Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 3 [All]

Author Topic: Nonterminal percentage  (Read 18142 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
Nonterminal percentage
« on: January 23, 2014, 11:58:13 pm »
+4

So, the base set has way fewer non-terminal Actions among its kingdom cards than any expansion except Prosperity (which makes up for its small number of non-terminal Actions with a large number of Treasures). Any idea why this is the case?

Prosperity: 26%
4 nonterminal, 12 terminal, 1 King's Court

Dominion: 27%
6 nonterminal, 18 terminal, 1 Throne Room

Hinterlands: 37.5%
6 nonterminal, 11 terminal, 3 variable

Seaside: 38%
10 nonterminal, 16 terminal

Intrigue: 41%
7 nonterminal, 11 terminal, 5 variable

Guilds: 42%
5 nonterminal, 7 terminal

Cornucopia: 45%
5 nonterminal, 6 terminal
…Maybe demote it to 42%, since Tournament can add terminals to your deck.

Dark Ages: 45%
13.2 nonterminal, 16.8 terminal,  2 variable, 1 Procession

Alchemy: 72%
6 nonterminal, 3 terminal, 1 Golem
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2005
  • Respect: +2109
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #1 on: January 24, 2014, 03:44:22 am »
0

What are the ratios if you count Treasures as non terminals?

I can understand not wanting 5 minute turns in the base set, but I don't think it had to be that way. I've been pretty vocal about my distaste for the base set around here.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3188
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #2 on: January 24, 2014, 07:21:40 am »
+1

I don't think it makes a lot of sense not to count treasure cards. For the most part, treasures are non-terminals with the benefit that you can't draw them dead. So the stats would probably be more interesting if you counted (non-terminal + treasure)/(non-terminal + treasure + terminal) for every expansion. KC+TR+PR can also be counted as non-terminals because you want them to collide with other actions.

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1751
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #3 on: January 24, 2014, 11:29:52 am »
0

Are you counting Stables as variable? I guess it is safe to say it is non-terminal, but still, technically it can be either.

I guess correctly that you are not counting Ruins nor Necropolis?

How are you counting Reactions and Durations? Terminal Durations are, in some sense, half-non-terminal (for instance, you usually allow about twice as many in a villageless deck as you allow regular terminal Actions).
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #4 on: January 24, 2014, 11:47:48 am »
0

Are you counting Stables as variable? I guess it is safe to say it is non-terminal, but still, technically it can be either.

I guess correctly that you are not counting Ruins nor Necropolis?

How are you counting Reactions and Durations? Terminal Durations are, in some sense, half-non-terminal (for instance, you usually allow about twice as many in a villageless deck as you allow regular terminal Actions).

I definitely wouldn't call Stables terminal, because there's no (edge cases, blah blah) reason to play it if you aren't using its non-terminal ability.

However, cards like Nobles and Spice Merchant could definitely be considered either. But in general I would call something non-terminal if it's possibly to play it with only 1 action remaining, and still play another card after. Procession, Throne Room, and King's Court being the exceptions.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #5 on: January 24, 2014, 11:52:35 am »
0

Are you counting Stables as variable? I guess it is safe to say it is non-terminal, but still, technically it can be either.

I guess correctly that you are not counting Ruins nor Necropolis?

How are you counting Reactions and Durations? Terminal Durations are, in some sense, half-non-terminal (for instance, you usually allow about twice as many in a villageless deck as you allow regular terminal Actions).

I definitely wouldn't call Stables terminal, because there's no (edge cases, blah blah) reason to play it if you aren't using its non-terminal ability.

However, cards like Nobles and Spice Merchant could definitely be considered either. But in general I would call something non-terminal if it's possibly to play it with only 1 action remaining, and still play another card after. Procession, Throne Room, and King's Court being the exceptions.

I wouldn't make exceptions for the Throne Room variants at all. I consider them all to be firmly non-terminal.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #6 on: January 24, 2014, 11:59:32 am »
0

Are you counting Stables as variable? I guess it is safe to say it is non-terminal, but still, technically it can be either.

I guess correctly that you are not counting Ruins nor Necropolis?

How are you counting Reactions and Durations? Terminal Durations are, in some sense, half-non-terminal (for instance, you usually allow about twice as many in a villageless deck as you allow regular terminal Actions).

I definitely wouldn't call Stables terminal, because there's no (edge cases, blah blah) reason to play it if you aren't using its non-terminal ability.

However, cards like Nobles and Spice Merchant could definitely be considered either. But in general I would call something non-terminal if it's possibly to play it with only 1 action remaining, and still play another card after. Procession, Throne Room, and King's Court being the exceptions.

I wouldn't make exceptions for the Throne Room variants at all. I consider them all to be firmly non-terminal.

I consider them a 3rd category; neither terminal nor non-terminal. More often than not, they cause an action to be taken away from your bank (given that more than half the actions are terminal). But they do also let you play 2 terminals on a turn, which makes them more like a Village.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7861
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #7 on: January 24, 2014, 12:18:41 pm »
0

Couldn't duration cards be considered somewhat special?  In the following turn, it's "as if" you played an additional action.
Logged

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #8 on: January 24, 2014, 12:53:49 pm »
0

Are you counting Stables as variable? I guess it is safe to say it is non-terminal, but still, technically it can be either.

I counted Stables as variable; it seemed the most accountable way to deal with the question.

Quote
I guess correctly that you are not counting Ruins nor Necropolis?

Right; maybe I should have counted Necropolis, I don't know. It doesn't matter whether Madman and Mercenary are counted, since they cancel each other out.

Quote
How are you counting Reactions and Durations? Terminal Durations are, in some sense, half-non-terminal (for instance, you usually allow about twice as many in a villageless deck as you allow regular terminal Actions).

Eh, if you have two Wharfs in your hand without +Actions, you can only play one of them; that's terminal enough for me.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7861
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #9 on: January 24, 2014, 01:16:59 pm »
0



Quote
How are you counting Reactions and Durations? Terminal Durations are, in some sense, half-non-terminal (for instance, you usually allow about twice as many in a villageless deck as you allow regular terminal Actions).

Eh, if you have two Wharfs in your hand without +Actions, you can only play one of them; that's terminal enough for me.

