Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5  All

Author Topic: Obstacles: Beyond the Five Deck Types  (Read 3258 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9992
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +10110
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #50 on: September 19, 2017, 05:50:28 am »
0

It was just you arguing with Awaclus, which is a thing newer people do and a thing older members just ignore.

Where did you get this from? I can hardly remember any instances of newbies getting into arguments with me, and in those cases there were always a lot of other veterans who agreed with me.

Awaclus' thing is being pedantic

That's one way of saying that I like puns. As far as being contrarian is concerned, that's not really the case either because usually I agree with other top players, there's just not all that much point in posting the thing someone else already said.
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 albums for free

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9992
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +10110
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #51 on: September 19, 2017, 05:53:00 am »
0

Hey, that post from faust got me thinking. Does it make sense to define the "strength" of a board as how efficiently and effectively one can solve the obstacles you laid out.

Say, one board's solution to Problem 1, 5, and 6 is "Prioritize getting a couple of Sentries". You take that same board, add one particular event to it, and the solution to Problem 1,5, and 6 becomes "Buy Donate". Would it make sense to call the Donate board "stronger"?

Yeah, I think it does, if we're talking about card strengths here.
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 albums for free

FemurLemur

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 121
  • Shuffle iT Username: FemurLemur
  • Respect: +133
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #52 on: September 19, 2017, 06:58:44 am »
0

Out of curiosity, do you ask if I'm new because of the "refuse to believe you're that much of a novice" comment, or the "being a contrarian" comment?

It was just you arguing with Awaclus, which is a thing newer people do and a thing older members just ignore.

That unfortunately sounds like an effective way to keep the community as small and stagnant as possible
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9992
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +10110
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #53 on: September 19, 2017, 07:24:49 am »
0

That unfortunately sounds like an effective way to keep the community as small and stagnant as possible

It also sounds like it's not true, as I already said.
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 albums for free

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3328
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +1931
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #54 on: September 19, 2017, 07:49:18 am »
0

Hey, that post from faust got me thinking. Does it make sense to define the "strength" of a board as how efficiently and effectively one can solve the obstacles you laid out.

Say, one board's solution to Problem 1, 5, and 6 is "Prioritize getting a couple of Sentries". You take that same board, add one particular event to it, and the solution to Problem 1,5, and 6 becomes "Buy Donate". Would it make sense to call the Donate board "stronger"?

Yeah, I think it does, if we're talking about card strengths here.

Yeah, I guess this idea fits with the concept of card strength, which is something that is of interest to players when assessing a board (and when deciding on their card rankings).
Logged

FemurLemur

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 121
  • Shuffle iT Username: FemurLemur
  • Respect: +133
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #55 on: September 19, 2017, 07:53:48 am »
0

That unfortunately sounds like an effective way to keep the community as small and stagnant as possible

It also sounds like it's not true, as I already said.

And yet it matches with the only experience I have with you. It's fair to say that you and I are both biased. So if everyone else says you're like this, what makes you think I'm going to take your word for it that you're not?
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9992
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +10110
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #56 on: September 19, 2017, 08:10:59 am »
0

And yet it matches with the only experience I have with you. It's fair to say that you and I are both biased. So if everyone else says you're like this, what makes you think I'm going to take your word for it that you're not?

The reason why a newbie is arguing with me right now and veterans aren't isn't that newbies always argue with me and veterans never do. If I was wrong, you could count on a lot of veterans to jump in and point out why I'm wrong.

Either way, if you have any comments or feedback about my character, you can feel free to send them to me via PM. This thread is not the correct platform for that.
« Last Edit: September 19, 2017, 08:12:11 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 albums for free

tripwire

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 268
  • Respect: +164
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #57 on: September 19, 2017, 08:42:46 am »
+4

And yet it matches with the only experience I have with you. It's fair to say that you and I are both biased. So if everyone else says you're like this, what makes you think I'm going to take your word for it that you're not?

The reason why a newbie is arguing with me right now and veterans aren't isn't that newbies always argue with me and veterans never do. If I was wrong, you could count on a lot of veterans to jump in and point out why I'm wrong.

Either way, if you have any comments or feedback about my character, you can feel free to send them to me via PM. This thread is not the correct platform for that.

Haha, Awaclus, you do realize that arguing with you is always so unproductive that it's pretty much a meme, right?

Also, I think it's more likely that people aren't arguing with you about terminology because they think it doesn't matter, not because they agree with you.
Logged

FemurLemur

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 121
  • Shuffle iT Username: FemurLemur
  • Respect: +133
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #58 on: September 19, 2017, 08:47:57 am »
0

Well, I'm totally convinced ::) Arguing me into submission is a great tactic for convincing me that you don't try to argue every single person into submission.

How about we both just agree to stop talking to each other? That's what I was trying to do by ignoring you in the first place (since there is apparently no blacklist feature on the site). I'm not about to PM you so we can get into a never-ending argument where I won't even have others to back me up when I feel you're being contrarian. If we can't even get along while talking about a card game, we're not going to get along while talking about why we dislike each other.

