Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]  All

Author Topic: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future  (Read 5296 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

tripwire

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 267
  • Respect: +162
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #125 on: September 08, 2017, 10:53:02 am »
+3

Yea with all respect to Theory I'm not sure derailing your post with drama about the potential logistics of the blog was a turn for the better.. at the very least perhaps it should have been/should be split off to another thread?

No it was fine. A lot was learned and it was a good thing overall. Because of this the blog will be active with good content.

I personally agree with Seprix here, especially since things are actually happening now. I mean, 3 new articles were posted yesterday alone; awesome
Logged

AdamH

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2785
  • You make your own shuffle luck
  • Respect: +3788
    • View Profile
    • My Dominion Videos
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #126 on: September 08, 2017, 11:58:20 am »
+5

Fundamentally, when Adam left the forums a while ago, there were a lot of burnt bridges, and people closest to the argument lost a lot of respect for him. Adam's argument has mostly been about his credentials and past experience with Dominion. He has made sure to emphasize that he's run several in-person tournaments, has written several good articles, has connections to other Dominion communities, etc., and in his view this should be a good enough argument for anyone. (@Adam, let me know if this seems fair.)

I've stated my credentials because there are people in the thread that asked what they were. A lot of that stuff I think would make me really valuable, and yeah that's why I think I'm a good choice. I would emphasize other parts of my qualifications that I think are more relevant to running a blog, most of why I've talked about that other stuff is because people have been questioning whether or not I can get along with anyone at all, ever.

I'm aware that I'm not everyone's favorite person ever. Some people think that outweighs the benefits I have to offer, some people (myself included) don't. I didn't think people would be singing my praises so that's why I've been a little more assertive about stating the reasons why I think I'm valuable. If the "main blog admin" has decided to listen to me, I don't need to take that kind of assertiveness. I'd rather my ideas stand or fall on their merits anyways.

There are a lot of different things that I think should be tried and I have no delusions of all of them being great, but I think it's worth trying a lot of them. I made an outline of a lot of my ideas, and while it's extremely rough I guess I'll put it at the bottom of this post in the interest of making people feel like I'm not holding my ideas hostage.

Can someone clue me in on why everybody seems to expect AdamH to go full Cromwell? Did something specific happen that animated this belief?

~2 years ago, Adam very publicly announced he was leaving f.ds because of disagreements with... I think Stef?  Maybe others.  No, that was why he left the league.  That's right.  He left f.ds because he felt it wasn't moderated heavily enough.  He thought threads went off-topic too often, and wanted stricter moderation to enforce staying on-topic.

No one else on f.ds agreed with him.  He left.

This is not why I left. I left because of the PMs between Theory and I that followed all of the stuff with the league, which happened months after all of the discussions about moderation. I never made any announcement about leaving the forums, that was Wandering Winder, and his reasons for leaving were more League-related than F.DS/Theory-related.

While I still think there are sections of the forums that should have some moderation (in fact I think it would be a HUGE asset to the blog), that is not the reason I left, and I understand that's probably not going to happen. I haven't pushed for that in about two years, this is the first time I've even mentioned it since then. If given the chance, I'll suggest a separate area of F.DS that's moderated for the purpose of writing articles (actually I guess I just suggested it now) and now I will say exactly zero more words about it. I don't want to be a part of that discussion, I don't want to be the moderator of that area.

---

So here's my outline. I can go into more detail on some of these things but a lot of this are pretty rough ideas that need refinement anyways.

Quote
Direction of the blog/Role of Wiki and Blog:
- Wiki:
-- contains data (reference)
-- strategic concepts that are objective and well-defined
-- links to articles
-- existing strategic articles moved and/or refined
- Blog:
-- contains anything
-- posts (articles) can be archived

What types of blog posts?
- News
-- Announcements
-- Previews
-- Promotion of competitive play (get RGG involved)
- Game reports
-- Annotated-game style (like videos but in text form)
-- Tournament summaries
-- "picture of turn"?
- Strategy articles
-- card-specific (low-hanging fruit, this list only just the ones with low variance)
-- concepts
-- combos (Native Village/Bridge, CH/TF, Hermit/Market Square, RC/Bridge, the end)
- Interactive
-- Kingdom discussion with follow-up (bread of the podcast sandwich)
-- Challenges (creative)

How to get more articles written?
- What isn't working
-- people are not motivated enough to actually write articles
-- people don't have incentive to provide or incorporate feedback
-- the pool of people who want to write articles is not growing

- Possible improvements
-- reduce expectations of articles
-- provide outlines (somehow encourage people to write and post an outline of an article before actually writing the article itself)
-- moderate feedback given (on-topic, constructive)
-- encourage pairs or teams to write articles
-- have more methods of submitting content
-- have more different kinds of articles
Logged
I am not "back."

trivialknot

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 437
  • Respect: +612
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #127 on: September 08, 2017, 12:52:00 pm »
+3

I think if you have to discuss checks and balances for the governing system behind a Dominion blog, something very weird has happened. Like, wow what is even going on.