Yeah, but if you played a Wharf last turn and draw a Wharf this turn, you've effectively played two terminal draws this turn.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11808
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12846
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #10 on: January 24, 2014, 01:24:55 pm »
+1



Quote
How are you counting Reactions and Durations? Terminal Durations are, in some sense, half-non-terminal (for instance, you usually allow about twice as many in a villageless deck as you allow regular terminal Actions).

Eh, if you have two Wharfs in your hand without +Actions, you can only play one of them; that's terminal enough for me.

Yeah, but if you played a Wharf last turn and draw a Wharf this turn, you've effectively played two terminal draws this turn.
The fact that a single Wharf alone is as powerful as two terminal draws doesn't make it any less terminal.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Warfreak2

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1149
  • KC->KC->[Scavenger, Scavenger, Lookout]
  • Respect: +1324
    • View Profile
    • Music what I do
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #11 on: January 24, 2014, 01:26:22 pm »
0

If you get to play an action card without using one of your actions, then whatever allowed you to do that is non-terminal in the same sense as Throne Room, King's Court, Procession and Golem.

If Fishing Village only gave +1 Action on the current turn, but still +1 Action next turn, it would still be a village.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2014, 01:27:51 pm by Warfreak2 »
Logged
If the only engine on the board is Procession->Conspirator, I will play it.

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #12 on: January 24, 2014, 01:28:10 pm »
+6

It doesn't matter whether Madman and Mercenary are counted, since they cancel each other out.

Noooo, that's so wrong! If you add 1 card to each side, then the percentage will be closer to 50% than it was before. (If you add 10000 cards to each side, the percentage would suddenly become almost 50%). In order to cancel out a set with 25% non-terminals, you would need to add 1 non-terminal and 3 terminals, not 1 of each.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7861
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #13 on: January 24, 2014, 01:34:23 pm »
0



Quote
How are you counting Reactions and Durations? Terminal Durations are, in some sense, half-non-terminal (for instance, you usually allow about twice as many in a villageless deck as you allow regular terminal Actions).

Eh, if you have two Wharfs in your hand without +Actions, you can only play one of them; that's terminal enough for me.

Yeah, but if you played a Wharf last turn and draw a Wharf this turn, you've effectively played two terminal draws this turn.
The fact that a single Wharf alone is as powerful as two terminal draws doesn't make it any less terminal.

But I'm not comparing the single Wharf to two terminals, I'm comparing the latter half of the previous Wharf and the first half of a currrent Wharf to two terminals.  Okay the distinction is minor, but the Peddler still costs $4 less instead of $2.  Or your single Wharf from last turn is like playing a nonterminal Smithy this turn.

So yes a Wharf is terminal, but it's kind of like a terminal*.. the functionality is different, and you probably require less Villages compared to regular terminals as someone mentioned.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11808
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12846
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #14 on: January 24, 2014, 01:43:15 pm »
0

If you get to play an action card without using one of your actions, then whatever allowed you to do that is non-terminal in the same sense as Throne Room, King's Court, Procession and Golem.

If Fishing Village only gave +1 Action on the current turn, but still +1 Action next turn, it would still be a village.
But you don't actually play Fishing Village again. You play it once, and it gives an action to replace the action you spent. Later, it gives you an extra action. Just like Village, except that Village gives the extra action immediately.
But I'm not comparing the single Wharf to two terminals, I'm comparing the latter half of the previous Wharf and the first half of a currrent Wharf to two terminals.  Okay the distinction is minor, but the Peddler still costs $4 less instead of $2.  Or your single Wharf from last turn is like playing a nonterminal Smithy this turn.

So yes a Wharf is terminal, but it's kind of like a terminal*.. the functionality is different, and you probably require less Villages compared to regular terminals as someone mentioned.
Peddler is an edge case. Your single Wharf from last turn is more like playing a Council Room last turn, except that the effect is just spread over two turns and is more powerful. It's true that you require less villages, but that's because Wharfs stay out and miss the reshuffle a lot.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7861
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #15 on: January 24, 2014, 01:47:17 pm »
0

If you get to play an action card without using one of your actions, then whatever allowed you to do that is non-terminal in the same sense as Throne Room, King's Court, Procession and Golem.

If Fishing Village only gave +1 Action on the current turn, but still +1 Action next turn, it would still be a village.
But you don't actually play Fishing Village again. You play it once, and it gives an action to replace the action you spent. Later, it gives you an extra action. Just like Village, except that Village gives the extra action immediately.
But I'm not comparing the single Wharf to two terminals, I'm comparing the latter half of the previous Wharf and the first half of a currrent Wharf to two terminals.  Okay the distinction is minor, but the Peddler still costs $4 less instead of $2.  Or your single Wharf from last turn is like playing a nonterminal Smithy this turn.

So yes a Wharf is terminal, but it's kind of like a terminal*.. the functionality is different, and you probably require less Villages compared to regular terminals as someone mentioned.
Peddler is an edge case. Your single Wharf from last turn is more like playing a Council Room last turn, except that the effect is just spread over two turns and is more powerful. It's true that you require less villages, but that's because Wharfs stay out and miss the reshuffle a lot.

But that's significant when thinking of terminal collision, right? They stay out, which would change the collision probabilities (I would assume).
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3188
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #16 on: January 24, 2014, 01:56:33 pm »
0

If you get to play an action card without using one of your actions, then whatever allowed you to do that is non-terminal in the same sense as Throne Room, King's Court, Procession and Golem.

If Fishing Village only gave +1 Action on the current turn, but still +1 Action next turn, it would still be a village.
But you don't actually play Fishing Village again. You play it once, and it gives an action to replace the action you spent. Later, it gives you an extra action. Just like Village, except that Village gives the extra action immediately.
But I'm not comparing the single Wharf to two terminals, I'm comparing the latter half of the previous Wharf and the first half of a currrent Wharf to two terminals.  Okay the distinction is minor, but the Peddler still costs $4 less instead of $2.  Or your single Wharf from last turn is like playing a nonterminal Smithy this turn.

So yes a Wharf is terminal, but it's kind of like a terminal*.. the functionality is different, and you probably require less Villages compared to regular terminals as someone mentioned.
Peddler is an edge case. Your single Wharf from last turn is more like playing a Council Room last turn, except that the effect is just spread over two turns and is more powerful. It's true that you require less villages, but that's because Wharfs stay out and miss the reshuffle a lot.

