Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Eliminating the obvious self-destruct aspect of game?  (Read 13319 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7829
    • View Profile
Re: Eliminating the obvious self-destruct aspect of game?
« Reply #50 on: September 08, 2015, 01:35:00 pm »
0

PS For anyone who cares, my preferred way of learning a game is like how my brother taught me Terra Mystica.  He had played it before, so I told him to just start off playing the full game with me a few turns, and tell me when I screw up.  Once I felt like I had a grasp on all the mechanics involved (the power, the turn bonuses, etc.) we aborted that game, and started over playing a "real" game.

This is basically how I prefer. 
Logged

JW

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 745
  • Shuffle iT Username: JW
  • Respect: +1345
    • View Profile
Re: Eliminating the obvious self-destruct aspect of game?
« Reply #51 on: September 08, 2015, 04:40:56 pm »
0

If I were teaching Dominion to someone prone to analysis paralysis, or who wasn't familiar with strategy games I'd consider using fewer than 10 cards for the first game kingdom.

For example: Workshop, Village, Smithy, Cutpurse, Festival, Junk Dealer.

This shows trashing, gaining, +Actions, +Buy, +Cards, and attacks, and has only simple cards.
Logged

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5292
  • Respect: +2724
    • View Profile
Re: Eliminating the obvious self-destruct aspect of game?
« Reply #52 on: September 08, 2015, 05:51:34 pm »
0

I really want to say, I don't think restricting the number of cards in the kingdom is all that different from running with the expectation that players will buy cards without reading all of the options available to them.
Logged
Also you probably are an expert if you buy two bureaucrats early.

Chris is me

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2677
  • Shuffle iT Username: Chris is me
  • What do you want me to say?
  • Respect: +3336
    • View Profile
Re: Eliminating the obvious self-destruct aspect of game?
« Reply #53 on: September 08, 2015, 08:05:58 pm »
+4

I really want to say, I don't think restricting the number of cards in the kingdom is all that different from running with the expectation that players will buy cards without reading all of the options available to them.

That's why he specified that he would make that rule change for people prone to analysis paralysis - people that would read every word of every card and agonize over every decision, even if you suggested they shouldn't. It can be really difficult to play games if you're tempted to think about everything, but the people who think this much also tend to really like Dominion once they get the hang of it. I think it's not a bad idea in certain circumstances.

---

In general, I like to teach people by putting the Base Cards on the table and then playing a few fake solitaire turns of Big Money, showing how the deck gets stronger with more money. Then I show how it gets better with a Smithy, then Village, then something to trash. All of this takes like two minutes - this isn't like a serious game or anything, just showing the mechanics. Then i set up the First Game and we play that. So nobody has to sit through a super boring "let's all take turns buying money and maybe a Smithy" fake game, but I can still show people the principle of Big Money, dangers of terminal collision, etc.
Logged
Twitch channel: http://www.twitch.tv/chrisisme2791

bug me on discord

pm me if you wanna do stuff for the blog

they/them

zipppy

  • Pawn
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
  • Respect: +1
    • View Profile
Re: Eliminating the obvious self-destruct aspect of game?
« Reply #54 on: September 09, 2015, 07:44:52 pm »
+1

[...] And despite the rulebook's lack of anything easier, Dominion passed this test over and over in the real world, endless new people learned it and enjoyed it, with 10 cards in game one. If your experience is different, well. There's a much bigger pile of evidence to the contrary. [...]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias

I'm not sure why you're being so defensive over this. Of course using a full kingdom works just fine with many/most people -- then again, many/most people trying out dominion are already game players. For all those that aren't, sometimes it works well to introduce new mechanics slowly.

