Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 18 [All]

Author Topic: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]  (Read 70754 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6033
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« on: July 02, 2012, 03:06:56 pm »
0

1: Personman
2: jtl005
3: ednever

1 2 3
2 3 1
3 1 2
1 3 2
2 1 3
3 2 1

WanderingWinder withdraws.
Logged

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +233
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #1 on: July 02, 2012, 03:09:26 pm »
0

Hey! if he withdraws can I substitute?

From my point of view I should have the right to play...
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6033
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Finals order
« Reply #2 on: July 02, 2012, 03:10:29 pm »
0

The thought did not occur to me to sub you in.  Are you available now?  The match already started, but I can conceivably ask them to restart.
Logged

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +233
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #3 on: July 02, 2012, 03:10:41 pm »
0

yes.
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order
« Reply #4 on: July 02, 2012, 03:11:42 pm »
0

Allowing timchen in would be unfair to a mess of other participants.

Qvist

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2398
  • Shuffle iT Username: Qvist
  • Respect: +4070
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #5 on: July 02, 2012, 03:19:44 pm »
+1

WanderingWinder withdraws.

I just wanted to say that it's kinda sad how this ended.
I do really not want to start the discussion, but I want to add, that tournaments serve at least 2 purposes IMO:
1.) The best should win
2.) It should be fun

If one player withdraws, we will never find out, if the first point was achieved and the second definitely not.

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6033
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Finals order
« Reply #6 on: July 02, 2012, 03:28:11 pm »
+1

I don't think I can justify subbing in timchen. 

I'm glad this damn thing is over, at least.
Logged

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2788
  • Respect: +1515
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #7 on: July 02, 2012, 03:37:18 pm »
0

Interesting to see that, despite the huge crapshoot that is 4p, still the final 4 are all highly-ranked on the leaderboard (WW at level 49, ednever at level 40, jtl005 at level 38, Personman at level 36). Disappointing that we don't get to see if WW can follow up his dominant performance in the semis.
Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7092
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9369
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #8 on: July 02, 2012, 03:37:48 pm »
0

Quote
WanderingWinder withdraws.

:(

I do want to note that whoever goes to nationals probably should do some practicing without the point counter.  Because, you know, it won't exist there...
« Last Edit: July 02, 2012, 03:38:17 pm by theory »
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

DStu

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2627
  • Respect: +1488
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #9 on: July 02, 2012, 04:11:06 pm »
0

I'm glad this damn thing is over, at least.

So where was this discussion? I only got the fallout in several other threads, but seem to have missed the main thread...
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6033
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Finals order
« Reply #10 on: July 02, 2012, 04:14:37 pm »
0

Much of it was done over email.  It was just a bit of a hassle, trying to coordinate everyone's schedules, while simultaneously trying to manage one of the all-time Dominion Top Ten Debates because our original ruleset wasn't comprehensive enough.

I think we ended up with a decent compromise, though I'm genuinely sorry WW decided to withdraw.
Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4733
  • Respect: +3327
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #11 on: July 02, 2012, 04:22:41 pm »
0

Why did he withdraw? Was it because of the video thing?
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

rrenaud

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 987
  • Uncivilized Barbarian of Statistics
  • Respect: +1177
    • View Profile
    • CouncilRoom
Re: Finals order
« Reply #12 on: July 02, 2012, 04:27:20 pm »
+3

It was basically the point counter debate all over again.  There were reasonable, but very strong views on both sides, and we couldn't come to a compromise that made everyone happy within the time constraints.  We really don't want to rehash this over and over.  We regret that WW resigned withdrew.  He is a great Dominion player and a great participant in this community.
Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4733
  • Respect: +3327
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #13 on: July 02, 2012, 04:48:57 pm »
0

It was basically the point counter debate all over again.  There were reasonable, but very strong views on both sides, and we couldn't come to a compromise that made everyone happy within the time constraints.  We really don't want to rehash this over and over.  We regret that WW resigned.  He is a great Dominion player and a great participant in this community.
But it was to be played over the internet right?

For such a game, NOT including the point counter would cause people to just jot everything down on a piece of paper and this would slow the game down way too much. Not that I want to start the argument again, but wouldn't it be better to have all the points be synchronously available to all players instead of waiting 5 minutes every time some one buys a Silk Road?

Would be even more fun with Vineyards, Silk Roads, Fairgrounds etc.
"Joe just bought an Island, break out the abacuses everybody!"

I mean, I can understand people generally not caring or wanting it in regular 2p games, but for the finals, man, you kind of have to do this.  :-\
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

rrenaud

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 987
  • Uncivilized Barbarian of Statistics
  • Respect: +1177
    • View Profile
    • CouncilRoom
Re: Finals order
« Reply #14 on: July 02, 2012, 04:51:42 pm »
+4

We can keep talking about this and get into the same argument.  But hey, I just got through the worst apartment move ever where a guy threatened to keep a truck full of my (and girlfriend's) possessions, so I've got better things to do than argue about point counters on the internet again.

If I could perma-ban myself from reading this thread again, I would ;).
Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4733
  • Respect: +3327
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #15 on: July 02, 2012, 04:54:33 pm »
+1

* Davio sees the word Possession in rrenaud's post.
* Davio must constrain himself not to make a pun, because it's such a serious story.
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6033
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Finals order
« Reply #16 on: July 02, 2012, 05:03:25 pm »
+8

Keep in mind those possessions included Council Room itself!!

Who knew that Thief/Council Room was a combo.
Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7092
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9369
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #17 on: July 02, 2012, 06:15:25 pm »
0

I mean, I can understand people generally not caring or wanting it in regular 2p games, but for the finals, man, you kind of have to do this.  :-\

Go right ahead and do that at nationals or any in-person tournament.  I dare ya!
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2788
  • Respect: +1515
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #18 on: July 02, 2012, 07:45:39 pm »
0

WW gave up a 1-in-4 chance of an expenses-paid trip to the US finals over the point counter? Wha?
Logged

GigaKnight

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 169
  • Respect: +54
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #19 on: July 02, 2012, 08:43:32 pm »
+1

WW gave up a 1-in-4 chance of an expenses-paid trip to the US finals over the point counter? Wha?

I'm also confused.  I have zero desire to argue about what should / shouldn't happen, but I am very curious to know what did happen.  The tournament rules state this:

Quote
Games must be played with randomly selected cards, no veto mode, identical starting hands, and with the official point counter enabled unless all players agree otherwise.

I'm not seeing what's unclear about this as it relates to the point counter.  Was somebody trying to use an extension point counter that created a problem?
Logged

greatexpectations

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1095
  • Respect: +1061
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #20 on: July 02, 2012, 08:51:46 pm »
+2

i am as curious as the next person as to what went down. but at the same time i think that if theory and/or WW had wanted the information of precisely what happened made publicly available they would have done so by now.  i would recommend not pressing the issue too much here, especially given that things seemed to be a little tense at the time of the decision.
Logged
momomoto: ...I looked at the tableau and went "Mountebank? That's for jerks."
rrenaud: Jerks win.

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2788
  • Respect: +1515
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #21 on: July 02, 2012, 09:21:18 pm »
0

WW gave up a 1-in-4 chance of an expenses-paid trip to the US finals over the point counter? Wha?

I'm also confused.  I have zero desire to argue about what should / shouldn't happen, but I am very curious to know what did happen.  The tournament rules state this:

Quote
Games must be played with randomly selected cards, no veto mode, identical starting hands, and with the official point counter enabled unless all players agree otherwise.