But that's significant when thinking of terminal collision, right? They stay out, which would change the collision probabilities (I would assume).

wharf is so ridiculous that you actually buy two of them without having any villages quite often. you would not do that if they wouldn't have the duration effect.

the way i see it is that it costs 1/2 action. notice that you could rephrase wharf to:

+2 cards
+1 buy
at the beginning of your next turn, move this to your hand, +1action and you have to play it immediately.

in that way it would also be "half" a terminal

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11808
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12846
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #17 on: January 24, 2014, 02:03:34 pm »
+1

the way i see it is that it costs 1/2 action. notice that you could rephrase wharf to:

+2 cards
+1 buy
at the beginning of your next turn, move this to your hand, +1action and you have to play it immediately.

in that way it would also be "half" a terminal
You can also rephrase Smithy to:

+1 card
If this is your first or second time playing this this turn, move this to your hand, +1 action and you have to play it immediately.

Doesn't make it a 1/3 terminal.

And I would totally buy two $5 cards that just say +4 cards, +2 buys if I was playing big money. That card is ridiculously overpowered.

If you get to play an action card without using one of your actions, then whatever allowed you to do that is non-terminal in the same sense as Throne Room, King's Court, Procession and Golem.

If Fishing Village only gave +1 Action on the current turn, but still +1 Action next turn, it would still be a village.
But you don't actually play Fishing Village again. You play it once, and it gives an action to replace the action you spent. Later, it gives you an extra action. Just like Village, except that Village gives the extra action immediately.
But I'm not comparing the single Wharf to two terminals, I'm comparing the latter half of the previous Wharf and the first half of a currrent Wharf to two terminals.  Okay the distinction is minor, but the Peddler still costs $4 less instead of $2.  Or your single Wharf from last turn is like playing a nonterminal Smithy this turn.

So yes a Wharf is terminal, but it's kind of like a terminal*.. the functionality is different, and you probably require less Villages compared to regular terminals as someone mentioned.
Peddler is an edge case. Your single Wharf from last turn is more like playing a Council Room last turn, except that the effect is just spread over two turns and is more powerful. It's true that you require less villages, but that's because Wharfs stay out and miss the reshuffle a lot.

But that's significant when thinking of terminal collision, right? They stay out, which would change the collision probabilities (I would assume).
It is somewhat significant, yes.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #18 on: January 24, 2014, 02:08:55 pm »
0

It doesn't matter whether Madman and Mercenary are counted, since they cancel each other out.

Noooo, that's so wrong! If you add 1 card to each side, then the percentage will be closer to 50% than it was before.

I wouldn't be adding 1 card to each side; I'd be counting Urchin as half terminal and Hermit as half nonterminal. The unit of counting here is Kingdom Action cards, not differently-named Action cards.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #19 on: January 24, 2014, 02:12:06 pm »
0

It doesn't matter whether Madman and Mercenary are counted, since they cancel each other out.

Noooo, that's so wrong! If you add 1 card to each side, then the percentage will be closer to 50% than it was before.

I wouldn't be adding 1 card to each side; I'd be counting Urchin as half terminal and Hermit as half nonterminal. The unit of counting here is Kingdom Action cards, not differently-named Action cards.

But even so, counting each one as half, or not counting either because they're both special, is different than counting 1 as terminal and 1 as non-terminal.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #20 on: January 24, 2014, 02:12:58 pm »
+3


wharf is so ridiculous that you actually buy two of them without having any villages quite often. you would not do that if they wouldn't have the duration effect.


Um, I'll buy 2 Smithies or 2 Council Rooms on a board without any Villages plenty often...
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #21 on: January 24, 2014, 02:25:16 pm »
+3


wharf is so ridiculous that you actually buy two of them without having any villages quite often. you would not do that if they wouldn't have the duration effect.


Um, I'll buy 2 Smithies or 2 Council Rooms on a board without any Villages plenty often...

Agreed, but I'd buy 3 or 4 Wharves in the same situation.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3188
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #22 on: January 24, 2014, 02:30:16 pm »
0

And I would totally buy two $5 cards that just say +4 cards, +2 buys if I was playing big money. That card is ridiculously overpowered.
wharf does just that, except that you need twice as many of them. but you wouldn't buy two +4cards+2buys if you draw your deck anyway with a stables or hunting party engine. the point is simply that you only need one action to support two wharfs in a working deck, so it only costs 1/2 action. rephrasing smithy like that is balls, because it happens in the same turn
« Last Edit: January 24, 2014, 02:34:55 pm by silverspawn »
Logged

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #23 on: January 24, 2014, 03:15:45 pm »
+2

the point is simply that you only need one action to support two wharfs in a working deck, so it only costs 1/2 action.

This doesn't make sense. Wharf costs one Action to play. If you're drawing your deck, you need two Wharfs in your deck to be able to regularly do so, but you're still only playing one Wharf per turn.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11808
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12846
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #24 on: January 24, 2014, 03:19:28 pm »
+1

And I would totally buy two $5 cards that just say +4 cards, +2 buys if I was playing big money. That card is ridiculously overpowered.
wharf does just that, except that you need twice as many of them. but you wouldn't buy two +4cards+2buys if you draw your deck anyway with a stables or hunting party engine. the point is simply that you only need one action to support two wharfs in a working deck, so it only costs 1/2 action. rephrasing smithy like that is balls, because it happens in the same turn
That's like saying that Pillage is entirely non-terminal because you can buy another Pillage every turn without having to deal with terminal collision if you're always drawing your entire deck.

Yes, you can only play one Wharf per two turns, but that is a limitation, not an advantage. It's not that you need only one action to support two Wharfs in a working deck, it's that you need two Wharfs to be able to play one Wharf every turn.

Rephrasing Smithy like that is, indeed, balls. That's what I was demonstrating. Rephrasing cards like that is balls.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #25 on: January 24, 2014, 03:21:27 pm »
0

It doesn't matter whether Madman and Mercenary are counted, since they cancel each other out.

Noooo, that's so wrong! If you add 1 card to each side, then the percentage will be closer to 50% than it was before.

I wouldn't be adding 1 card to each side; I'd be counting Urchin as half terminal and Hermit as half nonterminal. The unit of counting here is Kingdom Action cards, not differently-named Action cards.