Re this quote:
If people are worried about Adam being a dictator, why can't there just be a committee of people administering the blog, and Adam could be a part of the committee? This seems fair to me- Adam can do his good ideas, and no one has absolute or even higher power than the others.
People really do need to discuss governance for any group blog regardless of what the blog is about.  That has nothing to do with Adam.  The probability of conflict approaches 1 over time.

But the suggestion of a committee is way too glib, and sounds awful.  How does the committee even work?  How the heck does the committee handle conflict?

ETA: Really I mean that the people governing the blog need to talk about governance.  The forum doesn't really need to talk about it.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2017, 01:11:10 pm by trivialknot »
Logged

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7816
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Prepare to be boarded!
  • Respect: +8860
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #128 on: September 08, 2017, 02:01:07 pm »
+3

"strategic concepts that are objective and well-defined"

I mean, any sort of strategy article is going to have some opinion involved.  I think this is setting a too high bar, and could leave most wiki articles pretty barren.

I mean, let's just look at Sea Hag.  Go back 3 years and the "objective and well-defined" consensus was that you always opened Sea Hag, and it topped the Qvist rankings for 's at least once.  Now look at today, and trashing is valued a lot more highly, and Sea Hag is not considered a must-open.  Certainly, the hope is that wiki articles get updated if the strategic consensus changes/new cards are added that change the card's importance, but that would require a lot more contributors to the wiki than we currently have, and those contributors would need to individually each be a lot more active.  Adam, if having an up-to-date and strategically well-defined/objective wiki is important to you, I invite you to please help with that, and help contribute to the wiki, help keep it up to date.
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

kieranmillar

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 57
  • Shuffle iT Username: kieranmillar
  • Respect: +121
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #129 on: September 08, 2017, 02:05:32 pm »
+1

I love that this thread has spawned abunch of articles already. Articles are awesome. I kept meaning to write some, perhaps I should jump on the bandwagon too.
Logged

allanfieldhouse

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 160
  • Respect: +221
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #130 on: September 08, 2017, 02:06:39 pm »
+2

I don't see what the big fuss is about. You have 3ish people who want to be heavily involved: BA, Wero, and Adam. Some people have expressed concern about Adam being the "#1 in-charge over everything" person, but it doesn't even sound like that's what he wants.

Just start with a committee of those 3 people in charge. Give the "keys to the castle" to BA, but in practice try to work as equals. Define your roles however you see fit.

Content will be published. Some things will work out well, some things won't. The committee structure will probably change as they get more experience and figure stuff out. Worst-case scenario is that the committee doesn't work out and it has to be reevaluated. In the meantime, we'll have gotten some great content.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9889
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +9899
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #131 on: September 08, 2017, 06:25:37 pm »
+2

I mean, any sort of strategy article is going to have some opinion involved.  I think this is setting a too high bar, and could leave most wiki articles pretty barren.

I think the point is that the wiki shouldn't be a platform for articles, it should be a platform for facts like card texts, rulings, release dates, and whatever else people might want to look up. And if it is the point, then I agree.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The Twitch channel where I stream DominionThe YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's new 2017 album for free

AdamH

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2785
  • You make your own shuffle luck
  • Respect: +3788
    • View Profile
    • My Dominion Videos
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #132 on: September 08, 2017, 06:48:43 pm »
+2

I mean, any sort of strategy article is going to have some opinion involved.  I think this is setting a too high bar, and could leave most wiki articles pretty barren.

I think the point is that the wiki shouldn't be a platform for articles, it should be a platform for facts like card texts, rulings, release dates, and whatever else people might want to look up. And if it is the point, then I agree.

Awaclus said what I was going to, mostly.

An example of what I'm talking about here is that there might be a page on the Wiki stating what a "village" or "splitter" is. It's a strategic concept, but it's not really open to interpretation (OK that's not entirely true but TBH the community should probably define something because this would be a really good thing to have on the wiki).

As for contributing to the wiki, umm, well it feels like the blog and the wiki should probably work together somehow, like, serving complementary purposes. My idea is sorta outlined there in a bare-bones kind of way, but I kind of assumed it wasn't all up to me. There might be a discussion between some people about the direction for the blog and the direction for the wiki and once an agreement is reached, we'll figure out who can contribute to each of those things most effectively.