I'm not seeing what's unclear about this as it relates to the point counter.  Was somebody trying to use an extension point counter that created a problem?

Let me see if I can summarize the issue of the point counter in a neutral manner. (Disclaimer: I use the point counter extension.)

Isotropic's built-in point counter gives you just the minimum information a point counter can give you: the points each player had at the beginning of the current turn. The point counter extension existed first and gives you more information: the current points of each player, along with the current deck contents of each player. The tracking of deck contents is a side effect of tracking points, since you need that information to calculate the value of fairgrounds, silk road, etc.

The point counter extension makes point information available in two ways. One is that it can be seen at any time, by either player, by typing "!status" into the chat box. The other is that the current points information is shown next to the chat box, for the player running the extension.

The point counter extension makes deck content information available in two ways, also. Similar to points information, it can be seen by typing "!details" into the chat box. A few months ago, that was the only way to see it. Somewhat more recently, I believe on April 1st with the release of version 5.1 of the extension, the deck contents information started to display next to the supply. While I can't speak for other users of the extension, I didn't pay much attention to the deck content information until this UI change. However, all the information provided by the UI change was previously available by typing "!details".

Since there's no visible change to people who don't use the extension, initially only users of the extension were aware of the UI change. I believe that changed with this post in the Isotropic Discussion forum, so that's why it's becoming a hot topic now.

Opinions on the point counter extension are mixed. As theory summarized:
Quote
Consider yourself on notice that the unofficial "point counter extension" can count much more than points.  Some think this is cheating, some think this is unethical, some think this is both, some think this is neither.

Actually going over the pro and con arguments is a different discussion, and there are reasonable arguments on both sides. I suspect the issue here was that the tournament rules did not address the point counter extension, just the official isotropic point counter.
Logged

GigaKnight

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 169
  • Respect: +54
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #22 on: July 02, 2012, 09:37:30 pm »
0

I appreciate the summary but I wasn't actually asking about what the point counter did.  I'm trying to figure out why WW withdrew (and I'm trying to do it without setting off a powder keg).  My read of it from the forum is:

- At least 1 player likes to use the unofficial point counter and plans to use it in the finals
- WW objects
- Tournament organizers rule that unofficial point counter is OK
- WW withdraws

If there's concern that answering this will start an argument, one can always confirm / deny / correct this series of events and then lock the thread.  It happened.  It's over.  Whether people like or dislike it can be the subject of other threads.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2012, 09:43:42 pm by GigaKnight »
Logged

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2623
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3321
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #23 on: July 02, 2012, 10:31:25 pm »
0

WW gave up a 1-in-4 chance of an expenses-paid trip to the US finals over the point counter? Wha?

I'm also confused.  I have zero desire to argue about what should / shouldn't happen, but I am very curious to know what did happen.  The tournament rules state this:

Quote
Games must be played with randomly selected cards, no veto mode, identical starting hands, and with the official point counter enabled unless all players agree otherwise.

I'm not seeing what's unclear about this as it relates to the point counter.  Was somebody trying to use an extension point counter that created a problem?

Let me see if I can summarize the issue of the point counter in a neutral manner. (Disclaimer: I use the point counter extension.)

Isotropic's built-in point counter gives you just the minimum information a point counter can give you: the points each player had at the beginning of the current turn. The point counter extension existed first and gives you more information: the current points of each player, along with the current deck contents of each player. The tracking of deck contents is a side effect of tracking points, since you need that information to calculate the value of fairgrounds, silk road, etc.

The point counter extension makes point information available in two ways. One is that it can be seen at any time, by either player, by typing "!status" into the chat box. The other is that the current points information is shown next to the chat box, for the player running the extension.

The point counter extension makes deck content information available in two ways, also. Similar to points information, it can be seen by typing "!details" into the chat box. A few months ago, that was the only way to see it. Somewhat more recently, I believe on April 1st with the release of version 5.1 of the extension, the deck contents information started to display next to the supply. While I can't speak for other users of the extension, I didn't pay much attention to the deck content information until this UI change. However, all the information provided by the UI change was previously available by typing "!details".

Since there's no visible change to people who don't use the extension, initially only users of the extension were aware of the UI change. I believe that changed with this post in the Isotropic Discussion forum, so that's why it's becoming a hot topic now.

Opinions on the point counter extension are mixed. As theory summarized:
Quote
Consider yourself on notice that the unofficial "point counter extension" can count much more than points.  Some think this is cheating, some think this is unethical, some think this is both, some think this is neither.

Actually going over the pro and con arguments is a different discussion, and there are reasonable arguments on both sides. I suspect the issue here was that the tournament rules did not address the point counter extension, just the official isotropic point counter.

I didn't realize this at all. In other words, every person with the "Auto Count" thing next to their name has this ability?
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2788
  • Respect: +1515
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #24 on: July 02, 2012, 10:31:54 pm »
0

WW gave up a 1-in-4 chance of an expenses-paid trip to the US finals over the point counter? Wha?

I'm also confused.  I have zero desire to argue about what should / shouldn't happen, but I am very curious to know what did happen.  The tournament rules state this:

Quote
Games must be played with randomly selected cards, no veto mode, identical starting hands, and with the official point counter enabled unless all players agree otherwise.

I'm not seeing what's unclear about this as it relates to the point counter.  Was somebody trying to use an extension point counter that created a problem?

Let me see if I can summarize the issue of the point counter in a neutral manner. (Disclaimer: I use the point counter extension.)

Isotropic's built-in point counter gives you just the minimum information a point counter can give you: the points each player had at the beginning of the current turn. The point counter extension existed first and gives you more information: the current points of each player, along with the current deck contents of each player. The tracking of deck contents is a side effect of tracking points, since you need that information to calculate the value of fairgrounds, silk road, etc.

The point counter extension makes point information available in two ways. One is that it can be seen at any time, by either player, by typing "!status" into the chat box. The other is that the current points information is shown next to the chat box, for the player running the extension.

The point counter extension makes deck content information available in two ways, also. Similar to points information, it can be seen by typing "!details" into the chat box. A few months ago, that was the only way to see it. Somewhat more recently, I believe on April 1st with the release of version 5.1 of the extension, the deck contents information started to display next to the supply. While I can't speak for other users of the extension, I didn't pay much attention to the deck content information until this UI change. However, all the information provided by the UI change was previously available by typing "!details".

Since there's no visible change to people who don't use the extension, initially only users of the extension were aware of the UI change. I believe that changed with this post in the Isotropic Discussion forum, so that's why it's becoming a hot topic now.

Opinions on the point counter extension are mixed. As theory summarized:
Quote
Consider yourself on notice that the unofficial "point counter extension" can count much more than points.  Some think this is cheating, some think this is unethical, some think this is both, some think this is neither.

Actually going over the pro and con arguments is a different discussion, and there are reasonable arguments on both sides. I suspect the issue here was that the tournament rules did not address the point counter extension, just the official isotropic point counter.

I didn't realize this at all. In other words, every person with the "Auto Count" thing next to their name has this ability?

Yes.
Logged

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2623
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3321
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #25 on: July 02, 2012, 10:34:46 pm »
0

Oh. I see.
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7092
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9369
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #26 on: July 02, 2012, 10:38:56 pm »
0

I didn't realize this at all. In other words, every person with the "Auto Count" thing next to their name has this ability?