But even so, counting each one as half, or not counting either because they're both special, is different than counting 1 as terminal and 1 as non-terminal.

I think I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. Dark Ages has 33 Kingdom Action cards, of which 18.3 are terminal by my criteria (counting Knights as 4/5, and Procession, Squire, and Band of Misfits as 1/2 each). The numerator of 18.3 and denominator of 33 don't change if you count Urchin as non-terminal and Hermit as terminal, or if you count Urchin and Hermit as both 1/2 terminal.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3188
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #26 on: January 24, 2014, 03:30:37 pm »
0

Quote from: Awaclus
Rephrasing Smithy like that is, indeed, balls. That's what I was demonstrating. Rephrasing cards like that is balls.
well, no. imgagine a card which says
+2 cards
+1 buy
at the beginning of your next turn, put this into your hand

that could be a legit card, only that it would be too weak for $5 (and you have to rephrase slightly so it only comes back once). now compare it to wharf, and you'll have to admit that wharf is the same only that it requires 1 less action. in this way wharf is half terminal

of course, you can also compare it to this card:
+4 cards
+2 buys
and then you have a card which does the same only that you require half as many to do it. in this way wharf is terminal, only it has, as you put it, a limitation.

which way you choose to look at it seems competely arbitrary. I come from the angle of "how many can you support without villages" and therefore I'd say wharf is half terminal.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2014, 03:34:56 pm by silverspawn »
Logged

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #27 on: January 24, 2014, 03:48:48 pm »
+3

which way you choose to look at it seems competely arbitrary. I come from the angle of "how many can you support without villages" and therefore I'd say wharf is half terminal.

See, I come from the angle of "Does it give you +Action when you play it".
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #28 on: January 24, 2014, 03:56:50 pm »
+2

It doesn't matter whether Madman and Mercenary are counted, since they cancel each other out.

Noooo, that's so wrong! If you add 1 card to each side, then the percentage will be closer to 50% than it was before.

I wouldn't be adding 1 card to each side; I'd be counting Urchin as half terminal and Hermit as half nonterminal. The unit of counting here is Kingdom Action cards, not differently-named Action cards.

But even so, counting each one as half, or not counting either because they're both special, is different than counting 1 as terminal and 1 as non-terminal.

I think I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. Dark Ages has 33 Kingdom Action cards, of which 18.3 are terminal by my criteria (counting Knights as 4/5, and Procession, Squire, and Band of Misfits as 1/2 each). The numerator of 18.3 and denominator of 33 don't change if you count Urchin as non-terminal and Hermit as terminal, or if you count Urchin and Hermit as both 1/2 terminal.

Ok, so you'd just be changing Hermit from 0 to .5, and changing Urchin from 1 to .5? That makes sense then, sorry. It sounded originally like you were talking about the possibility of including both Madman and Mercenary.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1102
  • Respect: +2144
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #29 on: January 24, 2014, 04:12:15 pm »
0

now compare it to wharf, and you'll have to admit that wharf is the same only that it requires 1 less action.

Wharf also gives you 1 more card (since it stays in you're play area to do something when you already have a 5-card hand).

which way you choose to look at it seems competely arbitrary. I come from the angle of "how many can you support without villages" and therefore I'd say wharf is half terminal.

It doesn't make any sense to compare it to the first one, because the first one uses this new, invented "super-terminal" mechanic.  It's a terminal the first turn you play it, and the second turn you play it; that's not something any official card does, so it's not something that we expect when we're just talking about arbitrary terminals.  The fact that Wharf is "less terminal" than the card you described only implies that Wharf is not a "super-terminal"; it says nothing about whether Wharf is actually terminal or non-terminal.

The significance of being terminal is that each terminal in your deck increases the likelihood of terminal collision.  Adding a Wharf to your deck increases that chance by roughly the same amount as adding any other terminal to your deck would (slightly more since it's a drawer, but slightly less since it misses the re-shuffle more often).  The first card you described increases the chance of terminal collision much more than most (all?) existing terminals, so saying Wharf is "less terminal" than it doesn't mean that it's closer to non-terminal than terminal.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11808
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12846
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #30 on: January 24, 2014, 04:19:15 pm »
0

Quote from: Awaclus
Rephrasing Smithy like that is, indeed, balls. That's what I was demonstrating. Rephrasing cards like that is balls.
well, no. imgagine a card which says
+2 cards
+1 buy
at the beginning of your next turn, put this into your hand

that could be a legit card, only that it would be too weak for $5 (and you have to rephrase slightly so it only comes back once). now compare it to wharf, and you'll have to admit that wharf is the same only that it requires 1 less action. in this way wharf is half terminal

of course, you can also compare it to this card:
+4 cards
+2 buys
and then you have a card which does the same only that you require half as many to do it. in this way wharf is terminal, only it has, as you put it, a limitation.

which way you choose to look at it seems competely arbitrary. I come from the angle of "how many can you support without villages" and therefore I'd say wharf is half terminal.
Imagine a card which says
+1 card
If this is your first or second time playing this this turn, put this into your hand.

That couldn't be a legit card because of accountability issues, but let's assume it's online-only. Now compare it to Smithy, and you'll have to admit that Smithy is the same, only that it requires 2 less actions. In this way, Smithy isn't 1/3 terminal, it just gives you a bigger effect for the same cost (1 card and 1 action). This is why more powerful cards have to cost more $ (or P), and this is also why Wharf costs $5 and is still incredibly powerful.

Coming from the angle of "how many can you support without villages" is useful when you're building a big money deck with x copies of a single Action card, but not really very useful in other situations.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7861
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #31 on: January 24, 2014, 04:29:19 pm »
0

now compare it to wharf, and you'll have to admit that wharf is the same only that it requires 1 less action.
The significance of being terminal is that each terminal in your deck increases the likelihood of terminal collision.  Adding a Wharf to your deck increases that chance by roughly the same amount as adding any other terminal to your deck would (slightly more since it's a drawer, but slightly less since it misses the re-shuffle more often). 

This seems to suggest that terminal durations are at least different than standard terminals, though, which was my point.  Also, Merchant Ship doesn't draw cards to offset the reduced probability of collision. 
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3188
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #32 on: January 24, 2014, 04:36:33 pm »
0

now compare it to wharf, and you'll have to admit that wharf is the same only that it requires 1 less action.

