6301
Goko Dominion Online / Re: bug with tunnel / rebuild
« on: February 05, 2013, 10:53:00 pm »
I reported this bug a while ago. They claimed it had been fixed and would work in the next push. Whoops.
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.
6302
Goko Dominion Online / Re: UI issue: Ruins and piling out
« on: February 05, 2013, 04:56:59 pm »It's really easy to re-size 2D graphics and change placement of graphics in a 2D plane.Said like a programmer, not a UI designer.I'm sure it's not technical difficulty that's blocking interface redesign, but the lack of an acceptable design to change to. Keep in mind that it will need to work for tablets too, since Goko as a company ("Goko is games that go anywhere") have locked themselves into using the same interface for all platforms. Shrinking tappable regions is a big no-no on tablets.
Hey now, I did my share of UI work when I was finishing my Game and Simulation programming curriculum. Actually, considering I was one of the few people who understood what was going on, I did 3 or 4 people's share of UI work.
I guess my problem is the whole mentality of wanting to do something that will work on any platform. Build to your target, make sure that environment works properly, then think about the tweaks necessary to port to a new one. Call me old school, but I think I'd rather wait a while for each new platform then have the mess they are in now, where it functions well on some PCs and other users report spotty performance at best, and the best we've heard out of the tablet scene is 'yeah I can get through a game or two'.
I don't mean to keep dumping on Goko, I know I got a rep for being negative, but man, I like things that are done well, and it hasn't really hit my standard yet.
I agree with this, but I feel compelled to mention that Goko Dominion works great on my 4th gen iPad through Safari and I have yet to have it crash. I'm sure I've played at least 8 to 12 games in a row on it at some point. They've definitely made improvements. But as you say, they do have a ways to go before delivering a professional product.
6303
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Scout in Envoy-BM Games
« on: February 05, 2013, 02:16:21 pm »
Scout really is just primarily an Intrigue-specific combo card. For Nobles/Harem/Great Hall, obviously, but it's more than that. There is an abundance of cards in Intrigue that benefit from [reordering/having knowledge of] the top of your deck. Wishing Well, Steward, Pawn, all the other cantrips, etc.
6304
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Scout in Envoy-BM Games
« on: February 04, 2013, 07:07:38 pm »NoIf you look on my CR page, you will see that I have never bought Scout once.General rule of thumb: Never buy Scout. Ever.
That's the obvious answer...and for a reason I guess. I don't think I've ever bought scout and not regretted it.
Well, not to nitpick, but that means you have no basis for comparison, at least drawing from your own decks.
On the other hand, if you refused to buy Mountebank and kept losing all your Mountebank games because of that, you'd probably figure out pretty fast that it's not usually a good idea. If that's never happened for Scout, I suppose that says something right there.
Out of curiosity, have you ever lost to an opponent who did buy (and play) Scout? I'm just curious. Wouldn't surprise me if it's never happened.
Wait, I found one!
http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20120522-102930-188a7b99.html
Of course, the Scout did your opponent almost zero good, so this doesn't prove anything.
6305
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Scout in Envoy-BM Games
« on: February 04, 2013, 06:38:25 pm »If you look on my CR page, you will see that I have never bought Scout once.General rule of thumb: Never buy Scout. Ever.
That's the obvious answer...and for a reason I guess. I don't think I've ever bought scout and not regretted it.
Well, not to nitpick, but that means you have no basis for comparison, at least drawing from your own decks.
On the other hand, if you refused to buy Mountebank and kept losing all your Mountebank games because of that, you'd probably figure out pretty fast that it's not usually a good idea. If that's never happened for Scout, I suppose that says something right there.
Out of curiosity, have you ever lost to an opponent who did buy (and play) Scout? I'm just curious. Wouldn't surprise me if it's never happened.
6306
Dominion Articles / Re: Opening develop/terminal 4$
« on: February 04, 2013, 04:08:09 pm »dondon, I'm surprised you don't have more to say on this topic. I seem to remember you saying in no uncertain terms that the purpose of opening Develop/$4 was NOT to have them collide. I'm not claiming you're right or wrong, but as someone who holds a view diametrically opposed to the OP, you'd make an excellent devil's advocate for this article.
