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 - Jeebus

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 45
1
Dominion General Discussion / Re: The bad luck thread
« on: September 24, 2018, 08:21:33 am »
Right, thanks, the first 12 times. I actually only calculated 11, the correct probability is even less - 0.04%!
I think you have an extra zero in there. I calculate 0.414%, or once every 242 games.

I did notice another mistake. I had included the turn when they missed. So now I get 0.075%.

I calculated the chances of each of the 12 hits: 32%, 57%, 57%, 57%, 57%, 43%, 33%, 71%, 69%, 71%, 69%, 65%. And then I multiplied them. I don't know how our calculations differed.

I get 32%, 57%, 57%, 57%, 67%, 67%, 71%, 69%, 71%, 69%, 65%. So it seems you go wrong somewhere in the middle with 57%, 43% and 33% replacing the two 67%'s (from the 7/17's). You also only had 11 hits, not 12 -- the 12th line you listed was the first miss.

Ok, you're right, I put in the wrong numbers for turn 12 and 13. I don't know how I did that. But there were 12 hits, not 11, since my opponent hit twice on turn 13!
The correct percentages are: 32%, 57%, 57%, 57%, 67%, 67%, 67%, 71%, 69%, 71%, 69%, 65%. This makes the probability 0.28%, once in every 361 games.

2
Rules Questions / Re: Anything needed for Empires?
« on: September 20, 2018, 11:50:00 am »
Some clarifications that may or may not be too obscure to include in the rules:

If you use Prince or Ghost to play Crown at the start of your turn, youíre in your Action phase at that point.

Any extra turns are resolved after Donate/Mountain Pass.

Enchantress 1: The play ability is not actually changed on the Action card; rather the player gets +1 Card and +1 Action instead of resolving it. So they can call Royal Carriage to replay the Action and this time resolve its play ability. Similarly, Ghost will resolve the cardís play ability the second time it plays it. If the played card is a Duration, Ghost/Royal Carriage stays in play.

Enchantress 2: If you play Enchantress several times, the other players still only get +1 Card and +1 Action: Only the first Enchantress replaces what the players do; Enchantresses after that make no difference.

Enchantress 3: If one of your opponents gets an extra turn, the first Action played on that turn will also be Enchanted. (The rulebook says "just on their next turn", which is normally true, but not in this case.)

Enchantress 4: Timing - If a player plays an Enchanted Attack card, Reactions and Urchin will trigger first, as normal.

3
Dominion General Discussion / Re: The bad luck thread
« on: September 20, 2018, 10:28:45 am »
Right, thanks, the first 12 times. I actually only calculated 11, the correct probability is even less - 0.04%!
I think you have an extra zero in there. I calculate 0.414%, or once every 242 games.

I did notice another mistake. I had included the turn when they missed. So now I get 0.075%.

I calculated the chances of each of the 12 hits: 32%, 57%, 57%, 57%, 57%, 43%, 33%, 71%, 69%, 71%, 69%, 65%. And then I multiplied them. I don't know how our calculations differed.

4
Dominion General Discussion / Re: The bad luck thread
« on: September 19, 2018, 11:13:45 am »
Looks like they just hit the first 12 times, right? 12 times in 24 turns.  Still, pretty crazy.

Right, thanks, the first 12 times. I actually only calculated 11, the correct probability is even less - 0.04%!

5
Dominion General Discussion / Re: The bad luck thread
« on: September 19, 2018, 12:34:37 am »
A game with no trashing, my opponent went for knights, I went for Mountebanks.

Here is every time they played a Knight until the 25th turn, and how many trashable cards I had in my deck out of the total count:

turn 4 - 2/12 - hit Silver
turn 7 - 5/15 - hit Mountebank
turn 8 - 5/15 - hit Silver
turn 10 - 5/15 - hit Dame Anna
turn 12 - 7/17 - hit Haunted Woods
turn 13 - 7/17 - hit Silver and Mountebank
turn 18 - 9/20 - hit Changeling
turn 20 - 9/21 - hit Bazaar
turn 22 - 10/22 - hit Haunted Woods
turn 23 - 9/21 - hit Mountebank
turn 24 - 8/20 - hit Mountebank
turn 25 - 7/20 - first miss!

