Print

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

[Elanchana]

Disclaimer: I don't know any sets very well except base, so my thoughts will be largely based (heh) around that.

During my very first Dominion game IRL, someone said that "Once that first province goes, it's only a matter of time before the game is over." Obviously it's more complicated than that though. I've played games where one person picks up a province on their first or second $8 turn but the other waits until they can double-province and snags the win. On the other hand, I've also played games where one person picks up an early province and then waits for the megaturn stage, beating their opponent from PPR and such. And of course that's not counting duchy tennis, gardening, three pile endings, yada yada yada. I haven't really grasped the "secret formula" for when to green, so I want to hear more experienced players' thoughts. What kind of criteria do you take into account when you decide when to buy victory points?

[sudgy]

I usually do it when I can consistently get enough Provinces to beat the other player.  If I'm on the losing end I might go for blind hope and get Provinces sooner.

[jsh357]

The way I like to think of it is that if I have all of the cards I need to keep my deck consistent enough to get Provinces most turns, I'm OK starting to green.  Naturally, all kinds of things can happen to change this during a game.  It really depends on what's available and how things are going for my opponent.

[Gherald]

Some general rules for a typical Province-based game with no attacks:

Don't buy Provinces until turn 8 at the earliest

Don't buy Provinces on turns 9-10 if there is good deck building left to be done or good Alt sources of VP (like Monument, Goons, Nobles)

Buy a Province on turns 11, 12, 13, and 14.

If Harem is on the board and it is late enough that you would choose to buy a Province over a Gold with $8, then you should also choose to buy a Harem over a Gold with $6

When there are only 4 provinces left, consider buying a Duchy with < $8

When there are 3 or fewer provinces left, you very very likely want to buy a Duchy with < $8

[liopoil]

Someone here once said, I forget who (ehalc? EDIT: It was tables) that the goal of dominion isn't to have the most points when the game ends, it's to end the game when you have the most points. To evaluate your deck, you look at how many points it has or can ensure getting before the game ends, and also at how much control over when the game ends it has relative to your opponent. When you buy a province, you usually decrease your control over when the game ends. However, sometimes, you increase how many points you can make sure you get before the game ends. This isn't always the case. The question you need to ask yourself is "Will buying this province increase my chance of having a score higher than my opponent's when the game ends?". Often time in engines the answer is no, you would get more points by buying more action cards so you can green with more power and for longer. But that isn't the only thing you need to take into account. Buying a province, while maybe giving you more points by the time the game ends, might also give your opponent more points before the game ends. If they are playing a deck with goons, monument, Alt-VP, or just an engine that needs to make sure the game doesn't 3-pile too soon, then by buying a province you give them more time before the game ends. It might be better to buy cards that work towards that 3-pile instead of the province, thus increasing your score relative to your opponent's when the game ends. In answering this question you also need to take into account endgame tactics like PPR. In general lower piles (be it provinces or low piles) when you have more points, don't when you have fewer points. But be careful that they don't catch up before you end the game. For example:

You are up 5 points and there are 3 provinces left. It's your turn, you are playing a BM strategy and have 8. Your opponent is playing an engine that will be able to double province but will stall quickly if it gets any more victory point cards. Here, even though you are winning and would want to get the province to accelerate the end of the game, you shouldn't get the province. Why? Because your opponent will catch up in time. By buying a duchy instead, you keep your chances alive. If your opponent takes two provinces you hopefully get the last one and win. If they take just 1 and a duchy, you have a good chance that they will stall on their next turn and you will be able to maintain your lead.

These principles also apply to all other cards too.

[Awaclus]

Someone here once said, I forget who (ehalc?) that the goal of dominion isn't to have the most points when the game ends, it's to end the game when you have the most points. To evaluate your deck, you look at how many points it has or can ensure getting before the game ends, and also at how much control over when the game ends it has relative to your opponent. When you buy a province, you usually decrease your control over when the game ends. However, sometimes, you increase how many points you can make sure you get before the game ends. This isn't always the case. The question you need to ask yourself is "Will buying this province increase my chance of having a score higher than my opponent's when the game ends?". Often time in engines the answer is no, you would get more points by buying more action cards so you can green with more power and for longer. But that isn't the only thing you need to take into account. Buying a province, while maybe giving you more points by the time the game ends, might also give your opponent more points before the game ends. If they are playing a deck with goons, monument, Alt-VP, or just an engine that needs to make sure the game doesn't 3-pile too soon, then by buying a province you give them more time before the game ends. It might be better to buy cards that work towards that 3-pile instead of the province, thus increasing your score relative to your opponent's when the game ends. In answering this question you also need to take into account endgame tactics like PPR. In general lower piles (be it provinces or low piles) when you have more points, don't when you have fewer points. But be careful that they don't catch up before you end the game. For example:

You are up 5 points and there are 3 provinces left. It's your turn, you are playing a BM strategy and have 8. Your opponent is playing an engine that will be able to double province but will stall quickly if it gets any more victory point cards. Here, even though you are winning and would want to get the province to accelerate the end of the game, you shouldn't get the province. Why? Because your opponent will catch up in time. By buying a duchy instead, you keep your chances alive. If your opponent takes two provinces you hopefully get the last one and win. If they take just 1 and a duchy, you have a good chance that they will stall on their next turn and you will be able to maintain your lead.

These principles also apply to all other cards too.

The one who said that is Tables and his original post is worth reading too. But don't read the rest of that thread, it's not a very good thread.


In typical engine games, you should keep building as long as you can. When you think your opponent is able to end the game and gain some points on his next turn, you should buy green cards in order to prevent that from happening (and if you think you're winning, take less risks). If there is no +buy available, then you can start buying Provinces when you think you can keep buying Provinces every turn until you win.

In typical big money games, you should have at least one Gold, preferably two, and at least one Action (and I mean the kind of Action you actually want for a big money deck, such as Smithy).

[jaybeez]

"Once that first province goes, it's only a matter of time before the game is over."

Once the game begins, it's only a matter of time before the game is over.

[shark_bait]

"Once that first province goes, it's only a matter of time before the game is over."

Once the game begins, it's only a matter of time before the game is over.

My mother always told me that the fat lady singing dictated the end of all games

[Awaclus]

"Once that first province goes, it's only a matter of time before the game is over."

Once the game begins, it's only a matter of time before the game is over.

The Game never ends and I just lost it.

[Count Grishnakh]

Some general rules for a typical Province-based game with no attacks:

Don't buy Provinces until turn 8 at the earliest

Don't buy Provinces on turns 9-10 if there is good deck building left to be done or good Alt sources of VP (like Monument, Goons, Nobles)

Buy a Province on turns 11, 12, 13, and 14.

If Harem is on the board and it is late enough that you would choose to buy a Province over a Gold with $8, then you should also choose to buy a Harem over a Gold with $6

When there are only 4 provinces left, consider buying a Duchy with < $8

When there are 3 or fewer provinces left, you very very likely want to buy a Duchy with < $8

Wow, awful advice.

Awful, awful advice.

Even with your ¨no attack cards¨caveat, there are far too many scenarios to list that could change the tempo at which you buy VP cards, and which VP cards to prioritize


Your advice may be a decent starting point for a player starting out but at the pro level with all cards there are absolutely no general rules as to when exactly to green and even if such rules did exist, they certainly would not be turn dependent. You can´t generalize about when and which VP cards to buy.

If you disagree, I invite you to play some games against me and I will gladly beat you while defying your rules.

[silverspawn]

Gherald is a decent player, and I doubt that you could beat him. Moreover, I think his rules are a good starting point for typical province games. Not a universal rule, but a rule of thumb. Do you want to play some games against me too to show me how much better you are?

[theright555J]

He said general rules.  Of course it depends on the board. The OP was asking for advice on when to green, and that really needs to be assessed individually on a board by board basis and tactically intra-game. Those above rules are pretty good for a province game with no +Buy.

And Gherald is a pretty good player, you'd likely have a hard time beating him regardless of the board.

[Count Grishnakh]

Gherald is a decent player, and I doubt that you could beat him. Moreover, I think his rules are a good starting point for typical province games. Not a universal rule, but a rule of thumb. Do you want to play some games against me too to show me how much better you are?

Wow, so much opposition in this post for someone who repeated exactly what I said myelf! I said it´s a good starting point but nothing more and that approach is just as likely to cause you to lose as it is to help you in many games

What exactly is a ¨¨typical province game_¨ to me this just sounds ludicrous and almost any game characterized thus is being oversimplified

People who think such as you and Gherald remind me of the Karate and Kung Fu ¨masters¨who are obssessed with forms to the point of being robotic

I am the Bruce Lee of Dominion, if you will, perfectly formless and spontaneous

Therefore you are no match for me, but you are welcome to try!