Well, I didn't understand the OP very clearly (but now I do), and my point was that your plan should not bank on a 30% chance of success if you're opening Develop. Or if it is, then you were really far up a creek without a paddle in the first place. Typically I do not open Develop to get a 5/3 topdecked during the first reshuffle; I get it to turn my Estates into something good, and then maybe later on I can use it to do other cool stuff.
Makes sense. That being said, here are two questions I have for you.
1. Do you generally consider opening Develop/$4 Terminal as a viable option (whether or not you want them to collide)?
2. If you do make such an opening and your Develop collides with both an Estate and your $4 purchse on turn 3, what do you do?
We talked about opening Develop/$4 Non-terminal in our previous discussion, but I don't believe we covered this.
6307
Dominion Articles / Re: Opening develop/terminal 4$
« on: February 04, 2013, 03:48:58 pm »Yes, and you cycle -1 card.
dondon, I'm surprised you don't have more to say on this topic. I seem to remember you saying in no uncertain terms that the purpose of opening Develop/$4 was NOT to have them collide. I'm not claiming you're right or wrong, but as someone who holds a view diametrically opposed to the OP, you'd make an excellent devil's advocate for this article.
6308
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Playing Sea Hag when the Curses are gone
« on: February 04, 2013, 03:45:28 pm »Somebody should mention that if your opponent has a horse traders or tunnel in their deck, you really shouldn't play a dead sea hag.
Go ahead and take that last bit out of context.
Well, except if you're leading and there's only one gold left with 2 piles empty.
The opponent isn't forced to reveal his Tunnel to gain a Gold, though. Or did I misunderstand what you meant?
6309
Dominion Articles / Re: Opening develop/terminal 4$
« on: February 04, 2013, 03:07:16 pm »Cool! But I don't understand why you're saying a Develop play is costing you tempo. Is it because the cards go on your deck, delaying shuffle? Cause that seems to me like it's gaining tempo.
I mean, imagine if, on turn 3, you Develop a Militia into a Stables and a Scheme. Describing this play as any kind of loss of tempo, let alone "giving a free ghost ship play to your opponent," seems counterintuitive to me.
Agreed. Any tempo you're losing is the result of not playing your $4 card. Putting two good cards on your deck may delay your reshuffle, but as long as one or both of the cards you gain are the ones you want to play most often, putting them on your deck is a gain in tempo, not a loss.
6310
Goko Dominion Online / Re: Not a Goodbye, but a See You Next Time
« on: February 04, 2013, 02:17:05 pm »
You will be missed! Thanks for all your time and patience.
6311
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Scout in Envoy-BM Games
« on: February 04, 2013, 10:09:21 am »General rule of thumb: Never buy Scout. Ever.
Fairgrounds. Or, all your Tournaments were Swindled into Scouts, and there's one left for a 3-pile ending.
That's why it's a general rule of thumb, man. There are exceptions.
6312
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Strongbox
« on: February 03, 2013, 11:47:56 am »
The Copper option needs a boost, I think. It's just so much worse than the other two.
I might make it a Treasure worth $2 and costing $5 or some such.
Strongbox
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
Worth $2. When you play this, choose one: gain a Copper, putting it into your hand; gain a Silver, putting it on top of your deck; or gain a Gold and trash this.
On second thought, probably too powerful.
I might make it a Treasure worth $2 and costing $5 or some such.
Strongbox
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
Worth $2. When you play this, choose one: gain a Copper, putting it into your hand; gain a Silver, putting it on top of your deck; or gain a Gold and trash this.
On second thought, probably too powerful.
6313
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Filling in a gap in the attack paradigm
« on: February 03, 2013, 11:37:37 am »
Well, without thinking about it too long, you could have a Swindler that put the gained card onto the target's deck. I'll have to think more for an interesting and unique Attack.
6314
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Gifter
« on: February 01, 2013, 01:58:09 pm »
This card does create a lot of interesting scenarios.
If you play five Highways and then gifter, the joke's on you.