(Even with that extreme luch, they had no chance. They resigned soon after, because they had a deck full of curses.)


I calculated the probabilty of hitting the first 24 times as 0.13%!
I calculated the probabilty of hitting the first 12 times as 0.04% 0.075% 0.28%!

6
Rules Questions / Re: Pilgrimage With Split Piles
« on: September 18, 2018, 09:56:52 am »
How is this an edge case? You need to have copies of Plunder and Encampment in your deck already in order to be able to choose them...
They are actually in your opponents deck. You bought Pilgrimage while Possessing them.

Wow, I just realized how big of a jerk your opponent has to be in this edge case. Because you would actually be playing IRL.

7
Rules Questions / Re: Pilgrimage With Split Piles
« on: September 17, 2018, 11:47:25 pm »
Edge case: you remembered after choosing your 3 cards, but before gaining them, that Wolf Den was in the game, and your opponent is a jerk who don't allow undos for any reason.

FTFY

8
Rules Questions / Re: Pilgrimage With Split Piles
« on: September 17, 2018, 07:09:04 pm »
Yeah, I don't think there are other cards like this, where you choose several cards first, then gain them. But Dz is right; you choose the order. So it would be dumb to choose to gain Plunder before Encampment.

9
Dominion: Renaissance Previews / Re: Dominion: Renaissance on RGG's website
« on: September 14, 2018, 07:22:04 pm »
There will at some point also be Coffers tokens, that can be used at any time for +1 Coffers. So now we know why it was changed to "+1 Coffers".

10
Dominion General Discussion / Re: The bad luck thread
« on: September 13, 2018, 03:44:48 pm »
A game with no trashing.

I had 7 Ironmongers, 9 Sages and 4 Groundskeepers. I also had 2 Bridge Trolls and 2 Goons that I wanted to play.

26 of my 38 cards were Actions at game end!

Not once did I get a +action from Ironmonger that I was able to use. If I got several Bridge Trolls and/or Goons in hand, Ironmonger never gave me +1 Action. In hands with only one terminal, I got lots and lots of useless +actions.

I lost.

11
Rules Questions / Re: Inheritance bug in shuffle it?
« on: September 13, 2018, 12:02:09 pm »
It's correct that the +1 token can go on that pile. But your opponent's Estates should not get that bonus, because the Estates are not from that pile. (Any cards that are from that pile, get the bonus of course.)

I don't know if this works correctly on Dominion Online, I'm just saying.

12
Dominion General Discussion / Re: The bad luck thread
« on: September 13, 2018, 11:57:00 am »


You can take solace in the fact that had you played the Patrician first, the Vagrant would have missed that Estate anyway.  ;)

13
Rules Questions / Re: Order of Resolution with Imp and Royal Carriage
« on: August 30, 2018, 05:39:48 pm »
I see what you mean, and maybe I just made everything seem more confusing.

The original question was whether (a) Imp was fully resolved as soon as the chosen card was put into play, or (b) the chosen card was part of resolving Imp. Golem, TR, etc, are other cards that tell you to play a card as part of their instructions. By looking at how they work, we see that the answer has to be b, since such a card can have other instructions too, coming after.

In other words, I assumed that the confusion arose because Imp happened to have "play a card" as its final instruction, but since it's obvious that "play a card" has to behave the same in all instances, Golem and TR tell us that it's always part of resolving the original card.

It's kind of related to the old "+1 Action means I play an Action card now" misunderstanding.

14
Rules Questions / Re: Order of Resolution with Imp and Royal Carriage
« on: August 30, 2018, 01:44:52 pm »
Obviously this was expertly answered. I just want to add that comparing to Golem and TR, like you said, was a good idea. When you resolve Golem, it tells you to play a card, and after that is when you can call Royal Carriage to replay that card. But Golem can't be resolved at this point, because it still has one more instruction (play another card). The same is true of TR. It's even clearer with Procession and Disciple, which tell you to first play a card, then play it again, and then do one more thing (trashing/gaining).