I feel that you've got a chip on your shoulder and a need to be right, such that we will never have a pleasant discussion. I would understand if you thought the same thing about me. So we can probably just agree that the most constructive solution would be to not talk to each other, right?

And even though we're both talking about your character on this thread, and others are as well, I can be adult enough to agree with you that this isn't the platform for it. For the record, I didn't start it (as you seem to be implying by only calling me out for being off-topic), but I definitely didn't try to end it either, so I'm sorry for that.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9992
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +10110
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #59 on: September 19, 2017, 09:03:11 am »
0

Haha, Awaclus, you do realize that arguing with you is always so unproductive that it's pretty much a meme, right?

This applies to you as well:

Either way, if you have any comments or feedback about my character, you can feel free to send them to me via PM. This thread is not the correct platform for that.
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 albums for free

Chris is me

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2310
  • Shuffle iT Username: Chris is me
  • What do you want me to say?
  • Respect: +2686
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #60 on: September 19, 2017, 10:31:58 am »
+4

Haha, Awaclus, you do realize that arguing with you is always so unproductive that it's pretty much a meme, right?

This applies to you as well:

Either way, if you have any comments or feedback about my character, you can feel free to send them to me via PM. This thread is not the correct platform for that.

Peak Awaclus: Him having a pedantic, hair splitting debate as to the proper format and location for calling out the behavior absolutely everybody is positively sick of, but nobody can do anything about.
Logged
Twitch channel: http://www.twitch.tv/chrisisme2791

bug me on discord

they/them

tripwire

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 268
  • Respect: +164
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #61 on: September 19, 2017, 10:38:32 am »
+3

Getting back on topic about the article, what do you most hope readers will take away from this article? Do you want discussions like the one you had with FemurLemur? Something else?

I already mentioned that I think the "obstacles" are the most valuable part and worry that other aspects of the article might distract from that, but I figured I should see what you think is the most valuable before I give any specific suggestions.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9992
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +10110
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #62 on: September 19, 2017, 11:46:47 am »
+1

Getting back on topic about the article, what do you most hope readers will take away from this article? Do you want discussions like the one you had with FemurLemur? Something else?

I certainly didn't write the article in order to have discussions like the one I had with FemurLemur, I wrote it so that I wouldn't need to have them. Basically I wrote it so that the reader can learn to stop focusing on the superficial things that don't really matter, and start focusing on the underlying principles such as the obstacles.
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 albums for free

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9992
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +10110
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #63 on: September 19, 2017, 11:47:35 am »
0

Peak Awaclus: Him having a pedantic, hair splitting debate as to the proper format and location for calling out the behavior absolutely everybody is positively sick of, but nobody can do anything about.

This applies to you as well:

Either way, if you have any comments or feedback about my character, you can feel free to send them to me via PM. This thread is not the correct platform for that.
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 albums for free

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3559
  • Respect: +5822
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #64 on: September 19, 2017, 11:55:55 am »
+6

I don't want to lock this topic but if you all don't stop I will.  I don't know what the hell is going on here but you all need to step away from this "argument".
Logged

Cuzz

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 432
  • Shuffle iT Username: Cuzz
  • Respect: +690
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #65 on: September 19, 2017, 11:58:57 am »
+6

I think Awaclus has actually done a pretty good job of explaining his article and engaging in reasonable debate in this thread but some people are too locked into their perception of him as combative and obnoxious that that's all they can see.
Logged

singletee

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 807
  • Shuffle iT Username: singletee
  • Gold, Silver, Copper, Let's Jam!
  • Respect: +1290
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #66 on: September 19, 2017, 12:17:51 pm »
+2

I don't want to lock this topic but if you all don't stop I will.  I don't know what the hell is going on here but you all need to step away from this "argument".

It's kind of your job to know what the hell is going on here.

To elaborate, I expect you to do more than just show up when things get hairy and threaten to lock the thread. Stuff like this happens for reasons and if they are not figured out, it will keep happening.
« Last Edit: September 19, 2017, 12:20:32 pm by singletee »
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3559
  • Respect: +5822
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #67 on: September 19, 2017, 12:20:25 pm »
0

I don't want to lock this topic but if you all don't stop I will.  I don't know what the hell is going on here but you all need to step away from this "argument".

It's kind of your job to know what the hell is going on here.
I mean I don't understand the point of the arguments.  They have devolved into bizarre meta-arguments.  I don't see what anyone is trying to prove. 
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3559
  • Respect: +5822
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #68 on: September 19, 2017, 12:35:14 pm »
+1

To elaborate, I expect you to do more than just show up when things get hairy and threaten to lock the thread. Stuff like this happens for reasons and if they are not figured out, it will keep happening.
When I read this topic, as an independent observer, I see a person who is known for getting into pedantic debates write up a pretty good overview of a bunch of Dominion concepts.  It's imperfect as all classification systems will always be, but it makes a solid effort.  People then respond and get into pedantic debates about the nuances of that classification system.  So far this is all fine!  That's what you'd expect.