It is foolish to try to make a general rule about greening

There is indeed a science to building a deck

But greening, this is an artform and it eludes any fixed rule and is extremely situational

Come try your luck right now in Kings court if you are online!!! I will be multi tasking on the phone but I will still manage to make short work of you!

[Count Grishnakh]

He said general rules.  Of course it depends on the board. The OP was asking for advice on when to green, and that really needs to be assessed individually on a board by board basis and tactically intra-game. Those above rules are pretty good for a province game with no +Buy.

And Gherald is a pretty good player, you'd likely have a hard time beating him regardless of the board.

I know, and I am saying that it is not particularily helpful to have general rules, at all, doing so is just as likely to cause you to lose a game as it is to help you win a game! And of all things to base general rules on, number of turns!! My God.

Im in KINGS COURT IF ANYONE IS FEELING BRAVE!

[GeoLib]

Gherald is a decent player, and I doubt that you could beat him. Moreover, I think his rules are a good starting point for typical province games. Not a universal rule, but a rule of thumb. Do you want to play some games against me too to show me how much better you are?

Wow, so much opposition in this post for someone who repeated exactly what I said myelf! I said it´s a good starting point but nothing more and that approach is just as likely to cause you to lose as it is to help you in many games

What exactly is a ¨¨typical province game_¨ to me this just sounds ludicrous and almost any game characterized thus is being oversimplified

People who think such as you and Gherald remind me of the Karate and Kung Fu ¨masters¨who are obssessed with forms to the point of being robotic

I am the Bruce Lee of Dominion, if you will, perfectly formless and spontaneous

Therefore you are no match for me, but you are welcome to try!

It is foolish to try to make a general rule about greening

There is indeed a science to building a deck

But greening, this is an artform and it eludes any fixed rule and is extremely situational

Come try your luck right now in Kings court if you are online!!! I will be multi tasking on the phone but I will still manage to make short work of you!

Yeah, but you started out by saying it was awful, awful advice, so you kind of got the opposition going yourself. Gherald gave some very general (he even italicized general) rules that are decent when you're talking about no +buy/gain province games, especially if they're base only. Obviously we all know that just following these rules is going to cause you to get demolished against any reasonably good players.

You talk pretty damn big for someone who's not even in the top 1000 speaking to several people in the top 100 (and silverspawn was pushing top 10 quite recently).

[Count Grishnakh]

Gherald is a decent player, and I doubt that you could beat him. Moreover, I think his rules are a good starting point for typical province games. Not a universal rule, but a rule of thumb. Do you want to play some games against me too to show me how much better you are?

Wow, so much opposition in this post for someone who repeated exactly what I said myelf! I said it´s a good starting point but nothing more and that approach is just as likely to cause you to lose as it is to help you in many games

What exactly is a ¨¨typical province game_¨ to me this just sounds ludicrous and almost any game characterized thus is being oversimplified

People who think such as you and Gherald remind me of the Karate and Kung Fu ¨masters¨who are obssessed with forms to the point of being robotic

I am the Bruce Lee of Dominion, if you will, perfectly formless and spontaneous

Therefore you are no match for me, but you are welcome to try!

It is foolish to try to make a general rule about greening

There is indeed a science to building a deck

But greening, this is an artform and it eludes any fixed rule and is extremely situational

Come try your luck right now in Kings court if you are online!!! I will be multi tasking on the phone but I will still manage to make short work of you!

Yeah, but you started out by saying it was awful, awful advice, so you kind of got the opposition going yourself. Gherald gave some very general (he even italicized general) rules that are decent when you're talking about no +buy/gain province games, especially if they're base only. Obviously we all know that just following these rules is going to cause you to get demolished against any reasonably good players.

You talk pretty damn big for someone who's not even in the top 1000 speaking to several people in the top 100 (and silverspawn was pushing top 10 quite recently).

If the advice gets you demolished by reasonably good players then it is awful advice, this is not debatable!

Do not be fooled by my rank! I share this account with my brother, who sucks. Also, I quit games if people are slow, lowering my rank. I do not game the system like many of you do.

[Awaclus]

If the advice gets you demolished by reasonably good players then it is awful advice, this is not debatable!

"All advice is awful"
 —Count Grishnakh

[Count Grishnakh]

If the advice gets you demolished by reasonably good players then it is awful advice, this is not debatable!

"All advice is awful"
 —Count Grishnakh

Your conclusion does not logically follow from what I said

[eHalcyon]

I don't think anybody who frequents this forum games the system. To throw out that accusation is incredibly rude.

[silverspawn]

It is, in a situation like this, advisable to forget everything that happened, and reread and judge the posts of the thread as if you were an outsider.

A new member on f.ds, who himself stated several times that he is new to the game, has opened a thread and asked for advise on when to green.

Gherald has then made a post in which he complies with the OP and gives some advise. The first line of his post specifically pointed out that these are general rules, and he even highlighted that part.

You responded by saying, that's awful advice, it doesn't work at all, if you don't believe me, come on and play me. This post heavily implies that you think you are a better player than Gherald, and that you are willing to publicly challenge him to a match to prove this.

Note that, at this point, the only post Gherald has made in this thread was some general advise, and that he hasn't in any way at all whatsoever implied that he is better, or worse at the game than anyone, or even touched on this line of thinking at all. Your statement

People who think such as you and Gherald remind me of the Karate and Kung Fu ¨masters¨who are obssessed with forms to the point of being robotic

is therefore completely unreasonable by any standard, and the idea to apply it to Gherald in the context of this thread is ludicrous.

So much for him. My post could be taken that way, as I was indeed purposefully implying that I think I am better at the game than you are. I say this bluntly, because it's the truth. I would never use this argument in a discussion just like that, but I am going to use it if someone else, who is in no position to do so, does it first. I'm just that kind of guy. Further note that you were the one who challenged someone else, and all I did was saying, hey I think what he said is true, so if you are willing to challenge him, you consequently must be willing to challenge me also.

Lastly, let me explain to you why this post is not working in our current situation.

If the advice gets you demolished by reasonably good players then it is awful advice, this is not debatable!

This is not the out of context thread. Gherald has directed his advise to a new player, and the claim for it to be applicable on high level play does not exist. therefore, whether or not reasonably good players contradict this rule sometimes is not relevant.

[GeoLib]

Gherald is a decent player, and I doubt that you could beat him. Moreover, I think his rules are a good starting point for typical province games. Not a universal rule, but a rule of thumb. Do you want to play some games against me too to show me how much better you are?

Wow, so much opposition in this post for someone who repeated exactly what I said myelf! I said it´s a good starting point but nothing more and that approach is just as likely to cause you to lose as it is to help you in many games

What exactly is a ¨¨typical province game_¨ to me this just sounds ludicrous and almost any game characterized thus is being oversimplified

People who think such as you and Gherald remind me of the Karate and Kung Fu ¨masters¨who are obssessed with forms to the point of being robotic

I am the Bruce Lee of Dominion, if you will, perfectly formless and spontaneous

Therefore you are no match for me, but you are welcome to try!

It is foolish to try to make a general rule about greening

There is indeed a science to building a deck

But greening, this is an artform and it eludes any fixed rule and is extremely situational

Come try your luck right now in Kings court if you are online!!! I will be multi tasking on the phone but I will still manage to make short work of you!

Yeah, but you started out by saying it was awful, awful advice, so you kind of got the opposition going yourself. Gherald gave some very general (he even italicized general) rules that are decent when you're talking about no +buy/gain province games, especially if they're base only. Obviously we all know that just following these rules is going to cause you to get demolished against any reasonably good players.

You talk pretty damn big for someone who's not even in the top 1000 speaking to several people in the top 100 (and silverspawn was pushing top 10 quite recently).

If the advice gets you demolished by reasonably good players then it is awful advice, this is not debatable!

Do not be fooled by my rank! I share this account with my brother, who sucks. Also, I quit games if people are slow, lowering my rank. I do not game the system like many of you do.

Ah yes. Now accuse us of being cheaters. An excellent strategy.

I said that just following these rules will get you demolished by reasonably good players, which is actually a pretty high standard around here. Given that our starting point was "Once that first province goes, it's only a matter of time before the game is over" Gherald's advice is superb by comparison. This is advice being given to someone very new to the game and as a starting point. Not the be all and end all of Dominion Greening Tactics.

[Count Grishnakh]

Gherald is a decent player, and I doubt that you could beat him. Moreover, I think his rules are a good starting point for typical province games. Not a universal rule, but a rule of thumb. Do you want to play some games against me too to show me how much better you are?

