I'm not getting the infinite Possession thing. I see using Masquerade to pass Possessions around, but play has to proceed clockwise. Eventually, you will be the player being Possessed, and as soon as you are, your giant hand is used and then discarded.
First, concerning gaming the system: I'm only just starting to read through details about TS, but it seems to me that perhaps the goal definition for the algorithm should be more complex than who wins, perhaps taking into account some sort of priority of goals (in the simplest case, winning by pile depletion vs winning by resign). A game played to the end is far more reliable a judge of skill over a win by resign. Is TS flexible enough to make the distinction ... and does the game log data provide enough detail to recalculate based on the two different end-states? I think this is far more likely to help with Resign-bot cheating.
But hey Moat gets you 2 cards, which for 2 $ ain't bad, but it ain't exactly Chapel either.
really? seems good to me. but maybe a +1 Action would be appropriate to a Hero...
How about Expand? Remodel talks about coins, Expand only says $3 more.
Easier solution for #1
Firstly, you try to Remodel a Potion-costing card (e.g. Alchemist) and there are no more in the Supply.
Then you just Remodel a Copper into an Estate.
Hmm? Common sense would dictate that, upon discarding my Tunnel, I should repeatedly reveal it until all the Golds are in my deck, and then stop revealing it and proceed. Clearly I'm actually not allowed to do that; it's not just common sense or common courtesy that prevents me.
"Reveal" - when a player reveals a card, he shows a card to all players and then returns it to wherever it came from (unless instructed specifically to put it elsewhere). If the player is required to reveal cards from the top of his Deck, and he does not have enough cards, he shuffles in order to reveal the required number of cards.
I think those numbers are driven a lot on certain combinations and >2p games. Here's a game I just played, and I admit that I started to question my strategy when he saboteured a gold, a grand market, and a province. But I think he just ran out of turns, and buying those cards cost him turns. (I didn't plan on the pileout either, but he drained the first two.) I kind of bailed on my strategy which was supposed to be quarry to grand market. I wasn't planning on farmland, but I kept hitting $4 without copper or $7 with.
http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201111/17/game-20111117-214220-cca1a7f3.html
but 'normally' shark bait would be starting player in game 5. Is there a way to assure this via iso?
It takes a while to get going, but Governor/Minion is a pretty deadly combo. It's a lot of $5 cards to amass, so it probably doesn't go fast enough against stiff competition. But playing it sure was fun. If you draw a Governor or two, you can construct massive hands, play all your minions (and hopefully a non-terminal +buy), and then Minion away all the cards you gave to your opponent.
And if you don't draw your Governors, you can use Minion to take you to them.
Maybe throw in a Scheme?
This point was already mentioned for other key cards but it specifically applies to provinces so I'll repeat it. Let's suppose that both players have bought three provinces, two left in the supply, and can reasonably expect to buy one each turn. If player 1 draws badly he can just buy a duchy and player 2 still has a dilemma, since if player 2 buys the penultimate province then player 1 can buy the last province next turn and win by three points (this is the penultimate province rule). Player 1's deck would in fact have to perform badly twice to lose. So player 2 probably also has to buy a duchy and any advantage from his draw was wasted. However, if player 1 can buy a province he is in a safe position and will expect a tie at worst, while the second player will probably lose if they can only buy a duchy.
More generally, if player 1 falls behind in purchasing key cards they can use first turn advantage to equalize. If player 2 falls behind in purchasing key cards they never have the opportunity to catch up until player 1 fails as well.
Either you guys aren't bothering to read my whole posts, or [...] me look like a total raving lunatic.
Now *that's* what 'decline of civility' is like.
That seems even more annoying than Paralyzed to me, who at least played the game. Do people get banned off isotropic?
Consult NATONATO would probably collapse if we didn't ask them about a children's card game
Victory-Reaction, $6
+2 VP
When an opponent gains a card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, the United States Federal Government enters into binding consultation with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization on the subject of your opponent gaining the card, and he gains the card if and only if NATO agrees.
