Uncle Jed and Uncle Fred give the same amount of VP, but Jed also gives you what amounts to a silver in addition to the VP. Maybe I'll change Uncle Jed to gain the Harem into your hand and remove its additional +1VP.
Is Uncle Ned too strong despite the copper drawback? I'm having kindof a hard time comparing them to each other for balance. Which would you suggest adding standard VPs to to make someone consider not playing it?  I wouldn't want to do that with more than one or two of them because they're meant to be played to gain the inheritance.

1796

Variants and Fan Cards / YACI: Yet another crazy idea for a fan card(s).

« on: March 14, 2014, 08:37:18 pm »

This is a kingdom supply pile where each card is different, like the knights. Each is an inheritance from a dead relative. They're obviously very experimental, but I wanted to see what people think (besides a distaste I'm sure some people will have for certain unorthidox mechanics).

Unlike other kingdom card piles, the inheritance pile is kept face down so you don't know which one you're getting. They all cost $5, and all of them get trashed after being used. Almost all of them give you a VP token when you play them and are worth 1 VP themselves, so you get that 1VP whether or not you get a chance to play it (as long as it doesn't get trashed another way).
There are 12 because they are victory cards. In a 2-player game, the players may decide which four Inheritance cards to leave out.

Uncle Zed
Trash this. Gain any number of action cards with total cost up to $8. +1VP.
Worth 1 VP.

Uncle Ted & Uncle Ched  (Two cards which are the same.)
Trash this. Gain a Gold. +1VP.
Worth 1 VP.

Uncle Ned
Trash this. Gain a province and a copper.
Worth 1 VP.

Uncle Ed & Aunt Edna  (Two cards which are the same.)
+1 Action. Trash this. Gain any action card. If it costs less than $5, you may put it in your hand. +1VP.
Worth 1 VP.

Uncle Jed
Trash this. Gain a Harem (whether or not there are Harems in the Kingdom), putting it into your hand.
Worth 1 VP.

Uncle Bread
+$6, +1 buy. Trash this. +1VP. You may not buy more than one victory card this turn.
Worth 1 VP.

Uncle Fred
Trash this. +4VP.
Worth 2 VP.

Uncle Dread
You may trash one other card from your hand or discard pile. Each other player gains a curse and a ruins. If anyone gains a curse or ruins, trash this and +1 VP.
Worth 1 VP.

Uncle Red
Trash this. Gain an attack card and play it now. If the gained attack card costs less than $5, also gain any card costing up to $3. +1VP.
Worth 1 VP.

Uncle Thread
+$1. +1VP. Additional +$1 each turn for seven turns or until game ends. If you had more than 3 turns left on this duration when the game ends, +1VP. Keep this card in play until the end of the seven turns or end of the game, then trash it.
Worth 1 VP.

1797

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Meeting up to play Dominion IRL

« on: March 12, 2014, 02:10:42 pm »

More realistically, you can use meetup.com to find a Dominion or more general euro-board gaming group in your area. You probably won't find any f.ds people, but if you're near a city, You can probably find a group with people familiar with Dominion. I've used it to find people to play with IRL sometimes.

1798

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Activation Cards

« on: March 10, 2014, 07:37:19 pm »

Boomtown seems overpowered. The activation isn't much of a drawback when you get to choose when it happens. Sometimes putting a card back on your deck is a good thing.

And the attack on Engineer seems too nasty. You could have 2-3 or possibly even more cards trashed all at once. Gaining a cheaper card of the same cost doesn't weaken the attack much. If it hits duchies or silver, it's usually worse than just trashing the card and not getting anything in return. It does help you if it hits copper or estates, but I still think the attack is nasty. The knight attack is already one of the harshest attacks in the game. (Engineer's attack is more like knight's than swindler's. Swindler gives you a card of the same cost and often that means getting another copy of the same card.)

1799

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion: Pandemonium - Expansion WIP Thread

« on: March 09, 2014, 12:53:46 am »

Smelter
Action - $2
Reveal a card from your hand
If it's a(n):
Action: Gain a copy of it
Treasure: +$3
Victory Card: +3 Cards
Put the revealed card on top of your deck.

(Terminal silver that slows you down, inflexible Courtyard, or a gainer that either sacrifices the play  of a non terminal or makes your terminal clash problems even worse)

Wow, you're really selling me on this card! But seriously, I think even though the card is flexible, the three options are probably too weak, even for a $2 card. I'd try a $5 version that gave +$4 and +4 Cards. Maybe beef up the Action-gaining too, but that might not be necessary. Duplicating a non-terminal by putting off playing it for a turn may be enough for that option.

This is the only card of these that I really like, and I don't think it's weak at all. Getting a copy of any action card you have (no cost limit) seems very strong. The treasure option would be better used with other treasures than copper. Putting the victory card back on your deck doesn't seem so bad in exchange for +3 cards on a $2 cost card.
It wouldn't be much good in the early game, but it'd be much better after you've trashed your starting junk and have some worthwhile action cards to duplicate.
And of course this card would be insanely good with the hybrid victory cards (especially Nobles).

1800

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Least favorite card?

« on: March 09, 2014, 12:21:05 am »

I also see players going for Tournament all the time when they should not.

Like I did here:
http://dom.retrobox.eu/?/20140308/log.51354134e4b07cef8209f582.1394338126568.txt
It doesn't make me hate tournament any less (as you might imagine if you look at that log).