Wow, so much opposition in this post for someone who repeated exactly what I said myelf! I said it´s a good starting point but nothing more and that approach is just as likely to cause you to lose as it is to help you in many games

What exactly is a ¨¨typical province game_¨ to me this just sounds ludicrous and almost any game characterized thus is being oversimplified

People who think such as you and Gherald remind me of the Karate and Kung Fu ¨masters¨who are obssessed with forms to the point of being robotic

I am the Bruce Lee of Dominion, if you will, perfectly formless and spontaneous

Therefore you are no match for me, but you are welcome to try!

It is foolish to try to make a general rule about greening

There is indeed a science to building a deck

But greening, this is an artform and it eludes any fixed rule and is extremely situational

Come try your luck right now in Kings court if you are online!!! I will be multi tasking on the phone but I will still manage to make short work of you!

Yeah, but you started out by saying it was awful, awful advice, so you kind of got the opposition going yourself. Gherald gave some very general (he even italicized general) rules that are decent when you're talking about no +buy/gain province games, especially if they're base only. Obviously we all know that just following these rules is going to cause you to get demolished against any reasonably good players.

You talk pretty damn big for someone who's not even in the top 1000 speaking to several people in the top 100 (and silverspawn was pushing top 10 quite recently).

If the advice gets you demolished by reasonably good players then it is awful advice, this is not debatable!

Do not be fooled by my rank! I share this account with my brother, who sucks. Also, I quit games if people are slow, lowering my rank. I do not game the system like many of you do.

Ah yes. Now accuse us of being cheaters. An excellent strategy.

I said that just following these rules will get you demolished by reasonably good players, which is actually a pretty high standard around here. Given that our starting point was "Once that first province goes, it's only a matter of time before the game is over" Gherald's advice is superb by comparison. This is advice being given to someone very new to the game and as a starting point. Not the be all and end all of Dominion Greening Tactics.

So his awful advice was superior to a vague observation about the tempo of the game, that doesn´t make his advise helpful.


Also, I did concede that gheralds advice is a starting point, but as far as starting points go its pretty bad...

Of all of the parameters you could advise a new player to focus on, he would advise focusing on number of turns?.... one would be better off going on an intuitive approach, as far as ¨starting points¨ and ¨generic advice¨go

[Count Grishnakh]

Gherald is a decent player, and I doubt that you could beat him. Moreover, I think his rules are a good starting point for typical province games. Not a universal rule, but a rule of thumb. Do you want to play some games against me too to show me how much better you are?

Wow, so much opposition in this post for someone who repeated exactly what I said myelf! I said it´s a good starting point but nothing more and that approach is just as likely to cause you to lose as it is to help you in many games

What exactly is a ¨¨typical province game_¨ to me this just sounds ludicrous and almost any game characterized thus is being oversimplified

People who think such as you and Gherald remind me of the Karate and Kung Fu ¨masters¨who are obssessed with forms to the point of being robotic

I am the Bruce Lee of Dominion, if you will, perfectly formless and spontaneous

Therefore you are no match for me, but you are welcome to try!

It is foolish to try to make a general rule about greening

There is indeed a science to building a deck

But greening, this is an artform and it eludes any fixed rule and is extremely situational

Come try your luck right now in Kings court if you are online!!! I will be multi tasking on the phone but I will still manage to make short work of you!

Yeah, but you started out by saying it was awful, awful advice, so you kind of got the opposition going yourself. Gherald gave some very general (he even italicized general) rules that are decent when you're talking about no +buy/gain province games, especially if they're base only. Obviously we all know that just following these rules is going to cause you to get demolished against any reasonably good players.

You talk pretty damn big for someone who's not even in the top 1000 speaking to several people in the top 100 (and silverspawn was pushing top 10 quite recently).

If the advice gets you demolished by reasonably good players then it is awful advice, this is not debatable!

Do not be fooled by my rank! I share this account with my brother, who sucks. Also, I quit games if people are slow, lowering my rank. I do not game the system like many of you do.

Ah yes. Now accuse us of being cheaters. An excellent strategy.

I said that just following these rules will get you demolished by reasonably good players, which is actually a pretty high standard around here. Given that our starting point was "Once that first province goes, it's only a matter of time before the game is over" Gherald's advice is superb by comparison. This is advice being given to someone very new to the game and as a starting point. Not the be all and end all of Dominion Greening Tactics.

Gaming the system does not equal cheating, and I did not indend to say that.

I am simply pointing out that most serious players do game the ranking system, which means making a game out of it

There is nothing wrong with doing so

But I simply do not regard my ranking. If a player is slow in the first few turns, I quit the game, ranking be damned.

If I think the board looks boring, I quit the game in turn one, ranking be damned.

Many take ranking very seriously, and that´s fine, but I dont want to hear snooty players tell me that I talk big for someone with a X rank on Goko.

[markusin]

Using number of turns may not be the most intuitive measurement to base decisions on, but against new players there isn't much choice here. We have benchmarks on how fast an unopposed Smithy or Jack of all Trades gets Provinces. How are you supposed to judge the viability of your strategy against someone who, say, buys only Villages. Also, Base set tends to have a lot of straight rush-for-provinces games.

Clearly, there is a disagreement on what can be considered "decent" and what is "awful".

I believe that Gherald's advice works well as a base point, and that a player will gradually learn to break all those rules as they play more and against stronger opponents. What's the alternative? Tell a new player that it depends on the board using 10,000 words?

[Count Grishnakh]

Using number of turns may not be the most intuitive measurement to base decisions on, but against new players there isn't much choice here. We have benchmarks on how fast an unopposed Smithy or Jack of all Trades gets Provinces. How are you supposed to judge the viability of your strategy against someone who, say, buys only Villages. Also, Base set tends to have a lot of straight rush-for-provinces games.

Clearly, there is a disagreement on what can be considered "decent" and what is "awful".

I believe that Gherald's advice works well as a base point, and that a player will gradually learn to break all those rules as they play more and against stronger opponents. What's the alternative? Tell a new player that it depends on the board using 10,000 words?

Whats the alternative??.... Whats the alternative??? WHAT A QUESTION! But clearly one in dire need of an answer...

First of all let me be clear, I did not say that using number of turns as a parameter is not intuitive, I said that it is such a useless parameter to track for the purpose of timing VP buys that you would be better off going off of an intuitive approach

therefore, any advise that is outperformed by one´s own intuitive ¨gut instinct¨ is absolutely horrid advice,

because an intuitive approach frees up the mind so that the mind can track other variables, which brings me to the Alternative

the alternative is to pay attention to OTHER PARAMETERS BESIDES TURN NUMBER, TO SEE HOW DIFFERENT CARDS AND OTHER VARIABLES AFFECT THE TEMPO OF THE GAME... AND THUS HOW TO BEST TIME ONES VP BUYS..... The ¨alternatives¨ are myriad, and this advise is awful even for a beginner because a beginner would be better served paying attention to OTHER VARIABLES and measuring  parameters other than turn number!!

[Gherald]

The ¨alternatives¨ are myriad, and this advise is awful even for a beginner because a beginner would be better served paying attention to OTHER VARIABLES and measuring  parameters other than turn number!!

If the beginner is already able to pay attention to other variables, they are not a beginner

[eHalcyon]

Gaming the system does not equal cheating, and I did not indend to say that.

I am simply pointing out that most serious players do game the ranking system, which means making a game out of it

There is nothing wrong with doing so

But I simply do not regard my ranking. If a player is slow in the first few turns, I quit the game, ranking be damned.

If I think the board looks boring, I quit the game in turn one, ranking be damned.

Many take ranking very seriously, and that´s fine, but I dont want to hear snooty players tell me that I talk big for someone with a X rank on Goko.

You ought to be more careful with your words.  To "game" a system typically means to cheat or exploit a flaw in that system.  Serious players would never do this.  It is, in fact, a chief concern of serious players because it hurts the validity of the rankings.  There are people who game the system (e.g. by making fake accounts to rig matches).

As for snootiness, you were the first one to bring a "try and beat me" attitude to this thread.  If anyone was snooty, it was you.  Rank is an objective way to measure a player's ability.  We know it's not perfect (I personally don't even play on Goko), but it's still true that your words will have more weight if you have a high rank to back them up.  Maybe your rank is low because of your brother, or because you are severely impatient.  But as far as we know, you could just be a bad player spouting excuses.  Maybe you would be #1 if you gave a damn, but statistics say that you probably aren't anywhere close.  Maybe you should take up your challenge with silverspawn.

