Print

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

[Captain_Frisk]

While OWB and WW go off on the merits of 2p vs. 3p rankings in that other thread on first player bias that looks like its asking to be locked... it got me thinking about how you could actually collude in a multi player game.  What things could 2 players working together do in a 3 or 4 player game that would impact the final scoring?

Some ideas to get us started:

End game - refuse to buy a game ending card to allow your partner to gain it instead.

Masquerade - Purchase a masquerade while your partner is to your left - use it to give him good cards instead of bad.

Ambassador - Edge case @ end of game with 1 victory card remaining - you could Ambassador it to allow your friend (again on your left) to gain it.

Combo time - Governor / Discard Attack... use governor for + cards, partner (again on your left) executes the discard attack, but still gets the benefit of the boosted hand. 

Governor - Let your partner choose (either openly if you're really rude), or secretly through a series of wink wink / nod nod conventions.

Council Room - as above.  Maybe you both build an engine that works better with +cards, but yours uses CR as its terminal, and your buddy uses ghost ship....

3 pile rushes - you assist rushing a 3rd pile while your opponent rushes duchies.  Any cheap card, or remodel variant can help here.

Embargo - I really like this one - your partner focuses on economy, while you focus on embargoing the key cards that your opponent needs.   This one gets bonus points because it works best if you play to your partners left... so maybe your partner gets the first witch / mountebank / other key card, and you then follow it up with an embargo before your opponent can get one of their own.

Jester (and to a lesser extent swindler) - Give your opponent good cards!

[Forge!!!]

Contraband - just say curses every time.

[dondon151]

Smugglers lets you get cards that you want with a greater likelihood.

Collusion can occur, either willingly or unwillingly, any time that alt VP exists, because generally the 2 players that go for one form of VP will end the game faster than the 1 player going for another form of VP.

[ftl]

Ambassador - Edge case @ end of game with 1 victory card remaining - you could Ambassador it to allow your friend (again on your left) to gain it.

In a game with Amb and Lighthouse, you could choose whether to Ambassador good cards or bad cards depending on whether your friend or your opponent have lighthouses out.

End-game - PPR tricks. If your friend is ahead, buy the penultimate province, leaving your opponent to buy a Duchy and forced not to buy a Province. If your friend is behind, don't buy the penultimate province.

Or, build up an engine that does nothing but generate lots of buys. A hamlet-market engine that, by the end of the game, can generate 10 buys and empty the curses in one turn, letting you end the game whenever your friend is ahead. Similar in spirit to the 3-pile rush you suggested, I suppose.

Pull a KC-Goons-Masq trick! In 3p, this destroys the deck of only the player to your left.

Denying cards. For example, if my friend goes for Big Money, I could buy up all the villages to ensure that an engine can't get off the ground.

[rrenaud]

The great spy alliance.  Your spies are friendly.

Be a subject of tribute, buy tons of great halls, nobles, etc.

Generally play to counter or into counters.  Friendly Opp has library?  Play militia.  Foe opp has library, play council room.

Ambassador - Give away provinces iff enemy opp plays moat.

Test the waters with weak attacks like spy, play strong attacks like witch only if it's clear enemy opp doesn't have moat and friendly opp does.

Complete your friendly opp's combos action poor limited games.  Usually Council Room + militia requires an action fork.  But in 3+ player?  Well, there is an opportunity for team work.

[Higara]

Possession.

On ally's left: Build a deck with possessor-friendly elements like Salvager and Apprentice.

On ally's right: Green quickly or simply build a terrible deck. Alternatively, buy a Possession and possess your ally when he indicates he has a terrible hand.

[Obi Wan Bonogi]

Scrying pool.  Friendly Minions.  Tournament(choosing not to reveal a countering province).

[papaHav]

Pumping up cities or trade route.

Generally if 2 players both take high-variance strategies against 1 player hes pretty screwed.
e.g. 2 players zerging treasure maps really cuts down the odds in a 3p game.

[popsofctown]

Take one for the team, play 3 Hamlets to buy 4 Curses and cripple Enemy Player's IGG rush.

[JustANewPlayer]

Bloat their Gardens deck using Ambassador, Jester (somewhat risky), etc.

[Davio]

Possession + Bishop = lots of \'|'/ for your opponent.

[DG]

Selective thief, pirate, noble brigand, or jester.
Selective spy, oracle, scrying pool.
Placement of stash to help a friends's jester, pirate, etc.
Splitting piles of vp cards with an opponent (gardens, vineyards). Splitting piles other key cards with opponents (minions, peddlers).
Generous envoy and contraband decisions.
Testing for reaction cards with one attack and then selectively playing more attacks depending upon the result.
Selectively taking cards out of the black market or leaving them there.

[Kirian]

Every single one of these makes me think that 2v2 Dominion would be very, very interesting to try...

[dondon151]

I came up with a full fan expansion tailored for 2v2 Dominion (with some new rules too) but it desperately needs balancing, which is why I haven't posted about it yet...

[tao]

Every single one of these makes me think that 2v2 Dominion would be very, very interesting to try...

Would you have teammates sit opposite each other or adjacent? I think both have interesting strategic considerations.

[Kuildeous]

Every single one of these makes me think that 2v2 Dominion would be very, very interesting to try...

Would you have teammates sit opposite each other or adjacent? I think both have interesting strategic considerations.

Without a doubt, that consideration is vital.

On the one hand, having them sit across from each other provides a nice symmetry. You have an opponent to you left and to your right. But, there's not a whole lot of interaction with your partner. Sure, you can play Council Room/Militia combos and friendly Spies, but you lose out on colluding with Possession/Tribute/Envoy/etc.

If you do allow for adjacent seating, I'd say that the partners should choose who will be on the left and who will be on the right.

And how much table talk is allowed? If your partner on your right has $7, how does he know if you have a Smuggler in hand? Should he buy that Bank, or will he get a Gold instead?

[WanderingWinder]

Every single one of these makes me think that 2v2 Dominion would be very, very interesting to try...

Would you have teammates sit opposite each other or adjacent? I think both have interesting strategic considerations.

Opposite...

[RisingJaguar]

Every single one of these makes me think that 2v2 Dominion would be very, very interesting to try...

Would you have teammates sit opposite each other or adjacent? I think both have interesting strategic considerations.

Opposite...

Naturally I'd think that too, but wouldn't 1/4 and 2/3 help mitigate Team 1 advantage? (By that I mean 1/3 > 2/4)

This of course would not have players sit opposite

[BubbleBoy]

The problem with most of the proposed collusion strategies in official games is that the person helping his partner typically does so at his own expense, or non-bidirectionally, with the clearest exceptions being Spy-type cards and Swindler. But since so many strategies interact only with the player to your immediate left (or right), a side-by-side 2v2 game seems quite interesting.