Wharf also gives you 1 more card (since it stays in you're play area to do something when you already have a 5-card hand).
it doesnt, if you play wharf you start with 7 cards, if you play this -> next turn it goes to your hand -> 6 cards -> play it -> 5 cards -> draw 2 -> 7 cards -> start with 7 cards, but have -1 action.

it would be 1 less card if it just "shemed" itself instead of going right into your hand.

Quote
It doesn't make any sense to compare it to the first one, because the first one uses this new, invented "super-terminal" mechanic.  It's a terminal the first turn you play it, and the second turn you play it; that's not something any official card does, so it's not something that we expect when we're just talking about arbitrary terminals.  The fact that Wharf is "less terminal" than the card you described only implies that Wharf is not a "super-terminal"; it says nothing about whether Wharf is actually terminal or non-terminal.

The reason such a card doesn't exist is that it's simply a less elegant version of the duration cards we have now. Without any proof, I'm guessing that the motivation to do duration cards in the first place was to decrease shuffle luck. That could be achieved by a card which shemes itself, but it would be unnecssary complicated. That, however, has no weight when you compare them on an objective level.

What does matter is what the card does, and the return-to-hand card actually comes a lot closer to wharf, because it decreases the chance for your next hand to be dead. after all, that's the reason why wharf is one of the strongest cards in the game, because whenever you are at a point where you play 2 each turn, the chance for you to draw a dead hand is next to zero. You have to compare wharf to a card which shemes itself in one way or another, because only then you have the extra ensurance. Even if you can create a white card which has double the effect, and works simliar if you have half as many in your deck, it's still not the same because wharf plays itself twice when you pay an action once.

Quote
The significance of being terminal is that each terminal in your deck increases the likelihood of terminal collision.  Adding a Wharf to your deck increases that chance by roughly the same amount as adding any other terminal to your deck would (slightly more since it's a drawer, but slightly less since it misses the re-shuffle more often).  The first card you described increases the chance of terminal collision much more than most (all?) existing terminals, so saying Wharf is "less terminal" than it doesn't mean that it's closer to non-terminal than terminal.

we haven't made any distiction between terminals who draw and terminals who don't, so you can't just compensate the fact that wharf has less collision chance because it disappears for your next turn with the fact that it draws. Aside from that, measuring how often your terminals collide is a great idea, which underlines my point, because wharf collides less often than another terminal with +2 cards. Whenever there aren't any villages, you'll always be willing to buy more orange terminals than you would buy white ones.

Quote
That couldn't be a legit card because of accountability issues, but let's assume it's online-only. Now compare it to Smithy, and you'll have to admit that Smithy is the same, only that it requires 2 less actions. In this way, Smithy isn't 1/3 terminal, it just gives you a bigger effect for the same cost (1 card and 1 action). This is why more powerful cards have to cost more $ (or P), and this is also why Wharf costs $5 and is still incredibly powerful.
dude, no. a card which comes back in the turn you play it is something completely different. You are forcing players to pay multiple actions within the same turn. I'm simply finding another way to execute a card which already plays itself twice.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2014, 04:41:33 pm by silverspawn »
Logged

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1102
  • Respect: +2144
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #33 on: January 24, 2014, 04:55:39 pm »
0

now compare it to wharf, and you'll have to admit that wharf is the same only that it requires 1 less action.

Wharf also gives you 1 more card (since it stays in you're play area to do something when you already have a 5-card hand).
it doesnt, if you play wharf you start with 7 cards, if you play this -> next turn it goes to your hand -> 6 cards -> play it -> 5 cards -> draw 2 -> 7 cards -> start with 7 cards, but have -1 action.

it would be 1 less card if it just "shemed" itself instead of going right into your hand.

Yeah you're totally right about that, I was thinking your card top-decked itself.

we haven't made any distiction between terminals who draw and terminals who don't, so you can't just compensate the fact that wharf has less collision chance because it disappears for your next turn with the fact that it draws. Aside from that, measuring how often your terminals collide is a great idea, which underlines my point, because wharf collides less often than another terminal with +2 cards. Whenever there aren't any villages, you'll always be willing to buy more orange terminals than you would buy white ones.

That is a fair argument.  I suppose that since the significance of terminals is how often they collide (is there any other significance in distinguishing terminals from non-terminals?), it would seem natural to count drawers as "more terminal", durations as "less terminal", etc.  (And also to count villages as negative terminalness?)  But then I have no idea how you should weight them, it's not obvious to me that a duration is closer to counting as half a terminal than it is to counting as one terminal.
Logged

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1751
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #34 on: January 24, 2014, 05:01:05 pm »
+1

More important than Durations: I think counting Procession (and TR and KC) as anything other than non-terminals makes no sense at all.
Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3249
  • Respect: +5459
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #35 on: January 24, 2014, 05:02:42 pm »
+2

Without any proof, I'm guessing that the motivation to do duration cards in the first place was to decrease shuffle luck. That could be achieved by a card which shemes itself, but it would be unnecssary complicated. That, however, has no weight when you compare them on an objective level.

Improved shuffle luck?  I don't want to speak for Donald X., but I would be floored if this were even partially his motivation.  Repeating an effect next turn is an interesting way of publishing a bunch of vanilla cards (e.g. Wharf, Caravan, Fishing Village, Merchant Ship), as well as implementing novel ideas (e.g. Lighthouse, Tactician, Outpost, Haven).
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3188
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #36 on: January 24, 2014, 05:15:47 pm »
0

Without any proof, I'm guessing that the motivation to do duration cards in the first place was to decrease shuffle luck. That could be achieved by a card which shemes itself, but it would be unnecssary complicated. That, however, has no weight when you compare them on an objective level.

Improved shuffle luck?  I don't want to speak for Donald X., but I would be floored if this were even partially his motivation.  Repeating an effect next turn is an interesting way of publishing a bunch of vanilla cards (e.g. Wharf, Caravan, Fishing Village, Merchant Ship), as well as implementing novel ideas (e.g. Lighthouse, Tactician, Outpost, Haven).

well, that's what makes them great in my mind, so I'd be really surprised if it were just a side effect. The only way we'll ever know if he continues his interview thing.