I'd also like to point out something you said:

Your advice may be a decent starting point for a player starting out

Which is exactly what it was meant to be.

[Awaclus]

If the advice gets you demolished by reasonably good players then it is awful advice, this is not debatable!

"All advice is awful"
 —Count Grishnakh

Your conclusion does not logically follow from what I said

You bolded the part "Obviously we all know that just following these rules is going to cause you to get demolished against any reasonably good players.", so I assumed that your post was mostly directed at that. For most Dominion advice, just following that advice is "going to cause you to get demolished against any reasonably good players [when the advice is not suitable for the kingdom you're playing]", so either you're basically saying that all advice is awful or you don't actually think that "if the advice gets you demolished by reasonably good players then it is awful advice".

[GeoLib]

Using number of turns may not be the most intuitive measurement to base decisions on, but against new players there isn't much choice here. We have benchmarks on how fast an unopposed Smithy or Jack of all Trades gets Provinces. How are you supposed to judge the viability of your strategy against someone who, say, buys only Villages. Also, Base set tends to have a lot of straight rush-for-provinces games.

Clearly, there is a disagreement on what can be considered "decent" and what is "awful".

I believe that Gherald's advice works well as a base point, and that a player will gradually learn to break all those rules as they play more and against stronger opponents. What's the alternative? Tell a new player that it depends on the board using 10,000 words?

Whats the alternative??.... Whats the alternative??? WHAT A QUESTION! But clearly one in dire need of an answer...

First of all let me be clear, I did not say that using number of turns as a parameter is not intuitive, I said that it is such a useless parameter to track for the purpose of timing VP buys that you would be better off going off of an intuitive approach

therefore, any advise that is outperformed by one´s own intuitive ¨gut instinct¨ is absolutely horrid advice,

because an intuitive approach frees up the mind so that the mind can track other variables, which brings me to the Alternative

the alternative is to pay attention to OTHER PARAMETERS BESIDES TURN NUMBER, TO SEE HOW DIFFERENT CARDS AND OTHER VARIABLES AFFECT THE TEMPO OF THE GAME... AND THUS HOW TO BEST TIME ONES VP BUYS..... The ¨alternatives¨ are myriad, and this advise is awful even for a beginner because a beginner would be better served paying attention to OTHER VARIABLES and measuring  parameters other than turn number!!

Despite all the bold and capitalization, this post does not contain any actual strategy advice (which is true of all of your other posts too, actually).


Elanchana: sorry your thread has been so thoroughly derailed. The best advice I can give you is to see if SCSN is still doing his "teach beginners to play" thing. He did a nice set of (videoed) games against a beginner player, which I believe were successful and you might be able to convince him to make the next set against you http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=11149.0

[Awaclus]

and you might be able to convince him to make the next set against you

Yeah, it might be that he can't say no.

[Count Grishnakh]

If the advice gets you demolished by reasonably good players then it is awful advice, this is not debatable!

"All advice is awful"
 —Count Grishnakh

Your conclusion does not logically follow from what I said

You bolded the part "Obviously we all know that just following these rules is going to cause you to get demolished against any reasonably good players.", so I assumed that your post was mostly directed at that. For most Dominion advice, just following that advice is "going to cause you to get demolished against any reasonably good players [when the advice is not suitable for the kingdom you're playing]", so either you're basically saying that all advice is awful or you don't actually think that "if the advice gets you demolished by reasonably good players then it is awful advice".

You are thinking way too literally and I hope you are having fun playing games with words but you need not pretend that you are being logical.

[Count Grishnakh]

Using number of turns may not be the most intuitive measurement to base decisions on, but against new players there isn't much choice here. We have benchmarks on how fast an unopposed Smithy or Jack of all Trades gets Provinces. How are you supposed to judge the viability of your strategy against someone who, say, buys only Villages. Also, Base set tends to have a lot of straight rush-for-provinces games.

Clearly, there is a disagreement on what can be considered "decent" and what is "awful".

I believe that Gherald's advice works well as a base point, and that a player will gradually learn to break all those rules as they play more and against stronger opponents. What's the alternative? Tell a new player that it depends on the board using 10,000 words?

Whats the alternative??.... Whats the alternative??? WHAT A QUESTION! But clearly one in dire need of an answer...

First of all let me be clear, I did not say that using number of turns as a parameter is not intuitive, I said that it is such a useless parameter to track for the purpose of timing VP buys that you would be better off going off of an intuitive approach

therefore, any advise that is outperformed by one´s own intuitive ¨gut instinct¨ is absolutely horrid advice,

because an intuitive approach frees up the mind so that the mind can track other variables, which brings me to the Alternative

the alternative is to pay attention to OTHER PARAMETERS BESIDES TURN NUMBER, TO SEE HOW DIFFERENT CARDS AND OTHER VARIABLES AFFECT THE TEMPO OF THE GAME... AND THUS HOW TO BEST TIME ONES VP BUYS..... The ¨alternatives¨ are myriad, and this advise is awful even for a beginner because a beginner would be better served paying attention to OTHER VARIABLES and measuring  parameters other than turn number!!

Despite all the bold and capitalization, this post does not contain any actual strategy advice (which is true of all of your other posts too, actually).


Elanchana: sorry your thread has been so thoroughly derailed. The best advice I can give you is to see if SCSN is still doing his "teach beginners to play" thing. He did a nice set of (videoed) games against a beginner player, which I believe were successful and you might be able to convince him to make the next set against you http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=11149.0

It is not my intent to offer strategy advice, nor is the honus on me to provide such advice, nor do I have time to give out strategy advice. I am busy enough warding off various pestilent posters who are splitting hairs, diverting from the essence of my critique, and trying to discredit me in whatever manner they can manage to do so.

You yourself are diverting from the real issue by saying ¨you offer no strategic advice¨ as if that somehow invalidates my critique.

How can I have time to talk strategy when my hands are full teaching people how to be logical...


By the way my critique and my explanation on what NOT to do is far more useful for a beginner than counting turns and having a turn based schedule for province purchasing.. LOL! How rich.. Keep the hilarious idiocies coming, folks, I will pour myself another glass of brandy, step into my cigar room, and I look forward to seeing what you come up with next!!

[GeoLib]

It is not my intent to offer strategy advice, nor is the honus on me to provide such advice, nor do I have time to give out strategy advice. I am busy enough warding off various pestilent posters who are splitting hairs, diverting from the essence of my critique, and trying to discredit me in whatever manner they can manage to do so.

The question you claimed to answer with your rambling post was "What's the alternative?" However, you did not actually offer an alternative, unless your proposal is that when novice players ask for strategy advice that the best response is to ignore them or tell them to "pay attention to variables other than turn number."

Since this thread has degenerated into name-calling, I shall stop "trying to discredit" you, and go discredit others, as is my wont.

[silverspawn]

You are not arguing logically. I made a post explaining why you don't, and you didn't respond. If you really want to go with the "the forum just sucks, I'm the only one who gets it" mentality (sorry, but that's how it comes across to me), at least address every post. Even ErrinF did that.

Unrelated, the offer for our match still stands.

[jsh357]

I hope this type of discourse isn't that discouraging to you, Elanchana (if you didn't already stop visiting the forums after all this).  You're still new to the game; try and just have fun discovering new combos and such for now--one thing none of the better players can say is that anything's truly fresh for them at this point, and you should enjoy that aspect of the game as long as possible.  You'll get better without any input from others over time, though there's no harm in looking for advice either.  Dominion's fun for a lot of different reasons, and its complexity is only one.

[Count Grishnakh]

I hope this type of discourse isn't that discouraging to you, Elanchana (if you didn't already stop visiting the forums after all this).  You're still new to the game; try and just have fun discovering new combos and such for now--one thing none of the better players can say is that anything's truly fresh for them at this point, and you should enjoy that aspect of the game as long as possible.  You'll get better without any input from others over time, though there's no harm in looking for advice either.  Dominion's fun for a lot of different reasons, and its complexity is only one.

wise advise

this is how i learned

i also recommend playing against bots

the advantage is this.. You will feel more free to experiment and you wont worry about how you look in front of others

I practiced with bots for hundreds of games before I played against a single human, and I still think it was a great way to learn

[Count Grishnakh]

It is not my intent to offer strategy advice, nor is the honus on me to provide such advice, nor do I have time to give out strategy advice. I am busy enough warding off various pestilent posters who are splitting hairs, diverting from the essence of my critique, and trying to discredit me in whatever manner they can manage to do so.

The question you claimed to answer with your rambling post was "What's the alternative?" However, you did not actually offer an alternative, unless your proposal is that when novice players ask for strategy advice that the best response is to ignore them or tell them to "pay attention to variables other than turn number."