If it ends up that it makes sense for me to work on the wiki then sure I'll do it, but right now I don't know what that means so I'm not exactly going to promise to do it.
Logged
I am not "back."

AJD

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2747
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +3195
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #133 on: September 08, 2017, 09:45:55 pm »
+2

I mean, any sort of strategy article is going to have some opinion involved.  I think this is setting a too high bar, and could leave most wiki articles pretty barren.

I think the point is that the wiki shouldn't be a platform for articles, it should be a platform for facts like card texts, rulings, release dates, and whatever else people might want to look up. And if it is the point, then I agree.

I'm not sure whether articles per se belong on the wiki, but I do believe it should have at least some general strategy information. ("Transmute is fairly limited in utility." "Mountebank is considered one of the strongest cursers.")
Logged

Deadlock39

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1712
  • Respect: +1716
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #134 on: September 08, 2017, 10:55:06 pm »
0

I personally would approve of the wiki not having "strategy advice". If there is good strategy advice available for a card, it makes more sense to me to publish it as an article, and link to that from the wiki.

Maybe there is a really simple "beginner tips" template that can be filled out for all the cards, and linked from the wiki. Also, if that is something you guys think is a good idea, that would make for one piece of really consistent long lasting content that could be done pretty easily once a week or something.

Maybe it's a terrible, idea, but if not, these are a few things that came to mind just now:
-General power level
-Things to look out for (cards or types of cards the improve/worsen it)
-Tricks (ways to use it that may not be obvious)

aku_chi

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 429
  • Shuffle iT Username: aku chi
  • Respect: +792
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #135 on: September 08, 2017, 11:24:47 pm »
+3

Well, if people are going to write strategy advice for a card, it should at least have a link from the wiki.  Because the wiki is super convenient for a newer player to look up all kinds of information about cards.  I think the status quo is fine (with regards to strategy advice and the wiki).
Logged

Oyvind

  • Coppersmith
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 47
  • Respect: +29
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #136 on: September 09, 2017, 12:15:27 am »
+3

I'd like to start out by saying I have nothing against anyone on f.ds. Some replies on here shows that there is some history of bad blood between some members, which is pretty natural, given the general popularity of the game and the enthusiasm and commitment shown by several people over several years. We're all human, we're all passionate about the game, and we may say things that are highly influenced by human emotion. These things aren't necessarily bad, and we definitely have different ideas and qualities. What I've seen from this thread is that several people want to contribute to the blog in one way or another. That's a great start. It shows that the community is still very vibrant and active.

To be more specific, I think several of AdamH's ideas here are great, and it shows that he can be a great asset to a managing team. His history of great articles and podcasts shows that he can be a terrific boon to the writing team as well. His commitment and passion to the game is obvious, but I also think that his rather bombastic way of saying things, as if the blog would essentially self-destruct without him and his unique ideas, shows that he might not be the best leader for the team. I think the leader should be respected by all of his or her co-workers/contributors, and such views don't show the needed trust for the other people involved, IMHO.

I have a hockey blog (www.nhlstats.net) that I control 100 %. It's both a curse and a blessing. The curse is that I really haven't had the time to update it the past ten months (and I usually put up weekly content), which really bothers me. The blessing is that the content of the blog is exactly how I want it to be. I wish I was better at computing/editing, because the layout is really amateurish, but at least it's my baby. I tried to put up a fantasy hockey league (more or less identical to one I ran several years ago for local friends) but the interest was really poor (enthusiastic for sure, but only a couple of guys seemed interested). I knew I didn't have the time to run the league myself, so I asked for help, and especially one of the few interested people wanted to help me out by managing the league. He had a lot of great input, of which I implemented some, but in the end I knew that it was important to me that I controlled how the league should be run.

I therefore fully respect AdamH and his views, but I also agree that he should show a bit more humbleness. He's really good at what he does, he knows a lot, and he has done a lot for the Dominion community. I certainly think that he should be on the team (and it should be small in number) but I don't think he's a be-all, end-all for the blog. In my dream world, BA should be the head of the admin team, and Wero and Adam should be on that team, that is if they can really work together in a productive way. They've both stated that they're willing to work together on such a team, so I say: why not try it out? I hereby propose that BA takes the reigns of this project now, and that Wero and Adam joins him, if that's OK for everyone involved. There are also others who have shown interest in being on such a team, and if the size of it doesn't exceed a handful of members, I think this has a lot of promise!