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3249
  • Respect: +5459
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #37 on: January 24, 2014, 06:25:25 pm »
+3

Without any proof, I'm guessing that the motivation to do duration cards in the first place was to decrease shuffle luck. That could be achieved by a card which shemes itself, but it would be unnecssary complicated. That, however, has no weight when you compare them on an objective level.

Improved shuffle luck?  I don't want to speak for Donald X., but I would be floored if this were even partially his motivation.  Repeating an effect next turn is an interesting way of publishing a bunch of vanilla cards (e.g. Wharf, Caravan, Fishing Village, Merchant Ship), as well as implementing novel ideas (e.g. Lighthouse, Tactician, Outpost, Haven).

well, that's what makes them great in my mind, so I'd be really surprised if it were just a side effect. The only way we'll ever know if he continues his interview thing.

Well, we can look at the cards which exist.  If the motivation were to decrease shuffle luck, then we'd expect to seem a few Durations that say "Now and at the start of your next turn: X" where X is some typical card effect.  But we don't see that.  Half of the Durations are "Now and at the start of your next turn: vanilla" and the other half use the Duration type to implement effects that could not have otherwise been implemented (at least not without jumping through hoops).  Now, obviously the X couldn't have been too wordy, but there are plenty of non-vanilla cards whose text could have fit.

Edit:  Additionally, and perhaps more importantly, we can think about what we know about Donald.  What has motivated him elsewhere?  He has talked a lot about vanilla bonuses and the need for less complex cards.  Has he ever expressed a worry about shuffle luck?  Not that I can recall.  Rather, he has expressed a preference for luck several times.  He likes that Swindler's randomness takes the pressure off the game, and was worried that if you always drew your entire deck before reshuffling (and hence saw each card each shuffle) that there might be too little shuffle luck.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2014, 06:38:45 pm by SirPeebles »
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11808
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12846
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #38 on: January 24, 2014, 06:45:29 pm »
+3

dude, no. a card which comes back in the turn you play it is something completely different. You are forcing players to pay multiple actions within the same turn. I'm simply finding another way to execute a card which already plays itself twice.
Wharf doesn't play itself twice. It plays itself once, some of its effects are just delayed.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #39 on: January 24, 2014, 06:45:54 pm »
0

Without any proof, I'm guessing that the motivation to do duration cards in the first place was to decrease shuffle luck. That could be achieved by a card which shemes itself, but it would be unnecssary complicated. That, however, has no weight when you compare them on an objective level.

Improved shuffle luck?  I don't want to speak for Donald X., but I would be floored if this were even partially his motivation.  Repeating an effect next turn is an interesting way of publishing a bunch of vanilla cards (e.g. Wharf, Caravan, Fishing Village, Merchant Ship), as well as implementing novel ideas (e.g. Lighthouse, Tactician, Outpost, Haven).

well, that's what makes them great in my mind, so I'd be really surprised if it were just a side effect. The only way we'll ever know if he continues his interview thing.

Well, we can look at the cards which exist.  If the motivation were to decrease shuffle luck, then we'd expect to seem a few Durations that say "Now and at the start of your next turn: X" where X is some typical card effect.  But we don't see that.  Half of the Durations are "Now and at the start of your next turn: vanilla" and the other half use the Duration type to implement effects that could not have otherwise been implemented (at least not without jumping through hoops).  Now, obviously the X couldn't have been too wordy, but there are plenty of non-vanilla cards whose text could have fit.

Edit:  Additionally, and perhaps more importantly, we can think about what we know about Donald.  What has motivated him elsewhere?  He has talked a lot about vanilla bonuses and the need for less complex cards.  Has he ever expressed a worry about shuffle luck?  Not that I can recall.  Rather, he has expressed a preference for luck several times.  He likes that Swindler's randomness takes the pressure off the game, and was worried that if you always drew your entire deck before reshuffling (and hence saw each card each shuffle) that there might be too little shuffle luck.

Also we can add that at the beginning, you know, Duration wasn't a type, there were just cards that did things, and some of them did them on your next turn.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3188
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #40 on: January 24, 2014, 06:48:33 pm »
0

Without any proof, I'm guessing that the motivation to do duration cards in the first place was to decrease shuffle luck. That could be achieved by a card which shemes itself, but it would be unnecssary complicated. That, however, has no weight when you compare them on an objective level.

Improved shuffle luck?  I don't want to speak for Donald X., but I would be floored if this were even partially his motivation.  Repeating an effect next turn is an interesting way of publishing a bunch of vanilla cards (e.g. Wharf, Caravan, Fishing Village, Merchant Ship), as well as implementing novel ideas (e.g. Lighthouse, Tactician, Outpost, Haven).

well, that's what makes them great in my mind, so I'd be really surprised if it were just a side effect. The only way we'll ever know if he continues his interview thing.

Well, we can look at the cards which exist.  If the motivation were to decrease shuffle luck, then we'd expect to seem a few Durations that say "Now and at the start of your next turn: X" where X is some typical card effect.  But we don't see that.  Half of the Durations are "Now and at the start of your next turn: vanilla" and the other half use the Duration type to implement effects that could not have otherwise been implemented (at least not without jumping through hoops).  Now, obviously the X couldn't have been too wordy, but there are plenty of non-vanilla cards whose text could have fit.

Edit:  Additionally, and perhaps more importantly, we can think about what we know about Donald.  What has motivated him elsewhere?  He has talked a lot about vanilla bonuses and the need for less complex cards.  Has he ever expressed a worry about shuffle luck?  Not that I can recall.  Rather, he has expressed a preference for luck several times.  He likes that Swindler's randomness takes the pressure off the game, and was worried that if you always drew your entire deck before reshuffling (and hence saw each card each shuffle) that there might be too little shuffle luck.