But then it turns into a weird meta-debate over the debate itself, and questioning people's motivations, and getting really upset.  That is the part I don't understand, and I wish people would cut out.  If you don't want to engage in pedantic debate, don't do it.  Arguing over stuff is a normal and healthy consequence of forums, but perhaps better if all parties remember that their goal is usually to convince others, and not their opponent.  Convincing your opponent requires a very different approach.

PS incidentally there is a blacklist feature on the site.  http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?action=profile;area=lists;sa=ignore
Logged

allanfieldhouse

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 161
  • Respect: +227
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #69 on: September 19, 2017, 01:06:10 pm »
+1

But then it turns into a weird meta-debate over the debate itself, and questioning people's motivations, and getting really upset.  That is the part I don't understand, and I wish people would cut out.  If you don't want to engage in pedantic debate, don't do it.

This.

If you're getting mad about arguments on the internet, just stop arguing. Sure the other guy might get the last word, but it's better for your mental health.
Logged

allanfieldhouse

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 161
  • Respect: +227
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #70 on: September 19, 2017, 01:12:07 pm »
0

Back to the OP again, I'm not sure about your dislike for the "combo" category. I'm guessing this is just based on a difference of definition though. I've always thought of the combo category as synonymous with "misc" or "unique". The reason the word "combo" was chosen is because they usually rely on a specific combination of cards.

I'm guessing you don't like this sort of thing because a universal set of strategies can't cover that category?
Logged

faust

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1733
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +2331
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #71 on: September 19, 2017, 02:10:43 pm »
+1

But then it turns into a weird meta-debate over the debate itself, and questioning people's motivations, and getting really upset.  That is the part I don't understand, and I wish people would cut out.  If you don't want to engage in pedantic debate, don't do it.

This.

If you're getting mad about arguments on the internet, just stop arguing. Sure the other guy might get the last word, but it's better for your mental health.
But... but... what if the ohter person is WRONG?
Logged
Since the number of points is within a constant factor of the number of city quarters, in the long run we can get (4 - ε) ↑↑ n points in n turns for any ε > 0.

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9992
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +10110
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #72 on: September 19, 2017, 02:17:33 pm »
0

I'm guessing you don't like this sort of thing because a universal set of strategies can't cover that category?

I don't like this sort of thing because it's superficial. The fact that those strategies are not as common as rushes, slogs, engines and big money (well, rushes and slogs are super rare anyway) is a superficial attribute, not something useful.
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 albums for free

Cuzz

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 432
  • Shuffle iT Username: Cuzz
  • Respect: +690
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #73 on: September 19, 2017, 02:41:29 pm »
+1

(well, rushes and slogs are super rare anyway)

I'd been thinking about this lately and wondering whether this was true, since I almost never play these anymore and didn't know if I should be doing them more. The last time I thought a straight workshop/gardens rush was going to be competitive I tried it and lost to some candlestick maker/pathfinding engine I hadn't noticed.
Logged

tripwire

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 268
  • Respect: +164
    • View Profile
Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« Reply #74 on: September 19, 2017, 02:56:02 pm »
+5

Getting back on topic about the article, what do you most hope readers will take away from this article? Do you want discussions like the one you had with FemurLemur? Something else?

I certainly didn't write the article in order to have discussions like the one I had with FemurLemur, I wrote it so that I wouldn't need to have them. Basically I wrote it so that the reader can learn to stop focusing on the superficial things that don't really matter, and start focusing on the underlying principles such as the obstacles.

Okay, here's my suggestions for revision to make that more likely, then. (Although, I think your revisions since the last time I read the whole article, have already helped some with this issue.) Obviously, though, if you feel like any of these suggestions misrepresents your position or eliminates important info, then take it with a grain of salt.

1. I already mentioned changing the title to focus more on the "obstacles" rather than "deck types," but if you don't like that, what about changing it to put the focus on moving beyond the "deck type definition" debate (as you say, the more superficial elements)? I mean, is an "infinite number of deck types" any different than deck types no longer being that useful? Maybe modify your "Beyond the five types" subtitle to be the title for the whole article?

2. I would more explicitly suggest that this perspective encourages redefining how we think of the archetypal deck types. Rather than seeing them as determined by the number of actions, or level of synergy, or whatever other thing people use, your perspective demonstrates how it's useful to think of the deck types as common answers to the obstacles. This way if people have incompatible ideas of "engine" or "slog," they clearly know that's not what you are talking about.

3. I would remove references to terminology and your disagreements with it, unless it's absolutely necessary (e.g. your issues with "combo"). I think you could still show how the obstacles suggest other common strategies such as the "golden deck" or "stockpile" without as many criticisms of "combo." Maybe you need to keep it in the "beyond the five types" part, but does it need to be in the intro, too?

4. I would tone down the language about the stupidity of engine/bm hybrids. I think "stupid" will just generate resistance and cause some people to try to come up with "hybrid" examples to refute you, even though that completely misses your point. (why is stupid better than "ineffective" or "unfocused"?) Also, I'd take more opportunities to tie this back to the objectives (right now, the only reference is implicit in the word "solutions").

Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5  All
 

Page created in 0.102 seconds with 21 queries.