That is correct.  In addition, some people do not allow it to be disabled (the default state I believe).
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

Mic Qsenoch

  • 2015 DS Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1672
  • Respect: +4275
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #27 on: July 02, 2012, 10:44:05 pm »
0

The Auto Count thing means they have it set so that it cannot be disabled.

edit: well i'm not sure actually, it seems the Auto Count message is required if you've disabled disabling, but I don't know if Auto Count always means that has occurred.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2012, 10:47:19 pm by Mic Qsenoch »
Logged

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2788
  • Respect: +1515
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #28 on: July 02, 2012, 10:56:57 pm »
+1

The Auto Count thing means they have it set so that it cannot be disabled.

edit: well i'm not sure actually, it seems the Auto Count message is required if you've disabled disabling, but I don't know if Auto Count always means that has occurred.

There are three options:
  • Shows status message and can be disabled. (Edit: thought this was the default, but it's not.)
  • Shows status message and can't be disabled.
  • Doesn't show status message and can be disabled. (The default.)
The only thing that you can't do is turn off disabling and not show the status message.

I've attached a screenshot to show what the point counter looks like when you use it (with the other player's name hidden). Next to the cards in the supply, you can see how many each player has. The chat box is what it looks like after typing "!details", which both players can see. You can see current points and deck sizes next to the chat input box (which is the same info you get by typing "!status").
« Last Edit: July 02, 2012, 10:59:44 pm by blueblimp »
Logged

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order
« Reply #29 on: July 02, 2012, 10:58:47 pm »
+1

I have requested permission from the other finalists and theory to post full screenshots of the email debate that preceded the finals.

I have also uploaded the videos of the finals to youtube!

The games themselves were great, especially this one. I do feel that I threw away a good chance at the win via a) a somewhat unfortunate misclick in the last game (I meant to buy workshop, not woodcutter) and more importantly b) a failure to remember that it was in my interest to kingmake for ednever when it became clear that I couldn't win. However, jtl005 played extremely well in every game, had a better record than me going into the decider, and deserves his win fully. Ednever didn't have the strongest results, but he was no slouch, and was a real threat in every game. Well played to both opponents, thanks for the wonderful games, and special thanks to both of you for keeping level heads in the midst of what became a rather heated discussion.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2012, 11:06:23 pm by Personman »
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6033
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Finals order
« Reply #30 on: July 02, 2012, 11:21:27 pm »
+7

I do not give permission.  Not because there is anything damaging or embarrassing in those emails (as you know), but because I believe very strongly that if we had wanted to conduct the debate on a public forum, we would have.  People should be free to communicate on email without the fear of having their communications made public (or being pressured to do make it public).

If WanderingWinder wishes to explain his principled stand, he may do so on his own.  If he chooses not to, then that's the end of the story, I'm afraid.  This too shall pass.
Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7092
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9369
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #31 on: July 02, 2012, 11:37:30 pm »
+8

(screenshot)

Holy shit, really?  That's what this does?  I mean, that's everything except showing your hand and the contents of your discard pile to your opponent!  And I'm sure the same addon could probably do the latter to within a certain amount of error.

Seriously, that's easily five levels' worth of playing ability in a nice, succinct format, available only to one player.

I think it's time to start playing with "point counter: never" rather than "don't care."
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

nopawnsintended

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220
  • Respect: +186
    • View Profile
    • My Website
Re: Finals order
« Reply #32 on: July 02, 2012, 11:58:46 pm »
0

Wow.  I'm with Kirian. I had no idea that the Auto Count extension did this.  Now, I see why people use it, and why it could make a difference.  As someone who never thought to use a deck tracker (or even keep a spreadsheet tally as in the finals video), it never occurred to me to turn off the extension.  I thought it was just a somewhat innocuous public good -- That is, if I type "!details", everyone sees what I have too.

Logged

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order
« Reply #33 on: July 03, 2012, 12:02:26 am »
0

Theory: That's perfectly reasonable, and I meant no pressure. You need not fear that I will make anything from the thread public (and you are perfectly correct that you are not hiding anything damaging or embarrassing).

Kirian: There are a number of misunderstandings in your post. First and foremost, the isotropic combo box labeled "Point counter" does not in any way affect your opponent's use of drheld's extension. It refers only to the built in point counter. There is nothing isotropic can do to prevent you from using client-side card tracking tools. (Thanks blueblimp for correcting me on this!)

Secondly, the information is NOT available to only one player. The extension (in addition to being freely available to everyone) also includes a chat-box interface that the opponent can use. You can type "!details" in the chat box and receive a full listing of your and your opponent's cards.

Lastly, I strongly encourage you to think of the point tracker not as a devious attempt to gain an advantage, but as an enabling tool for a legitimate, optional Dominion variant in which more information is public. My favorite Dominion games by an ENORMOUS margin are those in which both players are using the extension and making well-informed decisions (and not wasting their time writing it down by hand or memorizing it). If you do not understand how I can think this, I refer you to this video, in which the extension enabled me to carefully and precisely control my deck flow with native village and wishing well. That is the kind of highly technical, tactical play that I enjoy.

This variant may not be to your liking, and that is fine. No one is asking that you play against players with the extension when you do not want to. If it is undisableable, it is announced in the player's status message, with the phrase "Auto▼Count". Otherwise, you have the option of typing "!disable" in chat to remove the extension entirely for both players. All I ask is that you not feel that you are being deceived or cheated. Some of us just sincerely believe that the extension makes the game deeper and richer for everyone.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 12:16:21 am by Personman »
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2788
  • Respect: +1515
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #34 on: July 03, 2012, 12:02:50 am »
0

I mean, that's everything except showing your hand and the contents of your discard pile to your opponent!  And I'm sure the same addon could probably do the latter to within a certain amount of error.

To address the technical issue here, namely whether the extension could track hand and discard pile: TLDR, it can't now, it would be harder to implement if someone wanted to, and it could never accurately track your opponent.

Tracking your opponent's discard (or hand, or draw deck) accurately is impossible. A lot of the time, you don't know what they discard, even in the early game. e.g. Was that card they didn't play an Estate, or a collided terminal? Or later, did they discard actions to that Warehouse, or VP? An extension could track which cards they've played since the last reshuffle, but you can get about the same effect by looking back a couple turns in the log.

Tracking your draw deck and discard is possible in principle, but difficult to implement. To understand why, you need to know how the point counter extension works now. To track deck contents, it uses log messages only. This works because whenever a card is added to or subtracted from your deck, there is a log message saying so. On the other hand, there isn't always a log message when you draw a card or discard a card (because of the clean-up phase). This means it's fundamentally impossible to track your draw deck by only looking at log messages. To track the draw deck, you'd also need to look at hand contents, and that increases implementation difficulty.
Logged

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +233
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #35 on: July 03, 2012, 12:04:07 am »
0

No it can't. It just tracks everything everyone has bought. No estimations and guesses. In a 2p game at least, it is not too different from what I keep track of (basically this is due to the fact that I know my cards and from the supply and trash I can deduce what the other player has.)