15
What's the functional difference in Embargo?

"Embargo was changed so each Curse gained per token on a pile is a separate event, rather than gaining all of them at once."

Is this actually a functional difference? It was ruled with first edition wording that the gains still happen one at a time (if there was only 1 Curse left, you could still reveal Trader twice to gain 2 Silvers). Is there another on-Gain effect that could come into play here?

The point is that Embargo 1E was one ability (when-buy ability), which matters if Haggler's when-buy ability also triggers at the same time. Within that ability, each gain is a separate effect. (This is in my doc.)

EDIT: Your Hoard example is correct. Also Talisman, Noble Brigand, Farmland, Stonemason, etc.

16
Iím secretly hoping that at some point they will release a rewording update pack.   Even in base and intrigue there were a few cards that got small rule changes by rewording the cards.  Maybe there are enough out of date (but not deprecated) cards now that there would be a market for an update pack to adddress those - including cards that need the coin token to coffers rework.
how many cards were reworded?

Many many were reworded, but just a few were reworded to alter the function of the card: Embargo, Masquerade, Mine, Moneylender, Outpost, Possession, Scheme, Stash, Throne Room and Trade Route. Possession was already changed via a ruling (in Empires rulebook), but then changed again in the printed 2nd edition card. In addition there are the Guilds cards that use "Coffers". I have more details in the document in my sig.

17
All of Dominion 2nd Edition, as of Renaissance, will include 322 Kingdom cards, 34 Events, 21 Landmarks, and most likely no more than a total of 23 Artifacts and Projects.

Well, there are also 5 Ruins, 3 Shelters, 7 Heirlooms, 29 Boons/Hexes/States, and 24 other non-Kingdom cards. Including the 6 split piles and the extra 9 Knights and 7 Castles, there are 467 unique cards in 2nd edition Dominion (not counting base Treasures and Victory cards) - plus Artifacts/Projects.

18
Rules Questions / Re: "in play" on Royal Carriage
« on: August 18, 2018, 08:36:52 pm »
When Royal Carriage refers to "still in play," it implicitly means in your own personal play area. That's my obscure ruling that will have no effect except to confuse people who read the wiki or look at Punchball's document.

I (AKA Punchball) have elected not to add more confusion to the world and haven't added anything at all about the possibilty to play other players' cards. My rough estimate is that this will come up once every 2.5 trillion real games of Dominion, so I thought it might not be worth it. Unfortunately it means that I now have to change the name of my rules document.

EDIT: I think nobody got my sarcasm.

19
Rules Questions / Re: Duplicate + spirits
« on: July 10, 2018, 06:56:43 pm »
This is somewhat related to this thread: http://forum.shuffleit.nl/index.php?topic=2936.0

20
Well, I just played this kingdom: Duke, Junk Dealer, Margrave, Vampire, Bank, Engineer, Farming Village, Miser, Rats, Wandering Minstrel. Both went for trashing via Rats and Junk Dealer, and village + Margrave. I also got a Vampire, but only attacked with it a few times. Nobody got Miser, I think it's too slow because you want to start attacking and trashing. So we had Vampire as a gainer and Miser as +coin, but still the main way of gaining cards was through treasure, and we each had to buy several silvers/golds. Would this be better as BM + Margrave? I don't think so. Would it be better with treasureless decks? I really don't think so.

21
Rules Questions / Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« on: June 30, 2018, 11:14:58 am »
World A:
4: I first do the Border Village effect. I gain a new card which covers up the Border Village in my discard, and since I only know the top card of my discard, I cannot top-deck Border Village with Watchtower. I can still reveal Watchtower to top-deck or trash the newly gained card, revealing the Border Village below it, but I don't know if this was the same Border Village as before. Furthermore, since I resolved the Border Village `gain' first, revealing the Watchtower can only refer to the most recent gain, and not one before it.