If you play five Highways and then gifter, the joke's on you.
6315
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Gifter
« on: February 01, 2013, 11:50:36 am »Is this inspired by "Grifter"?Yeah, the title is at least. I haven't looked at the Grifter topic, but I saw its title in the unread topics list.
It's probably fine.
Posting your own ideas for feedback without giving feedback on others' ideas? *boo* *hiss* Bad form!
On topic, though, I very much like the card. I don't think the fact that it's great in most Minion games is a problem at all. If I were testing it, I'd try it at both $4 and $5 price points. $4 might make for very fast games, but in most cases the drawback of the card seems very strong. It's probably a $5 card (or needs tweaking), but testing it at $4 might generate insights.
6316
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: January 31, 2013, 12:24:02 pm »I can pick a poster child for each set though.
Main: Laboratory
Intrigue: Nobles
Seaside: Wharf
Alchemy: Golem
Prosperity: Bank
Cornucopia: Fairgrounds
Hinterlands: Haggler
Dark Ages: Graverobber
It's interesting to me that you chose Bank for Prosperity, considering it would have been an Alchemy card if the sets had come out in the intended order. If Philosopher's Stone were in Prosperity instead, would that still be your pick for the set?
6317
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Clasic_Cards #48 - Tower
« on: January 29, 2013, 11:51:10 am »Very cool idea, but unfortunately this does create some rule resolution issues.
The problem with an on-buy ability that moves a card is that the card hasn't been gained yet. So after the card moves to the top of the player's deck, it would then be gained and move to the discard pile. Either that or it makes on-gain effects lose track of the card. It's messy, regardless.
I'm not convinced that this problem exists. The rules read as though buying is a different form of gaining, and that the purchase and placement are part of one process. The effect of my card replaces the placement altogether; it's not stepping in between, it's rewriting.What if you could reveal the card when a player gained a card during the buy phase? Or just during their buy phase, if you don't want it to work for the Curses that Ill-Gotten Gains gives out?
That would mirror conventional wording more. And offer up a few cute interactions. Looking through the sets, both the "gained during a buy phase" version and my version only have questionable interactions with Possession and Watchtower. (Everything else is rather straight-forward on how it should play out.) Possession would fortunately work the same as with Royal Seal... except I'm not entirely sure how that interaction works. If you've Possessed someone with Royal Seal and you, say, want to buy a Curse and put it on top of their deck, can you? I'd usually think no, but they're both trying to replace where the card ends up which leads me to think the possessing player would have a choice in the matter. Watchtower has a similar issue of which replacement takes precedence. If a player buys a Curse then reveals Watchtower to trash it, then I reveal Tower to top it, whose wins? Furthermore, who has precedence over reacting first?
That last issue might be cause for change. Possibly something like "Whenever a bought card is put into a discard pile..."
Possession's redirection is a would-gain effect and happens before any on-gain effects. Royal Seal can't affect a card gained during a possessed turn.
6318
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Grifter: A workshop/vault attack
« on: January 29, 2013, 09:08:52 am »It just doesn't feel right putting Looter on the card without having Ruins in the wording somewhere.
Do it, dude. It's a type that exists for the sole purpose of putting the Ruins pile out. No reason to have the on-trash penalty.
6319
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Clasic_Cards #48 - Tower
« on: January 29, 2013, 04:19:35 am »
Very cool idea, but unfortunately this does create some rule resolution issues.
The problem with an on-buy ability that moves a card is that the card hasn't been gained yet. So after the card moves to the top of the player's deck, it would then be gained and move to the discard pile. Either that or it makes on-gain effects lose track of the card. It's messy, regardless.
What if you could reveal the card when a player gained a card during the buy phase? Or just during their buy phase, if you don't want it to work for the Curses that Ill-Gotten Gains gives out?
The problem with an on-buy ability that moves a card is that the card hasn't been gained yet. So after the card moves to the top of the player's deck, it would then be gained and move to the discard pile. Either that or it makes on-gain effects lose track of the card. It's messy, regardless.