Well, I'm not going to argue about that, since It was just a guess in the first place. YOu might very well be right. Off topic, If swindler is supposed to take pressure away from the game, it doesn't work for me at all. I just feel like it makes the game harder, because you constantly have to consider whether it's worth buying something that could be swindled into something you don't want, or if you rather just buy gold. Counting vp's becomes more difficult too.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2014, 06:50:04 pm by silverspawn »
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11808
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12846
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #41 on: January 24, 2014, 06:52:48 pm »
0

I just feel like it makes the game harder, because you constantly have to consider whether it's worth buying something that could be swindled into something you don't want, or if you rather just buy gold.
Would you rather buy something that you want but could be swindled into something you don't want, or just simply buy something that you don't want? If you need the Gold, go for it. If you don't need a Gold, don't.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5301
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3188
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #42 on: January 24, 2014, 08:12:23 pm »
0

I just feel like it makes the game harder, because you constantly have to consider whether it's worth buying something that could be swindled into something you don't want, or if you rather just buy gold.
Would you rather buy something that you want but could be swindled into something you don't want, or just simply buy something that you don't want? If you need the Gold, go for it. If you don't need a Gold, don't.

sure, but if you have $5 you need to decide whether you get a $5 card which could be swindled into a duchy or rather a silver.

generally silver is awesome but not so much in dominion -.-

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5345
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #43 on: January 24, 2014, 08:34:38 pm »
0

In case anybody cares anymore, i too consider Throne Room, King's Court, Procession and Golem non-terminal. If a card enables you toplay two Smithies in a row, you basically won an action.

Necropolis i find hard to estimate. as it is a starting card, you would assume it to be relevant, but then again you only get up to one and only every few games.

Also the explanation why there are more nonterminals in later expansions is obvious: Because Chancellor is such an awesome card, Donald tried to increase the chance of a Chancellor+all-nonterminals-board, where he actually is better than Silver. The same goes for Woodcutter (another powerhouse), of course.
Logged

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2587
  • Respect: +2479
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #44 on: January 24, 2014, 08:39:59 pm »
0

King's court I would consider a village even, because it lets you play two more actions
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11808
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12846
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #45 on: January 24, 2014, 09:11:49 pm »
0

King's court I would consider a village even, because it lets you play two more actions
Village lets you play one more action.
I just feel like it makes the game harder, because you constantly have to consider whether it's worth buying something that could be swindled into something you don't want, or if you rather just buy gold.
Would you rather buy something that you want but could be swindled into something you don't want, or just simply buy something that you don't want? If you need the Gold, go for it. If you don't need a Gold, don't.

sure, but if you have $5 you need to decide whether you get a $5 card which could be swindled into a duchy or rather a silver.

generally silver is awesome but not so much in dominion -.-
The $5 card, unless you have a very good reason to buy a Silver instead of the $5 card. The odds of your opponent's Swindler hitting it are like 1/14 or less, you should make the play that's superior 13/14 of the time, not the one that's superior 1/14 of the time.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

liopoil

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2587
  • Respect: +2479
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #46 on: January 24, 2014, 09:19:36 pm »
0

King's court I would consider a village even, because it lets you play two more actions
Village lets you play one more action.
one more than a cantrip, but it two more than a terminal, which is what I mean. If you play a village, you get to play three actions total - village and two terminals. If you play a KC you play three actions - one card three times. I'm counting village as actually playing an action because you draw a card.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11808
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12846
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #47 on: January 24, 2014, 09:33:36 pm »
0

King's court I would consider a village even, because it lets you play two more actions
Village lets you play one more action.
one more than a cantrip, but it two more than a terminal, which is what I mean. If you play a village, you get to play three actions total - village and two terminals. If you play a KC you play three actions - one card three times. I'm counting village as actually playing an action because you draw a card.
But you also lose a card (the Village). What about Necropolis?
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #48 on: January 24, 2014, 09:53:10 pm »
0

I've got my own interpretation of all this.Here are my working definitions of terminal and non-terminal:


- Terminal Action - A card that, when played, decreases the number of additional terminal actions you can play on the same turn.

- Non-Terminal Action - A card that, when played, does not decrease the number of additional terminal actions you can play on the same turn.

Action splitters( or "villages") are a subset of non-terminal actions.

- Action Splitter - A card that, when played, increases the number of additional terminal actions you can play on the same turn.


You kinda have to add a special rule to the game that stipulates "When you cannot play any additional actions on your turn, you cannot play any additional non-terminals on that turn either". Notice the emphasis on the current turn. I'll explain why I define them like that shortly.


What are the consequences of these definitions? Well, all existing cantrips and cards that give +1 action are clearly non-terminal. What's key is that the number of non-terminals you can have in play is unbounded by the number of actions available, assuming the available number of actions is not zero.

Also, KC/TR/Golem/etc. are not only non-terminal, but action splitters as well. For example, playing one TR lets me play at least two additional terminal actions. An unbounded chain of them can play an unbounded number of terminals. I mean, a hypothetical hand of 50 Throne Rooms and 50 Militias can have all 50 Militias played and then some.

The big point I wanted to discuss is what durations fit into the "Terminal" category. By my definition Wharf, Tactician, and Merchant Ship are terminal, but Fishing Village and Caravan are non-terminals.

A hypothetical card that had an effect like "+1 action. At the start of your next turn, -1 action" would actually be non-terminal. Why? Because on the turn you play that hypothetical card, you can play as many other copies of it as possible, as well as any number of other non-terminals as well. Admittedly, my definition breaks down when the Tactician effect is considered (-1 action now, +2 actions next turn).

In theory, a delayed village (-1 action now, +2 actions next turn) can have two more copies of the delayed village played next turn, which can in turn lead to another 4 copies of the delayed village being played the turn after. At least, that doesn't happen with Tactician due to the hand discarding that can only be overcome with specific action splitters (Herald, Golem). But Wharf? Without action splitters, you can only have at most 2 copies of them in play at one time (one will have had to been played last the turn, the other in the current turn). Compare that to, say, Market that can have an unbounded number of them in play at once. The difference between infinity to 1 (The case for most terminals) and infinity to 2 (Durations like Wharf and Merchant Ship) is virtually nothing. It's also impossible to put into play 2 Wharves on the same turn, because there is no way to put Wharf in play in the first place without losing an available action first.

The notion of "half-terminal" doesn't have much theoretical significance, although when put to practical analysis it means you can reduce the number of terminal collisions with half-terminals. I also feel like introducing the notion of "half non-terminal", for any hypothetical card that says something like "set aside a copy of this card from your hand. If you do, +1 action. Discard the cards set aside this way during clean-up". The closest we have to a card like that is Nobles.

tl,dr: I say KC/TR/Golem/etc. are non-terminal, and are even action splitters. Wharf is terminal. Tactician is effectively terminal due to the discard-the-hand thing, but would otherwise be non-terminal.