Everything you wrote is correct except this. The conclusion is correct, but there's a mistake in the reasoning. You can still reveal Watchtower for the BV gain, since that window is still open - you're still doing when-gain stuff for the BV gain. You can choose to move the BV, but it will fail. The only reason Watchtower can't move the BV, is that it lost track of it since it was covered up.

This distinction actually matters when you gain Rocks and have a Watchtower.

22
Rules Questions / Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« on: June 30, 2018, 11:05:46 am »
If your game is simple enough, or has a small enough set of cards that you're careful with, it doesn't need such a rule (for example Temporum doesn't have it); past a certain point you need it. You might actually lose track of a card; what then?

That was my "third type", where I could only think of a card actually being shuffled in, which you could have a specific rule for. But I guess you're implying that there are other cases, which doesn't seem unlikely.

These days I think I would go the other way on Throne / Feast; if you can't put a card into play and it isn't there, you don't follow the instructions. That seems like it would work, and well, to follow the instructions we have to know what they are, and this means they're always there when you have to follow them. So it just seems better.

Right, that's a much better general rule than changing the text on Throne Rooms like I suggested, and it would have the same effect.

Note again that Thrones look special but are just the easiest way to get the problems they create. Playing a card a single time can also generate problems.

Yes, that was my "fourth type", a big category. My idea was to allow "losing track" then, assuming that the players know where the card is. Actually, the Princed Hound example was wrong (it doesn't happen), but a Princed Alchemist would be put on your deck and also played by Prince next turn (normally from your hand); and this is actually not so great because the Alchemist could be put on your deck or discarded in the meantime. At the very least the tracking would be horrible. Clearly my rules are not enough.

But I'm still not sure that I agree with you that simply having a card covered up means you should lose track. Given that the current lose-track is in place for all physical movement of cards, I don't see the problem (at least right now). And it would make some counter-intuitive interactions more intuitive and simpler. You could Summon Death Cart, or Watchtower-trash/topdeck whichever card you wanted with Cache, Border Village, etc.

23
Rules Questions / Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« on: June 29, 2018, 01:13:51 pm »
A separate, more doable, idea is scrapping covered-card-is-lost-track-of (the first type in my previous post). That would solve a lot of problems and make the game more intuitive. Unfortunately it's stated in the Dark Ages rulebook.

EDIT: It seems that lose-track is not even mentioned in any other rulebook. So unless you have Dark Ages, you only know about it through the examples given for certain card interactions. But the Hinterlands rulebook, for instance, doesn't mention anything about lose-track weirdness with Border Village. I don't think any rulebook has any examples of a card being lost track of because it's covered.

24
Rules Questions / Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« on: June 29, 2018, 01:10:54 pm »
I wonder if lose-track could never have existed in the first place.

First of all, you have the cases where a card is covered. The problem is that you have stuff like Warrior finding a Tunnel and not being able to trash it because it gets covered by a Gold. I'm pretty sure almost 100% of people who play IRL plays that wrong, because nobody thinks about that rule applying then. Arguably that also goes for all cases with triggered gains on when-gain (or triggered gains on when-trash resulting from when-gain). Almost everybody not intimately familiar with lose-track (or having played a lot online very observantly), wouldn't think that you can't move the card.

Secondly, lose-track is the reason cards played from trash don't jump out*, which was relevant from day 1. But in most cases people don't need to know the rule, because that's the way they play it intuitively - the opposite of Warrior/Tunnel. Of course you need a rule, but it could just be that cards played from trash stay there.

The third type is when the card is actually lost track of for the players. I can think of Inn shuffling in a card. In this case it's obvious that it's lost track of; you hardly need a rule, but it could be a rule about shuffling a card.

The fourth type is cases where a card moved. For instance, abilities moving a card twice: Counterfeit and Procession don't trash a card that moved in the meantime; Vassal doesn't put a Faithful Hound in play after it was set aside; Summon or Replace don't move a gained card that was moved by Watchtower/Royal Seal/Tracker/Travelleing Fair. Or multiple abilities triggered by a card moving: Alchemist, Scheme, Hermit, Prince and Faithful Hound all trigger on discard, so then just one of them can move the card; and we also have Fortress + Possession.