Since this thread has degenerated into name-calling, I shall stop "trying to discredit" you, and go discredit others, as is my wont.

well since everyone discredits everything i say, why on earth would i offer my alternative solution in detailż you smear all that i say and distort it, anyway, so why would i bother offering a detailed essay on this subjectż I certainly have such an essay in me, but if my words are to be smeared by the impudent rabble, then I will only paint my alternative in broad brush strokes

I would basically have to write an essay to do so, and I am not going to waste my time, not when I get this type of reception

but you know the game well, do not play dumb, you know what variables are relevant for timing your VP purchases

[Count Grishnakh]

You are not arguing logically. I made a post explaining why you don't, and you didn't respond. If you really want to go with the "the forum just sucks, I'm the only one who gets it" mentality (sorry, but that's how it comes across to me), at least address every post. Even ErrinF did that.

Unrelated, the offer for our match still stands.

lets do it

 name the time and place

[scott_pilgrim]

It is not my intent to offer strategy advice, nor is the honus on me to provide such advice, nor do I have time to give out strategy advice. I am busy enough warding off various pestilent posters who are splitting hairs, diverting from the essence of my critique, and trying to discredit me in whatever manner they can manage to do so.

You yourself are diverting from the real issue by saying ¨you offer no strategic advice¨ as if that somehow invalidates my critique.

How can I have time to talk strategy when my hands are full teaching people how to be logical...


By the way my critique and my explanation on what NOT to do is far more useful for a beginner than counting turns and having a turn based schedule for province purchasing.. LOL! How rich.. Keep the hilarious idiocies coming, folks, I will pour myself another glass of brandy, step into my cigar room, and I look forward to seeing what you come up with next!!

Generally, if you say someone's advice is awful, you're implicitly saying "I could give better advice".  You say you don't have time to come up with better advice because you're busy warding off everyone else's comments, but I would say, giving better advice would be sufficient response to the comments.

[Awaclus]

i also recommend playing against bots

the advantage is this.. You will feel more free to experiment and you wont worry about how you look in front of others

I practiced with bots for hundreds of games before I played against a single human, and I still think it was a great way to learn

...how to play against the bots. It's not a great way to learn how to play against people.

You are thinking way too literally and I hope you are having fun playing games with words but you need not pretend that you are being logical.

Oh, my mistake. Now that I'm not thinking too literally, it looks like you were saying Gherald's advice was in fact good for the purpose it served, and in that light, I no longer have a problem with it!

My statement is relevant and I have backed it up. If you want to refute it, you have to do it properly; just implying how illogical I'm being isn't quite sufficient.

[silverspawn]

You are not arguing logically. I made a post explaining why you don't, and you didn't respond. If you really want to go with the "the forum just sucks, I'm the only one who gets it" mentality (sorry, but that's how it comes across to me), at least address every post. Even ErrinF did that.

Unrelated, the offer for our match still stands.

lets do it

 name the time and place

i have no idea in which time zone you live. i have time during the next ~12 hours.

[Titandrake]

popcorn.gif

Since this thread has gone way out of alignment, here's my baseline metrics for when to start greening. It's much more important to base off shuffle count, rather than turn count.

- In a money based game, greening after buying the first Gold and shuffling it into your deck is safe. Province after Gold + 2-3 Silvers is safe. Greening with 1 Gold + 1 Silver is almost certainly too early, but the odds of hitting $8 with that is fairly unlikely.
- In an engine board, very very generally you should not be greening before you're getting $12 in a turn. You are presumably getting at least 2 buys a turn, so your goal should be 2 Province or Province + engine component every turn. $12 is a magic number - it's Province + $4 cost which feels okay to me.
-- (If you have no +Buys but are playing an engine-like deck, then the standard "buy Province on $8" is correct, but you should delay Duchies more than you would normally.)

[Count Grishnakh]

i also recommend playing against bots

the advantage is this.. You will feel more free to experiment and you wont worry about how you look in front of others

I practiced with bots for hundreds of games before I played against a single human, and I still think it was a great way to learn

...how to play against the bots. It's not a great way to learn how to play against people.

You are thinking way too literally and I hope you are having fun playing games with words but you need not pretend that you are being logical.

Oh, my mistake. Now that I'm not thinking too literally, it looks like you were saying Gherald's advice was in fact good for the purpose it served, and in that light, I no longer have a problem with it!

My statement is relevant and I have backed it up. If you want to refute it, you have to do it properly; just implying how illogical I'm being isn't quite sufficient.

By literally I mean, you seem to think that when I say ¨this is bad advice because it would cause you to lose against skilled players¨

you assume that this would be true for all advice, because all advice, if followed without reference to all other factors, would likewise lead to the same result...


it is this last assumption that is false, I said no such thing, that is your erroneous assumption, and it is absurd on your part to assume that my words had that meaning. Of COURSE all advice would lead to bad results if followed in isolation of all other factors.

Now I did mention that there are so many other pertinent factors that need to be considered, and while I agree that this applies to all advice, this paticular advice is particularily useless because this advise should be abandoned the majority of the time, and it also distracts the player from more important factors, thus delaying learning process of the finer points of the game

for this reason, I deem this advice impractical and useless, at best this incredibly simple advice would be suitable for a players first handful of games, but then for the first game one would be better for a player to focus on the CARDS, not the TURNS for the first few games anyways.

You, like others on this board, have an irritating habit of conjuring up a phantom premise, adding implications to my words that are not warranted, seemingly in order to make it easier for you to discredit my opinion

It is exhausting and I won´t continue to tutor you in logic and clean up your sloppy thinking unless you would like to pay me for my efforts..

Look at what this discourse has devolved into, all because of your petty diversions and your absurd interpretations of my words.

[Count Grishnakh]

popcorn.gif

Since this thread has gone way out of alignment, here's my baseline metrics for when to start greening. It's much more important to base off shuffle count, rather than turn count.

- In a money based game, greening after buying the first Gold and shuffling it into your deck is safe. Province after Gold + 2-3 Silvers is safe. Greening with 1 Gold + 1 Silver is almost certainly too early, but the odds of hitting $8 with that is fairly unlikely.
- In an engine board, very very generally you should not be greening before you're getting $12 in a turn. You are presumably getting at least 2 buys a turn, so your goal should be 2 Province or Province + engine component every turn. $12 is a magic number - it's Province + $4 cost which feels okay to me.
-- (If you have no +Buys but are playing an engine-like deck, then the standard "buy Province on $8" is correct, but you should delay Duchies more than you would normally.)

Yes I am all for getting this thread back into alignment, and your points are well taken.

See, if you one s going to make gross generalizations about greening, these types of variables, or  (say) whether or not extra buys are available, are far more useful parameters to consider than number of turns, and therefore I approve of your advice

[Count Grishnakh]

You are not arguing logically. I made a post explaining why you don't, and you didn't respond. If you really want to go with the "the forum just sucks, I'm the only one who gets it" mentality (sorry, but that's how it comes across to me), at least address every post. Even ErrinF did that.

Unrelated, the offer for our match still stands.

lets do it

 name the time and place

i have no idea in which time zone you live. i have time during the next ~12 hours.

I will leave a game open in KINGS COURT.. meet me there when you are ready, i will be awake for a few more hours

if I dont respond in goko send me a PM on this forum

If anyone else if feeling brave they are welcome to battle me in KINGS COURT

[Count Grishnakh]

It is not my intent to offer strategy advice, nor is the honus on me to provide such advice, nor do I have time to give out strategy advice. I am busy enough warding off various pestilent posters who are splitting hairs, diverting from the essence of my critique, and trying to discredit me in whatever manner they can manage to do so.

You yourself are diverting from the real issue by saying ¨you offer no strategic advice¨ as if that somehow invalidates my critique.

How can I have time to talk strategy when my hands are full teaching people how to be logical...


By the way my critique and my explanation on what NOT to do is far more useful for a beginner than counting turns and having a turn based schedule for province purchasing.. LOL! How rich.. Keep the hilarious idiocies coming, folks, I will pour myself another glass of brandy, step into my cigar room, and I look forward to seeing what you come up with next!!

Generally, if you say someone's advice is awful, you're implicitly saying "I could give better advice".  You say you don't have time to come up with better advice because you're busy warding off everyone else's comments, but I would say, giving better advice would be sufficient response to the comments.

I am making general statements about my alternative advice, and although I am not going into detail, you can imagine what I mean when I say its better to focus on other variables, assuming you understand the word and you are an astute and seasoned player of DOMINION

Now listen here young man, there is nothing logical about your statement that I need to provide good advice to prove the validity of my critique



The validity of a critique does not rest on offering a better alternative! Why don´t you understand that?