Edit: Formatting
« Last Edit: January 24, 2014, 09:55:54 pm by markusin »
Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3249
  • Respect: +5459
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #49 on: January 24, 2014, 09:59:55 pm »
0

- Terminal Action - A card that, when played, decreases the number of additional terminal actions you can play on the same turn.

 :(
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #50 on: January 24, 2014, 10:18:48 pm »
0

- Terminal Action - A card that, when played, decreases the number of additional terminal actions you can play on the same turn.

 :(
You kinda have to add a special rule to the game that stipulates "When you cannot play any additional actions on your turn, you cannot play any additional non-terminals on that turn either". Notice the emphasis on the current turn. I'll explain why I define them like that shortly.
Well, that should say "When you cannot play any additional terminal actions on your turn...", or "when you have 0 available actions...". With that exception, I don't see how the above statement is wrong.
Logged

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1102
  • Respect: +2144
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #51 on: January 24, 2014, 10:28:32 pm »
0

I think his problem is that the definition is recursive.
Logged

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #52 on: January 24, 2014, 10:33:41 pm »
0

I think his problem is that the definition is recursive.
Aww...but that's what I like best about the definition.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #53 on: January 25, 2014, 01:45:33 am »
+1

I think his problem is that the definition is recursive.
Aww...but that's what I like best about the definition.

What I like best about recursive definitions is that I like them (because they're recursive).
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1751
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #54 on: January 25, 2014, 07:40:16 am »
0

What I like best about recursive definitions is that I like them (because they're recursive).

That is not recursive.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7861
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #55 on: January 25, 2014, 10:44:39 am »
0

- Terminal Action - A card that, when played, decreases the number of additional terminal actions you can play on the same turn.

 :(
You kinda have to add a special rule to the game that stipulates "When you cannot play any additional actions on your turn, you cannot play any additional non-terminals on that turn either". Notice the emphasis on the current turn. I'll explain why I define them like that shortly.
Well, that should say "When you cannot play any additional terminal actions on your turn...", or "when you have 0 available actions...". With that exception, I don't see how the above statement is wrong.

Wouldn't it be easier to say nonterminal actions either give more actions or play actions immediately?  Splitters are a special case of nonterminal actions that give more than +1 action.  Terminal actions are not nonterminal.
Logged

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #56 on: January 25, 2014, 10:52:33 am »
0

- Terminal Action - A card that, when played, decreases the number of additional terminal actions you can play on the same turn.

 :(
You kinda have to add a special rule to the game that stipulates "When you cannot play any additional actions on your turn, you cannot play any additional non-terminals on that turn either". Notice the emphasis on the current turn. I'll explain why I define them like that shortly.
Well, that should say "When you cannot play any additional terminal actions on your turn...", or "when you have 0 available actions...". With that exception, I don't see how the above statement is wrong.

Wouldn't it be easier to say nonterminal actions either give more actions or play actions immediately?  Splitters are a special case of nonterminal actions that give more than +1 action.  Terminal actions are not nonterminal.
Possibly, but that would sort of make Cultist nonterminal, when it's really just a terminal chain effect. I wanted to be as general as possible. Also, my working definition helps distinguish from TR (an action splitter) and a hypothetical card that said "play an action card from your hand immediately" (non-terminal but not an action splitter).
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7861
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #57 on: January 25, 2014, 12:01:25 pm »
0

- Terminal Action - A card that, when played, decreases the number of additional terminal actions you can play on the same turn.

 :(
You kinda have to add a special rule to the game that stipulates "When you cannot play any additional actions on your turn, you cannot play any additional non-terminals on that turn either". Notice the emphasis on the current turn. I'll explain why I define them like that shortly.
Well, that should say "When you cannot play any additional terminal actions on your turn...", or "when you have 0 available actions...". With that exception, I don't see how the above statement is wrong.

Wouldn't it be easier to say nonterminal actions either give more actions or play actions immediately?  Splitters are a special case of nonterminal actions that give more than +1 action.  Terminal actions are not nonterminal.
Possibly, but that would sort of make Cultist nonterminal, when it's really just a terminal chain effect. I wanted to be as general as possible. Also, my working definition helps distinguish from TR (an action splitter) and a hypothetical card that said "play an action card from your hand immediately" (non-terminal but not an action splitter).

Well, you could specify nonterminal to be +{any number of actions} or play an arbitrary action immediately, and splitter to be +{more than one action} or play more than one arbitrary action (or the same action more than once)

Edit: Okay Golem is terminal this way, but change arbitrary to one that need not be the same card, or something.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2014, 12:14:20 pm by Witherweaver »
Logged

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Nonterminal percentage
« Reply #58 on: January 25, 2014, 02:41:04 pm »
0

- Terminal Action - A card that, when played, decreases the number of additional terminal actions you can play on the same turn.

 :(
You kinda have to add a special rule to the game that stipulates "When you cannot play any additional actions on your turn, you cannot play any additional non-terminals on that turn either". Notice the emphasis on the current turn. I'll explain why I define them like that shortly.
Well, that should say "When you cannot play any additional terminal actions on your turn...", or "when you have 0 available actions...". With that exception, I don't see how the above statement is wrong.

Wouldn't it be easier to say nonterminal actions either give more actions or play actions immediately?  Splitters are a special case of nonterminal actions that give more than +1 action.  Terminal actions are not nonterminal.
Possibly, but that would sort of make Cultist nonterminal, when it's really just a terminal chain effect. I wanted to be as general as possible. Also, my working definition helps distinguish from TR (an action splitter) and a hypothetical card that said "play an action card from your hand immediately" (non-terminal but not an action splitter).

Well, you could specify nonterminal to be +{any number of actions} or play an arbitrary action immediately, and splitter to be +{more than one action} or play more than one arbitrary action (or the same action more than once)

Edit: Okay Golem is terminal this way, but change arbitrary to one that need not be the same card, or something.
I could change the definition like that, but I just don't like the +{any number of actions} part. It's a bit specific to certain cards where my definition seeks to encompass the consequences of receiving +{any number of actions}. The result is a nice 1-line definition.

Anyway, I only came up with that definition for the purposes of analyzing the duration cards and their place in the terminal/non-terminal categories.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [All]
 

Page created in 0.097 seconds with 20 queries.