On the other hand 3p and 4p are quite different. I think conceivably one just cannot keep track of so many things ,without training. So if we go back to the original question, I actually think in this tournament the point counter should be left disabled. That is what you will face IRL anyway.
Logged

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2788
  • Respect: +1515
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #36 on: July 03, 2012, 12:07:55 am »
+1

Kirian: There are a number of misunderstandings in your post. First and foremost, the isotropic combo box labeled "Point counter" does not in any way affect your opponent's use of drheld's extension. It refers only to the built in point counter. There is nothing isotropic can do to prevent you from using client-side card tracking tools.
This is wrong. When the point counter extension is enabled, it forces the official point counter to be on. If your auto-match settings forbid a point counter, you won't be auto-matched with anybody using the point counter extension.

(In principle, anyone could modify the extension to be completely invisible to the opponent. There's no reason to believe that anyone does this.)

Quote
Secondly, the information is NOT available to only one player. The extension (in addition to being freely available to everyone) also includes a chat-box interface that the opponent can use. You can type "!details" in the chat box and receive a full listing of your and your opponent's cards.
This is correct. The only difference between the player running the extension and the player who isn't is how the information is displayed. "!details" gives you all the information available to either player (and actually more than is displayed next to the supply cards, because of Black Market, Tournament, etc.).
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 12:09:11 am by blueblimp »
Logged

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order
« Reply #37 on: July 03, 2012, 12:15:34 am »
0

Kirian: There are a number of misunderstandings in your post. First and foremost, the isotropic combo box labeled "Point counter" does not in any way affect your opponent's use of drheld's extension. It refers only to the built in point counter. There is nothing isotropic can do to prevent you from using client-side card tracking tools.
This is wrong. When the point counter extension is enabled, it forces the official point counter to be on. If your auto-match settings forbid a point counter, you won't be auto-matched with anybody using the point counter extension.

(In principle, anyone could modify the extension to be completely invisible to the opponent. There's no reason to believe that anyone does this.)

Oh! That makes sense. I think I knew that once, but had totally forgotten. That's quite a good thing, I suppose.
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2788
  • Respect: +1515
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #38 on: July 03, 2012, 12:21:02 am »
+2

(and not wasting their time writing it down by hand or memorizing it).
A little note here: from what I remember, the Donald X. ruling is that if one player is taking notes on paper, that is a variant. To play a variant legitimately, both players need to agree.

Edit: Reference for this.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 12:25:43 am by blueblimp »
Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7092
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9369
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #39 on: July 03, 2012, 12:23:16 am »
+7

Secondly, the information is NOT available to only one player. The extension (in addition to being freely available to everyone) also includes a chat-box interface that the opponent can use. You can type "!details" in the chat box and receive a full listing of your and your opponent's cards.

While this is technically true, there is an issue of convenience.  You, running the addon, get to see the numbers all the time in a nice, easy-to-read format.  I, without the addon, have to type !details every single time I want to know the information--which means every round if I want to have the same information you do.  In addition, the readability of the chat-log format is significantly lower, and takes more brain power to process; this is not a minor detail.

Quote
Lastly, I strongly encourage you to think of the point tracker not as a devious attempt to gain an advantage, but as an enabling tool for a legitimate, optional Dominion variant in which more information is public.

Certainly, it's a legitimate variant if you wish to play this way.  However, it's notable that people were being forced into this variant without knowing quite what it was, and the format of having the addon vs. not having it does still give an advantage to the player running the addon.  In addition, some people run it without it the option of the other player(s) disabling it, which is troubling, especially if the opponent doesn't know what the addon can do.

I'm kind of saddened that I won't get to play against you again, bb, but I basically consider tournament games I've played against you to be illegitimate.  Sorry.

This addon will be barred from future IsoDom tournaments, should they happen.
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order
« Reply #40 on: July 03, 2012, 12:24:01 am »
+1

Quote from: blueblimp
A little note here: from what I remember, the Donald X. ruling is that if one player is taking notes on paper, that is a variant. To play a variant legitimately, both players need to agree.

..and all players are given ample opportunity to opt out of games with the extension variant, as you yourself have just noted. I want to give you the benefit of the doubt, but it's hard not to read this as fairly pointless antagonism.

Quote from: Kirian
This addon will be barred from future IsoDom tournaments, should they happen.

You can do whatever you want in tournaments you run, but I beg you to consider the following line of argument:

1. Everyone likes to be able to trust each other and treat each other without suspicion.
2. People like to win.
3. People sometimes succumb to the temptation to secure advantages via illegitimate means, especially if they are 100% certain that they cannot be caught.
4. The point counter can be trivially modified to be undetectable. As blueblimp points out, at present there is no reason to believe anyone has done so (but neither is there particular reason to believe that they haven't).
5. Even if no one is actually cheating, the existence of an easy and undetectable way to cheat breeds suspicion and resentment.
6. It also provides an incentive for otherwise honest players to begin cheating - "My opponent is probably using an undetectable point counter, I guess I will too".
7. The only resolution to problems of unenforceability is to legalize the unenforceable action.
8. Therefore, to maintain the trusting nature of the community, and to avoid providing unfair advantages to those willing to cheat in undetectable ways, the extension should always be legal in competitive play. This is an unfortunate conclusion for those who have a strong preference for Dominion play without the extension, but I believe it is nevertheless an inescapable fact of online life. The alternative is to incentivize and reward unethical behavior.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 12:34:28 am by Personman »
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5378
  • Respect: +21878
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #41 on: July 03, 2012, 12:46:12 am »
+7

1. Everyone likes to be able to trust each other and treat each other without suspicion.
2. People like to win.
3. People sometimes succumb to the temptation to secure advantages via illegitimate means, especially if they are 100% certain that they cannot be caught.
4. The point counter can be trivially modified to be undetectable. As blueblimp points out, at present there is no reason to believe anyone has done so (but neither is there particular reason to believe that they haven't).
5. Even if no one is actually cheating, the existence of an easy and undetectable way to cheat breeds suspicion and resentment.
6. It also provides an incentive for otherwise honest players to begin cheating - "My opponent is probably using an undetectable point counter, I guess I will too".
7. The only resolution to problems of unenforceability is to legalize the unenforceable action.
8. Therefore, to maintain the trusting nature of the community, and to avoid providing unfair advantages to those willing to cheat in undetectable ways, the extension should always be legal in competitive play. This is an unfortunate conclusion for those who have a strong preference for Dominion play without the extension, but I believe it is nevertheless an inescapable fact of online life. The alternative is to incentivize and reward unethical behavior.
This is cuckoo.

I do not see myself being willing to try to talk sense into you. You could try David desJardins on BGG, I have seen him shoot down this brand of nonsense.
Logged

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2788
  • Respect: +1515
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #42 on: July 03, 2012, 12:46:17 am »
0

Quote from: blueblimp
A little note here: from what I remember, the Donald X. ruling is that if one player is taking notes on paper, that is a variant. To play a variant legitimately, both players need to agree.

..and all players are given ample opportunity to opt out of games with the extension variant, as you yourself have just noted. I want to give you the benefit of the doubt, but it's hard not to read this as fairly pointless antagonism.
Sorry, this wasn't directed at you specifically, but was just intended to ward off the debates over what's-cheating-what's-not that always seem to crop up in these threads. That debate tends to lead to threads getting locked.