What if you could reveal the card when a player gained a card during the buy phase? Or just during their buy phase, if you don't want it to work for the Curses that Ill-Gotten Gains gives out?
6320
Goko Dominion Online / Re: Alchemy on Goko
« on: January 28, 2013, 05:12:54 pm »When you put Fortress in hand, are you gaining it? Does it visit the trash pile?
You are not gaining it. I believe it visits the trash pile, yes.
6321
Dominion General Discussion / Re: The Dominion Cards Lists 2013 Edition: $4 cards (Part 1/5)
« on: January 28, 2013, 04:09:35 pm »You can buy Nomad camp early on for use as a Woodcutter, and that's fine. But one of the things you can do with Nomad Camp that you can't do with Woodcutter is to buy it opportunistically. If you're in full-on greening mode and you're trying to delay reshuffles, Nomad Camp can be useful. If I've spent most of the shuffle buying Victory cards and I've got $4 this hand, I'm almost certainly going to want a Nomad Camp over an Estate.
Problem here is that buying a Nomad Camp will only cause a delay in the shuffle about 1/5 of the time...
And the other 4/5 of the time you'll have one more this-shuffle card and one less next-shuffle card for the hand where you reshuffle. It still helps you.
6322
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« on: January 28, 2013, 12:02:55 am »
These are good questions.
It's not exactly an official ruling, but you can find what Donald has to say about this here. Until and unless an actual ruling is made, I'd go with his semi-ruling and say that you get to choose whether it goes to your hand or the top of your deck.
This question has a more concrete answer than the previous one. Even though Inn says "(including this)", that only applies if it's in your discard pile. There are other reasons it might not be. You might have played a Highway and gained an Inn with Armory, for instance.
What happens if I gain a Nomad Camp using Exchange? Where does it go? Exchange says that the gained card goes to my hand, while Nomad Camp says that it goes to the top of my deck.
It's not exactly an official ruling, but you can find what Donald has to say about this here. Until and unless an actual ruling is made, I'd go with his semi-ruling and say that you get to choose whether it goes to your hand or the top of your deck.
Edit: As a related issue, if you gain an Inn directly to your hand, does that mean you cannot shuffle it into your deck? It's a little ambiguous in Inn's text, since it says to look through your discard pile for actions "(including this)", since ordinarily when you gain the Inn it will be in your discard pile. It seems like if Exchange gains directly to your hand, then when you gain an Inn you'd be able to shuffle in your other actions, but not this new Inn, since it's an action in your hand, and not in fact an action in your discard pile.
This question has a more concrete answer than the previous one. Even though Inn says "(including this)", that only applies if it's in your discard pile. There are other reasons it might not be. You might have played a Highway and gained an Inn with Armory, for instance.
6323
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« on: January 27, 2013, 03:10:25 pm »When placing it "anywhere" in your deck, does that mean you get to see your deck?
No, it works similarly to Stash. But since you know where the Inventor is when you're placing it, it doesn't need a different back.
EDIT: A little more background info: at first I was testing a version that said, "+1 Action and put this on the top or bottom of your deck." Then I realized, why not let you put it anywhere? The answer to that question is AP, but I'm hoping that's not going to turn out to be an issue. The 'anywhere in your deck' wording is slightly simpler and much cooler.
6324
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« on: January 27, 2013, 03:03:40 pm »
I've finally gotten a bit more playtesting in with the cards, and I've made a few tweaks.
First of all, the wording on Exchange is fixed so that it doesn't count itself as a 'trashed card' for the purposes of gaining cards. (Thanks, Bron!) The wording of Enforcer has been simplified, but it's functionally the same.
Conscripts has had its '+$2' and 'gain a Silver' options replaced with '+$3' and 'gain a Gold'. It turns out this is not too powerful after all, since Conscripts is a one-shot that you sacrifice a fair bit of time to get your hands on.
I'm testing a new version of Clerk (I'm trying to differentiate it from Scavenger), but I'm not sure I'm happy with it yet. It digs for an Action to leave on top, and my wife used it and some Tunnels to empty the Gold pile and win handily. I probably didn't play my best, but it seems too cheap for a Tunnel enabler that's even better than Young Witch. We'll see how that shakes out.