 I was generous to even give you an inculcation of what my alternative would be

If anyone is genuinely interested I will be happy to write an article detailing my ideas but you´re a fool if you think I am wrong for not writing an essay about my ideas to such a hostile, antagonistic bunch who hasn´t even addressed the arguments that I have made, why would I waste time elaborating?

[dondon151]

Oh, we're not a hostile, antagonistic bunch. f.ds is the nicest forum that I frequent. Maybe you're seeing your reflection off the lens with which you're scrutinizing us.

[Count Grishnakh]

The ¨alternatives¨ are myriad, and this advise is awful even for a beginner because a beginner would be better served paying attention to OTHER VARIABLES and measuring  parameters other than turn number!!

If the beginner is already able to pay attention to other variables, they are not a beginner

What? So basically your advice is for someone who has played less than 5 games then? Or someone who is mentally challenged? Because I was able to pay close attention to more important parameters of each game and each turn within my first 15 games or so, and time my greening accordingly.

Sure I had not mastered my technique, but I at least was paying attention and learning accordingly

so basically your advice would work for someone with less than 15 games? In that case why not just let them play 15 games and get an intuitive feel for the game? Why try to have a schedule for buying provinces? Its ludicrous

[Count Grishnakh]

Oh, we're not a hostile, antagonistic bunch. f.ds is the nicest forum that I frequent. Maybe you're seeing your reflection off the lens with which you're scrutinizing us.

I am not antagonistic or mean spirited I simply enjoy speaking my mind and I lack patience for expressing myself diplomatically, for that, I apologize.

A nice bunch? Perhaps but I expected more logic from the likes of you and less impudence. I think you guys have an intense hive mind tribal mentality going on and you guys are backing up one of your own

loyalty to friends is admirable, but sloppy thinking, warped logic, advocating awful advice, not so much

[eHalcyon]

You've spent an inordinate amount of time in this thread putting people down and propping yourself up, criticizing others' advice without offering any of your own, and playing the part of the victim when others criticize you in turn.  You claim you have no time to give any advice, but you've spent plenty of time here arguing semantics and throwing insults.  When you mentioned that players should spend time tracking variables and parameters other than the turn number, surely you could have given a few examples. 

I'm going to point this out again, since you blithely ignored it the first time:

I'd also like to point out something you said:

Your advice may be a decent starting point for a player starting out

Which is exactly what it was meant to be.

And as for this:

If anyone is genuinely interested I will be happy to write an article detailing my ideas but you´re a fool if you think I am wrong for not writing an essay about my ideas to such a hostile, antagonistic bunch who hasn´t even addressed the arguments that I have made, why would I waste time elaborating?

The thread was the height of civility until you came in.  A couple of people objected to your hostility and antagonism, to which you took even greater offense.  And then it snowballed from there.

I haven't seen any arguments you brought up that haven't been thoroughly addressed.  If something has been missed, feel free to bring it back up.

I'll add that I find it amusingly ironic that you were so outraged at Gherald's advice (which you admitted was a fine starting point for a beginner but useless for advanced players, as if nobody knew that already) and then later recommended playing against bots, which is an activity that is also a fine starting point for beginners and also useless for advanced players trying to improve their game.


Oh, new posts...

The ¨alternatives¨ are myriad, and this advise is awful even for a beginner because a beginner would be better served paying attention to OTHER VARIABLES and measuring  parameters other than turn number!!

If the beginner is already able to pay attention to other variables, they are not a beginner

What? So basically your advice is for someone who has played less than 5 games then? Or someone who is mentally challenged? Because I was able to pay close attention to more important parameters of each game and each turn within my first 15 games or so, and time my greening accordingly.

Sure I had not mastered my technique, but I at least was paying attention and learning accordingly

so basically your advice would work for someone with less than 15 games? In that case why not just let them play 15 games and get an intuitive feel for the game? Why try to have a schedule for buying provinces? Its ludicrous

Again, what parameters?  How do they affect your timing?  You're not offering anything of value here.  If you are such a pro, it should be easy to offer the answers to these questions.

Oh, we're not a hostile, antagonistic bunch. f.ds is the nicest forum that I frequent. Maybe you're seeing your reflection off the lens with which you're scrutinizing us.

I am not antagonistic or mean spirited I simply enjoy speaking my mind and I lack patience for expressing myself diplomatically, for that, I apologize.

A nice bunch? Perhaps but I expected more logic from the likes of you and less impudence. I think you guys have an intense hive mind tribal mentality going on and you guys are backing up one of your own

loyalty to friends is admirable, but sloppy thinking, warped logic, advocating awful advice, not so much

Perhaps you should give others the same benefit of the doubt then.

I'm seen more logic and rationality from the "hive mind" than from you so far.  Impudence?  That implies that you are some sort of authority figure.  Sorry, you aren't.  If you want respect, you shouldn't jump into a thread just to insult people and then proclaim yourself the "Bruce Lee" of anything at all.  So far, people have been far more respectful to you than you have been to others.

And to be clear, I'm not defending Gherald here out of any sort of loyalty.  I've had relatively unfriendly debates with him in this forum, and I can't recall being in agreement with him before.  But he at least remained civil in all discussion.  Nobody is advocating awful advice here.  Again, you said it yourself -- it's a decent starting point for a beginner.  His advice was OK given the context.

[Count Grishnakh]

You've spent an inordinate amount of time in this thread putting people down and propping yourself up, criticizing others' advice without offering any of your own, and playing the part of the victim when others criticize you in turn.  You claim you have no time to give any advice, but you've spent plenty of time here arguing semantics and throwing insults.  When you mentioned that players should spend time tracking variables and parameters other than the turn number, surely you could have given a few examples. 

I'm going to point this out again, since you blithely ignored it the first time:

I'd also like to point out something you said:

Your advice may be a decent starting point for a player starting out

Which is exactly what it was meant to be.

And as for this:

If anyone is genuinely interested I will be happy to write an article detailing my ideas but you´re a fool if you think I am wrong for not writing an essay about my ideas to such a hostile, antagonistic bunch who hasn´t even addressed the arguments that I have made, why would I waste time elaborating?

The thread was the height of civility until you came in.  A couple of people objected to your hostility and antagonism, to which you took even greater offense.  And then it snowballed from there.

I haven't seen any arguments you brought up that haven't been thoroughly addressed.  If something has been missed, feel free to bring it back up.

I'll add that I find it amusingly ironic that you were so outraged at Gherald's advice (which you admitted was a fine starting point for a beginner but useless for advanced players, as if nobody knew that already) and then later recommended playing against bots, which is an activity that is also a fine starting point for beginners and also useless for advanced players trying to improve their game.


Oh, new posts...

The ¨alternatives¨ are myriad, and this advise is awful even for a beginner because a beginner would be better served paying attention to OTHER VARIABLES and measuring  parameters other than turn number!!

If the beginner is already able to pay attention to other variables, they are not a beginner

What? So basically your advice is for someone who has played less than 5 games then? Or someone who is mentally challenged? Because I was able to pay close attention to more important parameters of each game and each turn within my first 15 games or so, and time my greening accordingly.

Sure I had not mastered my technique, but I at least was paying attention and learning accordingly

so basically your advice would work for someone with less than 15 games? In that case why not just let them play 15 games and get an intuitive feel for the game? Why try to have a schedule for buying provinces? Its ludicrous

Again, what parameters?  How do they affect your timing?  You're not offering anything of value here.  If you are such a pro, it should be easy to offer the answers to these questions.

Oh, we're not a hostile, antagonistic bunch. f.ds is the nicest forum that I frequent. Maybe you're seeing your reflection off the lens with which you're scrutinizing us.

I am not antagonistic or mean spirited I simply enjoy speaking my mind and I lack patience for expressing myself diplomatically, for that, I apologize.

A nice bunch? Perhaps but I expected more logic from the likes of you and less impudence. I think you guys have an intense hive mind tribal mentality going on and you guys are backing up one of your own

loyalty to friends is admirable, but sloppy thinking, warped logic, advocating awful advice, not so much

Perhaps you should give others the same benefit of the doubt then.

I'm seen more logic and rationality from the "hive mind" than from you so far.  Impudence?  That implies that you are some sort of authority figure.  Sorry, you aren't.  If you want respect, you shouldn't jump into a thread just to insult people and then proclaim yourself the "Bruce Lee" of anything at all.  So far, people have been far more respectful to you than you have been to others.