Quote
1. Everyone likes to be able to trust each other and treat each other without suspicion.
2. People like to win.
3. People sometimes succumb to the temptation to secure advantages via illegitimate means, especially if they are 100% certain that they cannot be caught.
4. The point counter can be trivially modified to be undetectable. As blueblimp points out, at present there is no reason to believe anyone has done so (but neither is there particular reason to believe that they haven't).
5. Even if no one is actually cheating, the existence of an easy and undetectable way to cheat breeds suspicion and resentment.
6. It also provides an incentive for otherwise honest players to begin cheating - "My opponent is probably using an undetectable point counter, I guess I will too".
I disagree with this line of reasoning. If a tournament forbids the point counter extension, then honest players won't use it. Cheaters can always find some other way to cheat apart from using an illicit extension. (Get my better-ranked friend to play my games for me? Why not!)
Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7092
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9369
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #43 on: July 03, 2012, 12:46:44 am »
0

..and all players are given ample opportunity to opt out of games with the extension variant, as you yourself have just noted.

This is patently false if it is possible to turn off disabling.

You can do whatever you want in tournaments you run, but I beg you to consider the following line of argument:

1. Everyone likes to be able to trust each other and treat each other without suspicion.
2. People like to win.
3. People sometimes succumb to the temptation to secure advantages via illegitimate means, especially if they are 100% certain that they cannot be caught.
4. The point counter can be trivially modified to be undetectable. As blueblimp points out, at present there is no reason to believe anyone has done so (but neither is there particular reason to believe that they haven't).
5. Even if no one is actually cheating, the existence of an easy and undetectable way to cheat breeds suspicion and resentment.
6. It also provides an incentive for otherwise honest players to begin cheating - "My opponent is probably using an undetectable point counter, I guess I will too".
7. The only resolution to problems of unenforceability is to legalize the unenforceable action.
8. Therefore, to maintain the trusting nature of the community, and to avoid providing unfair advantages to those willing to cheat in undetectable ways, the extension should always be legal in competitive play. This is an unfortunate conclusion for those who have a strong preference for Dominion play without the extension, but I believe it is nevertheless an inescapable fact of online life. The alternative is to incentivize and reward unethical behavior.

I... wow, just wow, man.  Really?  You're going with "if X is outlawed, only outlaws will have X" as an argument?  Really?

If the addon can be trivially modified to be invisible--even without any evidence that it has been done--then I openly call for swift condemnation of the addon by the community, abjure those who use it, and ask dougz and the FunSockets team to do everything in their power to make such addons unusable.
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

jonts26

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2740
  • Shuffle iT Username: jonts
  • Respect: +3644
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #44 on: July 03, 2012, 12:54:20 am »
+1

"if X is outlawed, only outlaws will have X"

Fun fact to lighten to mood. This statement falls under the larger class of statements coined snowclones by the internet.
Logged

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2788
  • Respect: +1515
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #45 on: July 03, 2012, 12:56:29 am »
+1

Seriously, that's easily five levels' worth of playing ability in a nice, succinct format, available only to one player.

Anecdote here: I'm not much higher rank than before card count display.

I'd like tournaments to allow the point counter extension. I enjoy Dominion more with it, mostly out of curiosity (since it gives me something to look at during boring stretches of the game).

In my experience, it doesn't actually make that much difference when playing an individual game. Sure, it may show you that you lost the Peddler split 8-2, but you probably knew that roughly anyway, and you're going to lose in any case. Same goes with a severe curse imbalance. The main exception here are Amb games, where seeing how many coppers you have can be pretty helpful. (Although now that I know how useful it is, I'd want to start counting them mentally in non-extension games, which would be so annoying that I might quit Iso instead.)

Where it's really nice is after-the-fact analysis. Why did my opponent connect his Tournaments more easily? Well, maybe because he bought two of them and a Warehouse, whereas I only had one and didn't get a Warehouse. Sure, I could look at the log for this, but it's a lot more convenient to do it during the game. Somehow this doesn't actually make me play better, though.
Logged

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +233
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #46 on: July 03, 2012, 01:03:27 am »
+2

I think Personman's argument is probably exaggerated, but reasonable. Still, I believe people here are nice enough, and the games are friendly enough, so this argument is not relevant.

However, one thing I always have a hard time understanding is why some people prefer not to have point counters even in a pure online setting. I guess I just don't understand what part of memory game is fun, especially comparing to other aspects of Dominion.
Logged

Obi Wan Bonogi

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 254
  • Respect: +342
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #47 on: July 03, 2012, 01:06:57 am »
+14


Logged

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2788
  • Respect: +1515
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #48 on: July 03, 2012, 01:07:35 am »
0

If the addon can be trivially modified to be invisible--even without any evidence that it has been done--then I openly call for swift condemnation of the addon by the community, abjure those who use it, and ask dougz and the FunSockets team to do everything in their power to make such addons unusable.

To be clear, a cheater would need to modify the source code of the extension to do this. The add-on itself won't let you make it invisible, but AFAIK it is not technically possible for a Chrome extension to prevent source modification. The extension's author (drheld) has done everything reasonable to make the extension up-front.
Logged

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order
« Reply #49 on: July 03, 2012, 01:08:18 am »
+3

Quote from: Kirian
I... wow, just wow, man.  Really?  You're going with "if X is outlawed, only outlaws will have X" as an argument?  Really?

...yes. Yes I am. I would like to better understand your apparent belief in the absurdity of this notion, as "Really?" isn't really helping me.

Maybe the issue here is our differing experiences with other online communities? I just find it inconceivable to have faith that strangers on the internet, presented with an opportunity to cheat at a game with no chance of getting caught, will not do so. It must be nice to feel certain that your community is entirely above that, but I think it is naive.

In the early days of Isotropic I might have been more willing to entertain this notion, but after a recent string of players I've never met before opening games by saying "Fuck you" in chat, muting me, and proceeding to slow-play, I see absolutely no reason to assume people in an isotropic tournament won't be unscrupulous.

Of course, I also really, really, really think Dominion is a better game when played with the extension, so my conclusion intrinsically makes me happy rather than sad, and there is a real possibility that this is biasing my logic in some way. If you think so, please point out how.

Quote from: timchen
I think Personman's argument is probably exaggerated, but reasonable. Still, I believe people here are nice enough, and the games are friendly enough, so this argument is not relevant.

However, one thing I always have a hard time understanding is why some people prefer not to have point counters even in a pure online setting. I guess I just don't understand what part of memory game is fun, especially comparing to other aspects of Dominion.

Man, it feels really nice to encounter a somewhat like minded player. We should play some more games! And I wish I could be as optimistic as you about the community, but see above...

Quote from: Donald X
This is cuckoo.

I do not see myself being willing to try to talk sense into you. You could try David desJardins on BGG, I have seen him shoot down this brand of nonsense.

With all due respect, I was not asking you to talk sense into me. I worry that I am slipping into a persecution complex here, but I am really reading this as "HEY EVERYONE I MADE THIS GAME SO MY OPINION IS THE BEST, THIS OTHER GUY IS CRAZY AND WRONG LOL". I want to believe that you are above that, so I hope you can explain to me what I was meant to take away from your post, other than being made the target of a witchhunt by the most high-profile member of the community. I really am not attempting to force my opinions on anyone else. All I want are the following few things:

1. For my position to be respected, as I respect those who prefer memory-intensive Dominion.

2. To educate those who have misconceptions about why people like me enjoy extension-Dominion.

3. To find and/or help create like minded players, via my forum posts and commentary videos, so that I have a larger pool of like-minded players to compete with.