P.S. I really do love the wiki. That's where I spend most of my Dominion-time when I'm not playing, but I also agree that strategy content should probably be put up in another forum. When I hear 'wiki', I think of some sort of encyclopedia (purely fact-based). To me, putting such content in a blog instead, makes a lot of sense. The amazing work that's behind the wiki can't be applauded enough, but it currently shows a lot more than I would expect from a wiki. The impressive amount of content can actually be a bit confusing. I fully agree that generic facts with links to a fully functional blog would be the best format for a wiki. That's not to say that we should delete any info from the wiki, but maybe some of it should be moved to a blog?
Logged

Bowi

  • Chancellor
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20
  • Respect: +55
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #137 on: September 09, 2017, 01:06:26 am »
+8

I strongly disagree with the idea for the wiki being proposed by Awaclus and AdamH. It's not the Dominion wiki, but the Dominion Strategy wiki. That means more than just the mechanics and rulings for cards; information on the proper usage of cards must be given (and yes, there is an amount of subjectivity there). The wiki is also not a dictionary, and should not simply define words used for the discussion of strategy, but should include the strategic discussion itself.

Yes there should be an effort to keep things impartial. No that doesn't mean we should strip down the wiki to the point of uselessness.
Logged

Seprix

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5286
  • Shuffle iT Username: Seprix
  • Respect: +2953
    • View Profile
    • The Border Village
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #138 on: September 09, 2017, 02:11:58 am »
0

I strongly disagree with the idea for the wiki being proposed by Awaclus and AdamH. It's not the Dominion wiki, but the Dominion Strategy wiki. That means more than just the mechanics and rulings for cards; information on the proper usage of cards must be given (and yes, there is an amount of subjectivity there). The wiki is also not a dictionary, and should not simply define words used for the discussion of strategy, but should include the strategic discussion itself.

...which is why it will have links to relevant information and articles.
Logged
the weed whackers will return

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9889
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +9899
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #139 on: September 09, 2017, 07:34:53 am »
+4

Yes there should be an effort to keep things impartial. No that doesn't mean we should strip down the wiki to the point of uselessness.

But the factual data is already by far the most useful thing on the wiki.

If strategy advice is included, then it should have references to the articles where the advice comes from, just like Wikipedia does.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2017, 07:35:58 am by Awaclus »
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The Twitch channel where I stream DominionThe YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's new 2017 album for free

ehunt

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1357
  • Shuffle iT Username: ehunt
  • Respect: +1485
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #140 on: September 09, 2017, 09:14:42 am »
+2

I support maintaining strategy advice on the Wiki (along the lines of "this card is important/powerful/not important/not powerful" and "this card has particularly explosive and perhaps non-obvious combos with that card"), with links to longer articles.

There is tremendous value as a brand new player to the simplistic "Chapel is good/Chancellor is bad" type advice, even if it's generally not enough to make you a top 500 Dominion player. For that matter, even as an experienced and not-bad player, I find that I improve a lot when I learn from the Qvist rankings that a card that I've been undervaluing is highly valued by others (Groundskeeper comes to mind).
Logged

Seprix

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5286
  • Shuffle iT Username: Seprix
  • Respect: +2953
    • View Profile
    • The Border Village
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #141 on: September 09, 2017, 11:54:44 am »
0

Logged
the weed whackers will return

dedicateddan

  • 2017 Dominion Online Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 352
  • Shuffle iT Username: dan brooks
  • Respect: +697
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #142 on: September 09, 2017, 12:20:08 pm »
0

If it ends up that it makes sense for me to work on the wiki then sure I'll do it, but right now I don't know what that means so I'm not exactly going to promise to do it.

I'm not really involved here, but if I was, I might consider writing a few articles and wiki pages and seeing where things go
Logged

Polk5440

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1655
  • Respect: +1685
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #143 on: September 09, 2017, 12:50:32 pm »
+2

http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=17545.0

BA is now in charge.

That is a misreading of that thread. Theory is letting BA update the static pages while he decides what to do.
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3549
  • Respect: +5764
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Dominion Strategy: Then, Now, and the Future
« Reply #144 on: September 09, 2017, 01:08:49 pm »
+14

My proposed official ruling on the wiki: it should be neutral and factual, but have a separate section for "strategy" with views like "Mountebank is a strong card but no card will ever live up to the glory of Adventurer, the greatest Dominion card ever printed, $6 for +$2."

I think that makes everybody happy.  I agree that it is important to have a NPOV description of the card, but I also think there is value in providing non-controversial strategic considerations, hopefully ones that reflect the community at large and not the whims or predilections of any particular forum member or their beloved avatar.  Haven't you ever read Wikipedia and been like, OK, I get it, you have to be neutral, but come on, can't you just tell me what's really going on here?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]  All
 

Page created in 0.094 seconds with 20 queries.