And to be clear, I'm not defending Gherald here out of any sort of loyalty.  I've had relatively unfriendly debates with him in this forum, and I can't recall being in agreement with him before.  But he at least remained civil in all discussion.  Nobody is advocating awful advice here.  Again, you said it yourself -- it's a decent starting point for a beginner.  His advice was OK given the context.

I give up on this forum holy shit you guys are fucking annoying

every time I post my opinion this happens

first a bunch of you attack me, you make bogus personal attacks or you make up false criticisms such as ¨¨you havent offered your own advice¨¨

I defend against the same criticism multiple times, yet imps like you keep popping out of the word work repeating the very criticisms that I have already refuted

Then ppl say ¨well youre putting people down blah blah blah¨

Then people start picking apart everything I say intentionally miscontruing my words until my words have been interpreted in ways that are absurd

then I have to grudgingly discuss semantics because of said misconstrucing of my words until they have created an absurd caricature of my argument

then I have an asshole like you blame me for discussing semantics

I dont want to discuss semantics you dumb fuck I am not the one who took the debate in this direction, it was the petty denizens of this board

holy fuck are you guys ever annoying

Nobody is listening to what im saying people are just straw manning and repeating the same criticism over and over

you guys arent listening to what im saying so far, and what you are paying attention to is petty details, what you are paying attention to, you are intentionally straw manning

then you criticise me for ¨¨not offering anything of value¨¨ lets have a reasonable discussion about this topic, actually listen to me and stop criticising my character or strawmanning me and I will give you more details

wow you treat me like shit then wonder why I am not elaborating on my points¨?? I wonder why I am not in the mood to explain my ideas!!

Because this awful fucking community shits on anyone who dares to express ideas that go against the grain with harsh honesty

[silverspawn]

Count Grishnakh and I have played 4 games against each other, unrated, full random (though I did randomize a couple of times to have complex boards, but didn't spend more than few seconds looking at them). the logs to the games can be found here, here, here, and here.

[Count Grishnakh]

Count Grishnakh and I have played 4 games against each other, unrated, full random (though I did randomize a couple of times to have complex boards, but didn't spend more than few seconds looking at them). the logs to the games can be found here, here, here, and here.

Yeah now we have this snitch showing our logs so everyone can attack me for how I play rather than focus on the point, this forum is fucking awful, fuck you all

Ive never been able to make a single post here without being attacked by hordes of people

Sure, I take some responsibility for my attitude and i express myself in a harsh way sometime, but you all treat me like shit which doesnt help my attitude any

im actually a nice person always kind to others but fuck you all,

[scott_pilgrim]

(Disclaimer: I haven't read the last ~10 or so posts in this thread (except this one)).

I am making general statements about my alternative advice, and although I am not going into detail, you can imagine what I mean when I say its better to focus on other variables, assuming you understand the word and you are an astute and seasoned player of DOMINION

Now listen here young man, there is nothing logical about your statement that I need to provide good advice to prove the validity of my critique



The validity of a critique does not rest on offering a better alternative! Why don´t you understand that?


 I was generous to even give you an inculcation of what my alternative would be

I'm not saying you're morally obligated to back up your post with evidence or anything, I'm just saying, I would be much more inclined to agree with you if you did.  You made a claim, framed it in a way that seemed insulting to another user, and then refused to back up the claim with argumentation.  Instead of providing arguments regarding the claim, you got wrapped up in these arguments about the other users here.  I'm saying, ignore those arguments; the best way to prove your case is to argue for it, not to attack others who argue against it.

Your attitude of coming in, pointing out that these rules are not applicable at high levels of play (a trivially obvious claim), and then challenging Gherald to a Dominion match, sounds to me like you weren't hoping to start a respectful discussion about how to know when to green, but that you just came in here wanting to prove that you're the best at Dominion; it's not surprising that several strong players have taken offense to that attitude, because they most likely are better than you.

If anyone is genuinely interested I will be happy to write an article detailing my ideas but you´re a fool if you think I am wrong for not writing an essay about my ideas to such a hostile, antagonistic bunch who hasn´t even addressed the arguments that I have made, why would I waste time elaborating?

Well here I am trying to ask you to do that.  I'm not asking you to write a giant article, just provide what you think would be better advice than Gherald's.  I tried to ask you to do this in my last post, but instead your response was just, "I'm not going to do that, because no one will listen to me".

[Count Grishnakh]

[/quote]

I'm not saying you're morally obligated to back up your post with evidence or anything, I'm just saying, I would be much more inclined to agree with you if you did.  You made a claim, framed it in a way that seemed insulting to another user, and then refused to back up the claim with argumentation.  Instead of providing arguments regarding the claim, you got wrapped up in these arguments about the other users here.  I'm saying, ignore those arguments; the best way to prove your case is to argue for it, not to attack others who argue against it.

Your attitude of coming in, pointing out that these rules are not applicable at high levels of play (a trivially obvious claim), and then challenging Gherald to a Dominion match, sounds to me like you weren't hoping to start a respectful discussion about how to know when to green, but that you just came in here wanting to prove that you're the best at Dominion; it's not surprising that several strong players have taken offense to that attitude, because they most likely are better than you.

If anyone is genuinely interested I will be happy to write an article detailing my ideas but you´re a fool if you think I am wrong for not writing an essay about my ideas to such a hostile, antagonistic bunch who hasn´t even addressed the arguments that I have made, why would I waste time elaborating?

Well here I am trying to ask you to do that.  I'm not asking you to write a giant article, just provide what you think would be better advice than Gherald's.  I tried to ask you to do this in my last post, but instead your response was just, "I'm not going to do that, because no one will listen to me".
[/quote]




This board is full of assholes who are simultaneously shitting on everything I say, not listening to a god damn word, distoring what I say, then they have the nerve to scold me for not elaborating on my ideas

I know I have really bad decorum on this board but I get treated like shit by everyone on this board so I might as well be an asshole its me against like 8 other people

I even tried to make constructive posts elsewhere in the forum a while back and I couldnt make any claim without 4 or 5 people picking apart what I said because I was making an oversimplification because I could not be bothered to write a longer post that would be more accurately worded

Then I make one critique and everyone jumps on me for that

Although it was a ¨¨trivially honest claim¨ that wasnt the main point, the main point is that such advise is not practical, even for an absolute beginner.

[Count Grishnakh]

Im not going to post in this forum anymore I can´t stand the lot of you go ahead and resume your circle jerk

you know a bluntly stated unpopular opinion is more valuable then a bunch of fucking conformists circle jerking together

A person like me would be great for this forum I could stir up a lot of discussion but its too bad that there are so many who completely kill my passion for discussing this game with their constant barrage of personal attacks and endless diversions and hair splitting and straw manning

fuck ive never been scolded so incessantly in my life, not even when I was a child, my god.

fuck you all, im done

[silverspawn]

I love this forum. Best com ever <3 <3

[jsh357]

A person like me would be great for this forum

The burden of proof is on you, sir.  Was a fun thread; good day.

[scott_pilgrim]

the main point is that such advise is not practical, even for an absolute beginner.

It's not obvious to me that this is the case, so I would like to hear you back up that claim with evidence.  That's what people do on forums, they make arguments.  You seem to take so much offense to my asking you to back up your claim.  I'm not trying to be offensive, I'm trying to get you to make a case.


I don't know what your other experiences on f.ds were like, so I'm sorry if they were bad; people here are generally nice and respectful as long as you're nice and respectful to them.  But in this case, I think you really should have expected the response you got.  You told a user that his advice was horrible, with an attitude that you could do much better, but then you never backed it up with evidence or arguments.  All I'm asking you to do is follow up on your claim with argumentation.

[Awaclus]

the main point is that such advise is not practical, even for an absolute beginner.

It's not obvious to me that this is the case, so I would like to hear you back up that claim with evidence.  That's what people do on forums, they make arguments.  You seem to take so much offense to my asking you to back up your claim.  I'm not trying to be offensive, I'm trying to get you to make a case.


I don't know what your other experiences on f.ds were like, so I'm sorry if they were bad; people here are generally nice and respectful as long as you're nice and respectful to them.  But in this case, I think you really should have expected the response you got.  You told a user that his advice was horrible, with an attitude that you could do much better, but then you never backed it up with evidence or arguments.  All I'm asking you to do is follow up on your claim with argumentation.

His previous experiences were actually coincidentally linked on the page 1 of this thread.

[eHalcyon]

Nobody attacked you at first, let a lot "a bunch".  It was two people and they merely disagreed with you, respectfully, and you got into a big huff about it.  People asked you to elaborate and you refused.  First, you said you had no time.  Now, you say that people are personally attacking you or misconstruing your words so you don't want to elaborate.  I'm starting to think you don't actually have any advice at all.