I wish everyone didn't have to get so mad...
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 01:15:38 am by Personman »
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2788
  • Respect: +1515
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #50 on: July 03, 2012, 01:18:47 am »
0

However, one thing I always have a hard time understanding is why some people prefer not to have point counters even in a pure online setting. I guess I just don't understand what part of memory game is fun, especially comparing to other aspects of Dominion.
One reason could be that having a memory game forces you to choose what to spend your memory on. You can't remember full deck contents, so you need to identify key splits and counts and remember only those. That's definitely a skill.

Another reason is that it can be interesting for a game to require a mixture of skills. Lots of people like Starcraft because it requires a mix of thinking and fast clicking. I'm not a fan of the clicking part myself, but I can see where these people are coming from.
Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7092
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9369
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #51 on: July 03, 2012, 01:23:07 am »
0

All I want are the following few things:

1. For my position to be respected, as I respect those who prefer memory-intensive Dominion.

You want us to respect what some consider to be unethical or cheating.  Gotcha.

Quote
2. To educate those who have misconceptions about why people like me enjoy extension-Dominion.

Please go post it in the Variants subforum.  It's there for a reason.

Quote
3. To find and/or help create like minded players, via my forum posts and commentary videos, so that I have a larger pool of like-minded players to compete with.

And I sincerely hope that doesn't happen.

Quote
I wish everyone didn't have to get so mad...

I didn't start the cheating.
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order
« Reply #52 on: July 03, 2012, 01:32:44 am »
0

Once again, though I'm getting a bit tired of it: you can always avoid playing a game with the extension, either by disabling it or choosing not to play with players who have the ""Auto▼Count" status. No one is trying to deceive you. We are just trying to play the game we love. Please stop calling us cheaters.

Quote
3. To find and/or help create like minded players, via my forum posts and commentary videos, so that I have a larger pool of like-minded players to compete with.

And I sincerely hope that doesn't happen.


... are there so few Dominion players in the world that you are concerned that I will steal them all from you? Your position is already the majority. Why must you maliciously wish me to be unable to find opponents I will enjoy playing against? Live and let live...

Oh, and re your earlier contention that the extension provides 5 free isotropic levels: I challenge you to two sets of ten dominion games, one in which neither of us uses the counter, and one in which only you do. Dominion is variant enough that I don't want to make a claim about the actual difference in games won, but I believe strongly that after playing those games you will revise your estimate to perhaps 1/10 of a level, if that. I don't play with it because it's an advantage, I play with it because it's more fun.
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5378
  • Respect: +21878
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #53 on: July 03, 2012, 01:36:14 am »
+6

With all due respect, I was not asking you to talk sense into me.
And I didn't ask you to ask me! I get to reply to posts, I am registered in the forums and everything.

I worry that I am slipping into a persecution complex here, but I am really reading this as "HEY EVERYONE I MADE THIS GAME SO MY OPINION IS THE BEST, THIS OTHER GUY IS CRAZY AND WRONG LOL". I want to believe that you are above that, so I hope you can explain to me what I was meant to take away from your post, other than being made the target of a witchhunt by the most high-profile member of the community. I really am not attempting to force my opinions on anyone else. All I want are the following few things:
If people think I am just posting to throw my weight around, that's just them being who they are; it's not going to convince me not to post in forums to save them from feeling oppressed. Man I would link you to some BGN article comments where this lunatic tried to argue that game designers should be separated from reality so that no-one would be affected by anything they might say about their games (man maybe you could look it up on the wayback machine). Anyway whatever, you reading it that way just backs up my read on you, which I'll get to in a minute.

What you were meant to take away from my post was, that you, Personman, should go to the website we refer to as BGG, and post about this issue there, and then people would show up and tell you how foolish you were, and this would save me lots of time, whether you were swayed by them or not.

What other people were meant to take away from my post - I didn't send you a private message, and wasn't just posting for you - was, that there are people who see that your argument was clearly nonsense. I do not like to see nonsense just sitting there, I feel like someone might see it and think "oh, no-one protested, I guess people believe this?"

1. For my position to be respected, as I respect those who prefer memory-intensive Dominion.

2. To educate those who have misconceptions about why people like me enjoy extension-Dominion.

3. To find and/or help create like minded players, via my forum posts and commentary videos, so that I have a larger pool of like-minded players to compete with.
But these have nothing to do with your post, which was about using awful reasoning to justify whatever you were going to believe anyway. It had zilch to do with "I like using a point-counter, is that so wrong." Liking point-counters is fine.

If I were trying to argue about this with you, I would start by explaining the cognitive biases. That is what I think of your argument.
Logged

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order
« Reply #54 on: July 03, 2012, 01:49:03 am »
+3

Thanks for your levelheaded reply. Sorry I was a bit accusatory, I really was feeling a bit set-upon from all sides.

I certainly don't think you should refrain from posting in the forums! I think it is lovely that you post in the forums. I just wish you would do it with more substance and tact than your first post contained (and which your second demonstrates you are more than capable of).

I already indicated in my own post that I was aware of the potential cognitive bias, and asked for external input aside from "Really?" and "That's cuckoo", which is all I've heard so far. I am not asking you to argue with me, and I do not think that it is my responsibility to post elsewhere in order to "save you time". I am asking you not to insult my intelligence publicly without backing yourself up at all.

I've put forward what still seems to me like a pretty well-reasoned defense of the initial post you took issue with. A primary point of divergence for people seems to be that they are more trusting of internet strangers than I am. If that is the same reason you think I am "cuckoo", then at least I will understand where you are coming from. I don't think anyone can convince me that all isotropic players are somehow immune to the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory, but at least I can understand why other people might believe they are, and we can have a polite agreement to disagree.

I'm not aware of any other counterpoints to the arguments I made. If there are some, I would like to know about them. But again, I am in no way demanding your or anyone else's time or energy. Anyone who feels like trying to change my mind or help me see it their way is welcome to, and I am eager to listen... at least once we move past insults & incredulity.
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

Young Nick

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 560
  • Respect: +269
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #55 on: July 03, 2012, 01:54:57 am »
+3

So a few quick notes seeing as I have internet at home for the first time in a while...

I started using the add-on after learning about the April 1 update. You can see me asking "for this magical extension" in the thread that ultimately got locked about verification failed (refer to blueblimp's summary). I started using it only because I thought it would make the game less stressful for me. In fact it did, though because I paid so much attention to who had how much of what, I kind of forget about what was left in the supply. I firmly believe that I have played several games with the add-on worse than had I never gotten it. I now use it, but don't care one way or the other.

I firmly believe that if one player is using it, s/he has a definite advantage over an opponent who is not, even if said opponent types !details at the start of every turn. The information is just so much easier to process when you run the add-on.

Though, I disagree with Persoman's line of logic about it turning us into cheaters if we outlaw it, I still do not agree with the likes of Kirian. Calling someone a cheater is a very dangerous accusation, one that I think is unjustified. And while I respect that he runs his own tournaments and thus can establish his own rules, I think if all agree to use it...I can't see why it should be banned.

Saying that one will not play with others who use the add-on seems unfairly harsh. I now am afraid to use it knowing that I may miss out on games because of it.

I mean, we are all playing to have a good time, and typing !disable doesn't seem too harsh, even if you don't ask permission beforehand.

More than anything else, I, a long-time non-add-on player, do not want others to view add-on users as cheaters. This seems wrong.
Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7092
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9369
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #56 on: July 03, 2012, 02:04:28 am »
+3

Why must you maliciously wish me to be unable to find opponents I will enjoy playing against? Live and let live...