My question is whether lose-track is needed to regulate this type of interaction. Why not just allow that everything happens? All abilities move the card. Well, one weirdness with Watchtower is that it would let you move a card from trash without even gaining it. We could revise the rule about playing from trash to cover both cases: "A card can't move from trash unless an ability lets you can gain it from there." Another weirdness would be that Hound would be put in your hand at end of turn but still be played by Prince the next turn, but I guess that would be okay. (It would be an optional and dumb move.) (Edit: Not a real case, since a Princed Hound can't use its ability.) I can't think of other problems right now.

The fifth type is cards specifically designed to exploit lose-track, like Madman, Prince, Wish. These can't be successfully Throned because of lose-track. A rule about moving cards from trash doesn't help, because these cards move from somewhere else. This type might be a bigger problem. The problem is purely with TR variants. A fix could be to make all TR variants like Royal Carriage: "You may play a card from your hand, then if it's still in play, replay it". (It would mean that Madman and Wish doesn't even give +Actions on second play, but that doesn't really matter.**)

Conclusion: Lose-track is complicated, so I probably haven't covered all cases, but if I designed Dominion from scratch, I might try to do it this way:

Rule 1: A card can't move from trash unless an ability lets you can gain it from there.
Rule 2: A card that is shuffled in a face-down deck can't be moved.
Change Throne Room variants to: "You may play a card from your hand, then if it's still in play, replay it".

The point of these two rules is that they are intuitive. Someone might wonder about moving cards from trash, but most people wouldn't assume that you can without checking the rules at least.

*except when an ability tells you to play a card from the trash: only Necromancer, which specifically prohibits the card from moving.
**Late edit: It would of course, as Donald has pointed out, also mean that things like TR+Feast doesn't work.



25
Rules Questions / Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« on: June 28, 2018, 05:42:59 pm »
But this makes me wonder how Faithful Hound doesn't break lose-track? Since you're allowed to order the cards when you discard several, you could always put the Hound on top, and then no problem. But if you discard several Hounds, I don't see how you can set aside more than one. Donald?
A card can make itself an exception of course, though that's a bad rule to do that with.

I'm going to again go with, it's "as you discard this." Technically this means you could briefly see an extra top-of-discard card with Cellars.

Then it has another timing than Tunnel, since Tunnel can't be "as you discard this", unless you change the ruling that you can't Watchtower a Tunnel-gained Gold when you discard your whole hand.

Not sure why that follows. Even if Tunnel were" as you discard this", you wouldn't be into that timing until all cards, including Watchtower, are being discarded.

Hmm, maybe you're right. In this old thread Donald is saying that it doesn't work to reveal Tunnel before you finish discarding, based on the Watchtower case. That was after I mentioned it. But maybe I only thought about revealing Tunnel either in your hand before discarding, or after putting it in your discard pile before discarding the other cards. I didn't think about revealing it when it's in being-discarded limbo. I guess if you reveal it in limbo, when all your being-discarded cards are in limbo, there is no Watchtower problem.*

I see that Donald has replied while I was writing this. It sounds like being-discarded limbo is when you reveal Tunnels and Hounds, then when all the cards are in the discard pile, you gain Golds. But I guess the Hounds are not set aside then, because then you have the situation of having to fish out Hounds, which also breaks lose-track. So the Hounds get set aside when you reveal them in limbo, I guess.

* Is there a lose-track problem? What is a bunch of cards in limbo anyway? It's not unordered, because the rules say you can order them before discarding. If you order them in your hand and then discard them all, then only one card is on top and the others are covered even in limbo, so it seems lose-track applies. Or maybe it's a fanned out set of cards where no card is on top even if it's ordered. That makes sense. So you separate all to-be-discarded cards from your hand, reveal whichever you want, then put them in discard. You have to reveal all cards at once though, otherwise we get the old "is it the same card?" problem.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 45

Page created in 0.098 seconds with 18 queries.