Nobody is strawmanning.  We're responding directly to your written statements.  If I have misconstrued anything, feel free to point it out and correct my misunderstanding. 

You are the only one here using profanity, calling people idiots and snitches.  And on that, really?  You issued the first challenge and it was public.  Nobody is going through those games to nitpick.  Please calm down.

We've been listening for what you have to say this whole time.  You're just not saying anything.  scott_pilgrim just asked you very kindly to give your thoughts on when to green but you still refuse to do so.  I'll second his request.  I would love to hear your thoughts.  I mean this sincerely, without mockery or sarcasm.  If you had given a few suggestions from the start, people would be discussing that instead.




But at this point, I have to wonder if we've just been successfully trolled. 

[Titandrake]

Guys help.

I'm out of popcorn what do I do. Where's the closest internet store? Is it reddit?

I've almost never seen an internet argument resolve itself peacefully. There's something about the medium that makes people respond to criticism with more criticism until you get to a positive feedback loop of disappointment. It's why I like this forum so much - generally, people have enough respect and are chill enough to make everything resolve itself. Of course, as this has just showed, generally != all the time. (And if you had argued why Gherald's general rules weren't good baselines, none of this would have happened. As it so happens I don't really like the turn metric because the shuffle metric is more important and gets you thinking correctly about how/when new cards get into your deck.)

Unpopular beliefs need strong arguments to matter - your arguments aren't.

[silverspawn]

But at this point, I have to wonder if we've just been successfully trolled. 

I don't think so (he is probably going to get banned for his insults, so it should be fine if we talk about him). He legitimately tried to win the games we played, and he was telling the truth when he said that he is better than his ranking suggests. A generous guess would be lvl 25 skill wise.

ErrinF was serious, and I think this guy was very reasonable compared to him, so my guess is that he was serious too.

[Aidan Millow]

I've almost never seen an internet argument resolve itself peacefully. There's something about the medium that makes people respond to criticism with more criticism until you get to a positive feedback loop of disappointment.

I actually find this phenomenon quite interesting so here's more of a response than you were probably expecting:
Some premises (because I like premises).

• People instinctively want to win arguments, even if they're wrong.
• In person and in most other media people often suppress this desire due to social conditioning (and practical concerns such as time sometimes come into play).
• Due to being semi-anonymous on the internet people are less inhibited.

Due to point 3, point 2 doesn't stop people so when one person makes a statement and then sees a reply that does anything but admit defeat they starts preparing a response. If you actually want to stop you have to take a step back and say to yourself "I don't want to be doing this any more." Then to assuage your instincts you often have to make a statement of leaving the discussion.

[2.71828.....]

fuck ive never been scolded so incessantly in my life, not even when I was a child, my god.

Well, then I am glad that we, as the f.ds community, have been able to expand your horizons into the world of criticism and assist you in learning how to demurely accept constructive criticism without becoming overly enraged and hostile.  It is a useful skill to learn from criticism.

Guys help.

I'm out of popcorn what do I do. Where's the closest internet store? Is it reddit?

yes

[GeoLib]

I've almost never seen an internet argument resolve itself peacefully. There's something about the medium that makes people respond to criticism with more criticism until you get to a positive feedback loop of disappointment.

I actually find this phenomenon quite interesting so here's more of a response than you were probably expecting:
Some premises (because I like premises).

• People instinctively want to win arguments, even if they're wrong.
• In person and in most other media people often suppress this desire due to social conditioning (and practical concerns such as time sometimes come into play).
• Due to being semi-anonymous on the internet people are less inhibited.

Due to point 3, point 2 doesn't stop people so when one person makes a statement and then sees a reply that does anything but admit defeat they starts preparing a response. If you actually want to stop you have to take a step back and say to yourself "I don't want to be doing this any more." Then to assuage your instincts you often have to make a statement of leaving the discussion.

Yeah. The stepping back thing for me was definitely caused by the fact that I realized I had way more important things to do and "the Count" had slipped beyond the point where I cared about his opinions.

I think another important factor that you didn't state, is that people are much more likely to think the worst of any textual communication. Without the influencing factor of tone, that part is filled in by the reader's own head. Apparently in his head we're a "hostile" "antagonistic" "impudent" "rabble" of "imps" "popping out of the word work" while he is the "Bruce Lee of DOMINION." Given that context, it's pretty understandable that he took offense to us questioning his almighty authority.

Elanchana: I'm really sorry that this was one of your first introductions to this forum. Hopefully you stopped reading this thread a while ago, but I promise that this doesn't happen very frequently. In general on this forum I have seen some of the best internet decorum ever and found people genuinely make up and see reason after having been on the precipice of a flame war.

Silverspawn, did you already report his posts to theory? I'm not actually sure that banning him is necessary, though I certainly wouldn't argue strongly against it.

[silverspawn]

Silverspawn, did you already report his posts to theory? I'm not actually sure that banning him is necessary, though I certainly wouldn't argue strongly against it.

no, I don't mind him here. I just used it as a justification to talk about him like that.

[Count Grishnakh]

Guys help.

I'm out of popcorn what do I do. Where's the closest internet store? Is it reddit?

I've almost never seen an internet argument resolve itself peacefully. There's something about the medium that makes people respond to criticism with more criticism until you get to a positive feedback loop of disappointment. It's why I like this forum so much - generally, people have enough respect and are chill enough to make everything resolve itself. Of course, as this has just showed, generally != all the time. (And if you had argued why Gherald's general rules weren't good baselines, none of this would have happened. As it so happens I don't really like the turn metric because the shuffle metric is more important and gets you thinking correctly about how/when new cards get into your deck.)

Unpopular beliefs need strong arguments to matter - your arguments aren't.

what? I said that there are so many other variables that are more relevant that the new player would be better served paying attention to those, rather than turn order

I questioned the notion of the ¨typical province game¨ How many games are truly ¨typical¨ in that sense? Maybe 1 in 10?

I argued that this counting turns approach would be no more successful than ¨going by ones gut¨ as far as greening goes

You said yourself that shuffle mechanic is more relevant, thats just one of many factors that are far more relevant to timing one´s VP buys

Just because I haven´t elaborated on my argument does not mean its weak. You are all experienced players, you should understand what I am referring to when I refer to other variables

for instance another variable  the presence of extra buys

a new player would be much better served by a method of VP purchase that takes into account the absence or presence of buys

such emphasis would be much more useful for a beginner than number of turns

[Count Grishnakh]

Nobody attacked you at first, let a lot "a bunch".  It was two people and they merely disagreed with you, respectfully, and you got into a big huff about it.  People asked you to elaborate and you refused.  First, you said you had no time.  Now, you say that people are personally attacking you or misconstruing your words so you don't want to elaborate.  I'm starting to think you don't actually have any advice at all.

Nobody is strawmanning.  We're responding directly to your written statements.  If I have misconstrued anything, feel free to point it out and correct my misunderstanding. 

You are the only one here using profanity, calling people idiots and snitches.  And on that, really?  You issued the first challenge and it was public.  Nobody is going through those games to nitpick.  Please calm down.

We've been listening for what you have to say this whole time.  You're just not saying anything.  scott_pilgrim just asked you very kindly to give your thoughts on when to green but you still refuse to do so.  I'll second his request.  I would love to hear your thoughts.  I mean this sincerely, without mockery or sarcasm.  If you had given a few suggestions from the start, people would be discussing that instead.




But at this point, I have to wonder if we've just been successfully trolled. 

Listen, this is the first post of yours I like

Now I have apologized many times for my way of speaking, and I know I have excessive pride, I can´t help myself some times, and nobody should take my flamboyant way of speaking to heart

my wanton issuing of challenges to others when they disagree with me is more out of enthusiasm for the game than anything else, and also a way of showing that I am willing to back up what I say and put myself on the line

I understand my weaknesses as a forum citizen, but I ask you all to consider yours as well... The constant use of ¨we¨ and ¨us¨ betrays the fact that you are a tight knit group, thats fine.. but becareful not to barrage anyone with an unpopular opinion with unfair criticism...


I don´t care if you disagree but a lot of criticisms of me in this thread were not based on logical principles..

And above all, until now nobody has expressed interest in what I actually have to say

I thought you all could imagine what I was alluding to in my sketch of my alternative style of learning to time VP buys.. but maybe you can not

I will write a short essay on this topic and reveal it to you all when it is finished

I apologize for the profanity but I really cant stand 8 different people attacking me in unfair and illogical ways all at once, it is agonizing and exhausting!

good day

[theory]

Thread locked.  Count Grishnakh banned.