I guess I only wish that so long as you make it clear to those opponents that you are no longer playing Dominion.

Quote
Oh, and re your earlier contention that the extension provides 5 free isotropic levels: I challenge you to two sets of ten dominion games, one in which neither of us uses the counter, and one in which only you do. Dominion is variant enough that I don't want to make a claim about the actual difference in games won, but I believe strongly that after playing those games you will revise your estimate to perhaps 1/10 of a level, if that. I don't play with it because it's an advantage, I play with it because it's more fun.

That would require me to install that script on my machine.  Not going to happen.
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order
« Reply #57 on: July 03, 2012, 02:06:12 am »
+1

Quote from: Young Nick
Though, I disagree with Persoman's line of logic about it turning us into cheaters if we outlaw it

Hmm. I was trying to be very technical and formal, and I think I overstated that part of my case. I don't really think it will "turn us into cheaters". Though it is unquestionably a pressure in that direction, most honest people remain honest even under mild pressure. I think really the more likely case is that there are some people who will use it whether it is legal or not, and it's sad to give them an advantage.

Quote from: Kirian
I guess I only wish that so long as you make it clear to those opponents that you are no longer playing Dominion.

Thanks for backtracking on that, but seriously: I think this makes four times that I have talked about how no one is being deceived...

Quote from: Kirian
That would require me to install that script on my machine.  Not going to happen.

lol. It doesn't bite.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 02:10:12 am by Personman »
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2788
  • Respect: +1515
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #58 on: July 03, 2012, 02:18:17 am »
+1

More than anything else, I, a long-time non-add-on player, do not want others to view add-on users as cheaters. This seems wrong.

Yeah, and actually I'm a bit surprised at the general reaction. I figured that, since people don't type "!details" very often, and since the point counter extension has been freely available for ages and announces its URL when the game starts, that most people not using it just didn't care, except for those who would decline auto-match when seeing the status message.

The first time the card counts appeared next to the supply, I actually found it annoying. I liked the extension because it shows up-to-date scores, instead of just what you had at the beginning of the turn. The card counts seemed not nearly as helpful as knowing whether I can safely 3-pile. In fact, I still believe this is true for most kingdoms.

So to conclude, if I have been cheating by openly using the point counter extension, then I only wish I had been cheating in a way that would actually improve my leaderboard rank, Paralyzed-style.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 02:19:22 am by blueblimp »
Logged

Mazwa

  • Herbalist
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9
  • Respect: +2
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #59 on: July 03, 2012, 02:34:38 am »
0

It does seem like the least Kirian could do is install the addon and see for himself what type of advantage it provides before labeling 20% of the community cheaters with such strong language.  I'm saying 20% because the addon has 1500 users and there's 8000 on the leaderboard.  Wouldn't shock me if that 1500 skewed towards the higher end of rankings and towards those players who played more games, so the game-weighted average might even be higher than 20%.

The add-on just doesn't matter in the majority of everyday (2 player) dominion.  I sometimes sign in on firefox by mistake, and might not notice for a full game that I don't have the addon available.  If you play a lot of dominion, you are going to remember all your important cards, and as tim said earlier in the thread, by subtraction, you know what your opponent holds.

I suppose how much it really matters varies from person to person, but for me personally, it really only helps with vineyards, silk roads, sabateur, or swindler on the board.

The recent 4 person qualifier is a different story, however.  I found it extremely helpful, because I cannot remember what 4 different people are buying, particularly when people are playing slowly and the game drags out and approaches 30 minutes in length.  So I can understand the opposition to using it in that format.

And to agree with what blueblimp just said, its baffling to see such surprised indignation at the use of the addon, considering that if you play a lot, you see the link to the addon spammed in your chat window several times a day.  The reaction we're seeing suggests that all this cheating was going on behind everyone's back, when in fact we link the addon at the start of every match and its only a 1-click install.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 02:39:58 am by Mazwa »
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5378
  • Respect: +21878
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #60 on: July 03, 2012, 02:40:55 am »
0

I am not asking you to argue with me, and I do not think that it is my responsibility to post elsewhere in order to "save you time".
It is not your responsibility. It is my advice that you do it though, if you really want to know how nonsensical that post was. Of course people in general do not wish to know such things. There are all sorts of advantages to believing false things. And who knows, maybe people wouldn't spend time on you at BGG, or maybe someone will here.

I have to stick to not arguing out that thing line by line, because it will take hours over days and not get anywhere, and it's not worth it to me. You not being satisfied with that can't dissuade me; man I have been down that road. I once participated in a thread that went hundreds of pages arguing about whether or not point nine repeating decimal is equal to one. You can tell yourself how crazy and unlike you that is, but your post is more of that crazy. So, the important thing to me is for people to see, immediately following your awful reasoning, someone calling it out. And the people who don't have anything invested in your conclusion will work out the problems with your argument to the degree that they want to.
Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7092
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9369
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #61 on: July 03, 2012, 02:42:31 am »
+1

It does seem like the least Kirian could do is install the addon and see for himself what type of advantage it provides before labeling 20% of the community cheaters with such strong language.

Again, on principle, I will not install the addon.  I can see what it does from screenshots now; I really don't need anything else.

And to agree with what blueblimp just said, its baffling to see such surprised indignation at the use of the addon-on, considering that if you play a lot, you see the link to the add-on spammed in your chat window several times a day.  The reaction we're seeing suggests that all this cheating was going on behind everyone's back, when in fact we link the add-on at the start of every match and its only a 1-click install.

The indignation was because most of us didn't realize what the addon user could actually see.  We assumed you needed to type !details to see, well, all of the details.  No one except users had any idea that those users could see basically everything about another player's deck.

As for it being a one-click install, not everyone uses Chrome.

As for it being cheating, it gave players using it an advantage that non-users didn't even know about until recently--a couple of weeks ago.  Blueblimp's screenshot and Personman's videos made everything suddenly a lot clearer to us non-users.
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2788
  • Respect: +1515
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #62 on: July 03, 2012, 02:43:30 am »
0

The extension in the Chrome web store. The screenshots haven't been updated with the new UI (and they actually date from before even "!details" existed), so maybe that is the issue. Apparently I was wrong about which version introduced the card count UI:
Quote
== v5.0 ==
- Added UI for displaying all cards owned by all players.
- Several bug fixes.
The github commit for v5.0 was on Feb 16th, 2012, so that's a while ago now.
Logged

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2623
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3321
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #63 on: July 03, 2012, 02:47:09 am »
+3

See, I just didn't know that your opponent could know deck details without hitting !status. That's the big reason to me why it's such a huge revelation and deception. Because, I don't keep track of that stuff very well (I'm no mental math guy), and the !status directions are sort of hard to read. So I always assumed that we both just didn't know deck details for sure if no one had done !status.

Seeing those numbers next to the piles of who bought what is absolutely infuriating.
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +233
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #64 on: July 03, 2012, 02:47:23 am »
+2

Donald, I have to disagree on you here.

if it takes you hours over days and not get anywhere, it is probably not that obvious. For your example of whether .99999 equals 1, you can have a 2-3 line proof for it. Whether people take it is another issue, but you can have it written there, instead of saying "I don't want to waste my time here because while my argument is simple and clear you won't accept it."