Unless you're going to make a case that the most complicated cards are just as easy to learn in game#1 as basic mechanics, then it should follow that fewer mechanics=easier to learn.
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5354
  • Respect: +21697
    • View Profile
Re: Eliminating the obvious self-destruct aspect of game?
« Reply #55 on: September 09, 2015, 11:13:32 pm »
0

[...] And despite the rulebook's lack of anything easier, Dominion passed this test over and over in the real world, endless new people learned it and enjoyed it, with 10 cards in game one. If your experience is different, well. There's a much bigger pile of evidence to the contrary. [...]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias

I'm not sure why you're being so defensive over this. Of course using a full kingdom works just fine with many/most people -- then again, many/most people trying out dominion are already game players. For all those that aren't, sometimes it works well to introduce new mechanics slowly.

Unless you're going to make a case that the most complicated cards are just as easy to learn in game#1 as basic mechanics, then it should follow that fewer mechanics=easier to learn.
Maybe you're reading emotions into it that you enjoy reading into it, zipppy. I'm not sure why you're being so however you're being about this that's insulting.

Feel free to do a study of games that have simplified rules with half the components, and then the full game, and games that don't, desperately trying to control for everything that you can. Over here, time does not permit. If it helps you I'm content to leave it as "those obviously stupid things are obviously stupid," with no evidence. I don't need to convince anyone; you're not getting at the rulebook.

Easier mechanics makes it easier to learn those easier mechanics. It doesn't make it easier to learn things you aren't actually learning. What you must have meant then, is, that learning things piecemeal is easy than learning them all at once? Thankfully Dominion both has "easier mechanics" and teaches you them piecemeal. I'm way ahead of you there.
Logged

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +233
    • View Profile
Re: Eliminating the obvious self-destruct aspect of game?
« Reply #56 on: September 11, 2015, 01:19:53 am »
0


I'm not here to yell at fans; play the game however you want. I disagree strongly enough with your approach, and the OP suggestion of 2 actions, to report on mine.


Hmm. I guess the discussion in this thread took a strange turn when I was absent.

My proposal was not meant as a way to teach people the game. It was meant for my own enjoyment when playing with casual players. I think with such help their "naive" play without as much consideration of terminal collision is more effective. Certainly on the rule side there is drawback (more complicated) but that was not the concern.

But yeah, I agree with Donald's way of teaching the game. What I usually do is that if there is enough people I'll teach the game and watch them play. It's just that I do not enjoy as much playing among them this way. I can pursue a certain interesting strategy for my own satisfaction, but I don't want my friends to have the feeling that I am intentionally playing suboptimally.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7829
    • View Profile
Re: Eliminating the obvious self-destruct aspect of game?
« Reply #57 on: September 11, 2015, 11:49:49 am »
0

I think the entire topic (the original one) is a nonstarter.  I'm sure that adjusting the rules to "idiotproof" (so to speak) Dominion would just introduce new ways for people to make mistakes and play badly.  The only way to remove strategic errors from a game would be to make the game completely random, right?
Logged

Deadlock39

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1722
  • Respect: +1745
    • View Profile
Re: Eliminating the obvious self-destruct aspect of game?
« Reply #58 on: September 11, 2015, 12:37:18 pm »
+2

I think the entire topic (the original one) is a nonstarter.  I'm sure that adjusting the rules to "idiotproof" (so to speak) Dominion would just introduce new ways for people to make mistakes and play badly.  The only way to remove strategic errors from a game would be to make the game completely random, right?

JSH was playing dominion randomly before it was cool.

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7910
  • Respect: +8718
    • View Profile
Re: Eliminating the obvious self-destruct aspect of game?
« Reply #59 on: September 11, 2015, 12:42:45 pm »
0

I think the entire topic (the original one) is a nonstarter.  I'm sure that adjusting the rules to "idiotproof" (so to speak) Dominion would just introduce new ways for people to make mistakes and play badly.  The only way to remove strategic errors from a game would be to make the game completely random, right?

JSH was playing dominion randomly before it was cool.


Eating while recording is a bad idea. I was trying to listen to the video with my headphones, but I actually had to stop it because it sounded like someone was chewing in my ear.
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
Pages: 1 2 [3]  All
 

Page created in 0.09 seconds with 20 queries.