The biggest reason I'm posting, though, is to get feedback on my latest version of Inventor. The most recent version was this:
Inventor
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Choose one: +3 Cards; or +1 Action and set this card aside, returning it to your hand at the start of your next turn.
There were concerns that it was too powerful (both for BM-strategies and engines) and that the setting aside meant that there was no opportunity cost for repeatedly setting it aside.
To remedy these issues, it was suggested that it put itself back on top of the deck instead. I didn't like this exact solution because it meant that two Inventors in hand always collided. Putting one back on your deck just meant drawing it dead with the other one. Putting both back on your deck meant getting only 3 other cards in your next hand to get a Village.
The new versions looks like this:
Inventor
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Choose one: +3 Cards and +1 Buy; or +1 Action and put this anywhere in your deck.
So it's never an 'extra' card in hand, like it would be if you set it aside. But if you draw two Inventors in a hand, you can play one, put it four cards down in your deck, and play the other one for +3 Cards. Of course, you can't do this if you don't have at least three cards in your deck, so it's not a guaranteed solution. Also, I gave it an extra buy, having removed the +1 Buy from Tax Collector. I think it'll give it more utility in more situations without boosting its power too much.
I'm going to test it more, of course. I'm hoping this will be the last iteration of the card. If you have an opinion about the new version, I'd love to hear it!
First of all, the wording on Exchange is fixed so that it doesn't count itself as a 'trashed card' for the purposes of gaining cards. (Thanks, Bron!) The wording of Enforcer has been simplified, but it's functionally the same.
Conscripts has had its '+$2' and 'gain a Silver' options replaced with '+$3' and 'gain a Gold'. It turns out this is not too powerful after all, since Conscripts is a one-shot that you sacrifice a fair bit of time to get your hands on.
I'm testing a new version of Clerk (I'm trying to differentiate it from Scavenger), but I'm not sure I'm happy with it yet. It digs for an Action to leave on top, and my wife used it and some Tunnels to empty the Gold pile and win handily. I probably didn't play my best, but it seems too cheap for a Tunnel enabler that's even better than Young Witch. We'll see how that shakes out.
The biggest reason I'm posting, though, is to get feedback on my latest version of Inventor. The most recent version was this:
Inventor
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Choose one: +3 Cards; or +1 Action and set this card aside, returning it to your hand at the start of your next turn.
There were concerns that it was too powerful (both for BM-strategies and engines) and that the setting aside meant that there was no opportunity cost for repeatedly setting it aside.
To remedy these issues, it was suggested that it put itself back on top of the deck instead. I didn't like this exact solution because it meant that two Inventors in hand always collided. Putting one back on your deck just meant drawing it dead with the other one. Putting both back on your deck meant getting only 3 other cards in your next hand to get a Village.
The new versions looks like this:
Inventor
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Choose one: +3 Cards and +1 Buy; or +1 Action and put this anywhere in your deck.
So it's never an 'extra' card in hand, like it would be if you set it aside. But if you draw two Inventors in a hand, you can play one, put it four cards down in your deck, and play the other one for +3 Cards. Of course, you can't do this if you don't have at least three cards in your deck, so it's not a guaranteed solution. Also, I gave it an extra buy, having removed the +1 Buy from Tax Collector. I think it'll give it more utility in more situations without boosting its power too much.
I'm going to test it more, of course. I'm hoping this will be the last iteration of the card. If you have an opinion about the new version, I'd love to hear it!
6325
Goko Dominion Online / Re: Alchemy on Goko
« on: January 27, 2013, 02:16:39 pm »This one seems to be taking quite a long time to release. Given all the other sets that have been implemented, one would think the Alchemy cards would be super easy to implement (except Possession), unless the Goko programmers did something silly like not planning ahead for potions as part of the card cost when they implemented all of the other cards.
This is the kicker. It's Possession that's taking so long. I'm guessing it requires a whole new, unique interface. Also, it's has some rules subtleties that are hard to get right.
I'm assuming that's also why we haven't seen Black Market or Stash yet. They each require a unique interface.