Really, if you do think what he said is ridiculous and crazy (as I said I think it is exaggerated but not unreasonable), just point it out. Whether he takes it or not is another issue.
Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4733
  • Respect: +3327
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #65 on: July 03, 2012, 02:48:31 am »
+3

This discussion reminds me of the discussion about the use of tracking software for poker rooms. I believe the consensus was that tracking software was allowed, but exchanging hand histories with other players is illegal or highly unethical (they can't enforce this of course).

For this discussion to have any meaning, we must firstly accept this fact: Online Dominion is not the same as offline Dominion. Trying to make the online version a perfect copy of the offline version is an effort in futility. Tools like the Point Counter Extension will always exist and they will always be used.

I believe that banning such tools will not stop them from being used, in fact they would be driven underground and would not give any notice to the other players anymore in the form of: "Hey, I'm using the point counter." They would just be silent.

It's important to note that these extensions only use information that's available to yourself and takes information from other players that's publicly available. I would consider it cheating if it somehow knew what everyone passed with Masquerade.

So banning the extension doesn't really do anything. If you're so concerned about how many cards each player has, you could just write it down and waste everyone's time. This means we kind of have to accept the point counter extension and moreover I believe that it should be included in Isotropic and turned on if one player opts in.

I know this is kind of a bold statement, but again, we're talking about online Dominion here, not offline. There's nothing stopping your from secretly writing everything down behind your computer so you'll know where everyone is at. You could go even further and write down which cards you have seen your opponents play so you can guess what's left in their decks with a higher degree of certainty. I believe this is something the extension doesn't yet offer.

The only thing the extension does is make it easier for a player to gather all the info he would otherwise have to write down. And I think this is a good thing, as it keeps the game going.


Now let me just address the boo yellers by saying that I do not condone pen and paper during a live game. Again, because it slows the game down and because I believe that keeping all the points and cards in your head is a skill that should be tested during a high level live game.

You simply can't enforce this during online play, so we might as well accept it and regulate it.
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +233
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #66 on: July 03, 2012, 02:49:42 am »
0

See, I just didn't know that your opponent could know deck details without hitting !status. That's the big reason to me why it's such a huge revelation and deception. Because, I don't keep track of that stuff very well (I'm no mental math guy), and the !status directions are sort of hard to read. So I always assumed that we both just didn't know deck details for sure if no one had done !status.

Seeing those numbers next to the piles of who bought what is absolutely infuriating.
This is quite interesting. My guess is that you will find point counter users usually track those relatively well even without point counter (in a 2p game anyway) whereas it is people who have more problem tracking those themselves are complaining.
Logged

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2623
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3321
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #67 on: July 03, 2012, 02:54:32 am »
+2

See, I just didn't know that your opponent could know deck details without hitting !status. That's the big reason to me why it's such a huge revelation and deception. Because, I don't keep track of that stuff very well (I'm no mental math guy), and the !status directions are sort of hard to read. So I always assumed that we both just didn't know deck details for sure if no one had done !status.

Seeing those numbers next to the piles of who bought what is absolutely infuriating.
This is quite interesting. My guess is that you will find point counter users usually track those relatively well even without point counter (in a 2p game anyway) whereas it is people who have more problem tracking those themselves are complaining.

Both players need the numbers next to the supply piles for the game to be fair. The info needs to presented to the 2 people in the same fashion, or else it's simply not a fair game. If you get to keep track of the score on pen and paper, and I have to chisel the score into a stone tablet, you have an advantage, don't you?
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4733
  • Respect: +3327
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #68 on: July 03, 2012, 02:58:27 am »
0

See, I just didn't know that your opponent could know deck details without hitting !status. That's the big reason to me why it's such a huge revelation and deception. Because, I don't keep track of that stuff very well (I'm no mental math guy), and the !status directions are sort of hard to read. So I always assumed that we both just didn't know deck details for sure if no one had done !status.

Seeing those numbers next to the piles of who bought what is absolutely infuriating.
This is quite interesting. My guess is that you will find point counter users usually track those relatively well even without point counter (in a 2p game anyway) whereas it is people who have more problem tracking those themselves are complaining.

Both players need the numbers next to the supply piles for the game to be fair. The info needs to presented to the 2 people in the same fashion, or else it's simply not a fair game. If you get to keep track of the score on pen and paper, and I have to chisel the score into a stone tablet, you have an advantage, don't you?
Not if he's not stopping you from grabbing pen and paper or stopping your from programming an off-line counter on your computer as I have done in the past.
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

Young Nick

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 560
  • Respect: +269
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #69 on: July 03, 2012, 02:59:03 am »
0

Both players need the numbers next to the supply piles for the game to be fair. The info needs to presented to the 2 people in the same fashion, or else it's simply not a fair game. If you get to keep track of the score on pen and paper, and I have to chisel the score into a stone tablet, you have an advantage, don't you?

I agree with this, but it's hard to argue that people are cheating when they use the add-on. Is anyone really using the add-on maliciously? I was in your same boat, Robz888, until just a week or two ago. It doesn't make that big of a difference, let me tell you. It is helpful, undeniably so, but nothing like some are making it out to be.
Logged

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2623
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3321
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #70 on: July 03, 2012, 02:59:45 am »
+2

See, I just didn't know that your opponent could know deck details without hitting !status. That's the big reason to me why it's such a huge revelation and deception. Because, I don't keep track of that stuff very well (I'm no mental math guy), and the !status directions are sort of hard to read. So I always assumed that we both just didn't know deck details for sure if no one had done !status.

Seeing those numbers next to the piles of who bought what is absolutely infuriating.
This is quite interesting. My guess is that you will find point counter users usually track those relatively well even without point counter (in a 2p game anyway) whereas it is people who have more problem tracking those themselves are complaining.

Both players need the numbers next to the supply piles for the game to be fair. The info needs to presented to the 2 people in the same fashion, or else it's simply not a fair game. If you get to keep track of the score on pen and paper, and I have to chisel the score into a stone tablet, you have an advantage, don't you?
Not if he's not stopping you from grabbing pen and paper or stopping your from programming an off-line counter on your computer as I have done in the past.

Well, up until now, I thought we were both using stone tablet and chisel.
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2623
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3321
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #71 on: July 03, 2012, 03:01:11 am »
0

Both players need the numbers next to the supply piles for the game to be fair. The info needs to presented to the 2 people in the same fashion, or else it's simply not a fair game. If you get to keep track of the score on pen and paper, and I have to chisel the score into a stone tablet, you have an advantage, don't you?

I agree with this, but it's hard to argue that people are cheating when they use the add-on. Is anyone really using the add-on maliciously? I was in your same boat, Robz888, until just a week or two ago. It doesn't make that big of a difference, let me tell you. It is helpful, undeniably so, but nothing like some are making it out to be.

I don't think it's an enormous benefit, nor do I think most people using it were trying to purposefully malicious or deceitful. But it's a non-negligible advantage, I would say.
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.

DStu

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2627
  • Respect: +1488
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #72 on: July 03, 2012, 03:01:52 am »
0

See, I just didn't know that your opponent could know deck details without hitting !status. That's the big reason to me why it's such a huge revelation and deception. Because, I don't keep track of that stuff very well (I'm no mental math guy), and the !status directions are sort of hard to read. So I always assumed that we both just didn't know deck details for sure if no one had done !status.

Seeing those numbers next to the piles of who bought what is absolutely infuriating.
This is quite interesting. My guess is that you will find point counter users usually track those relatively well even without point counter (in a 2p game anyway) whereas it is people who have more problem tracking those themselves are complaining.

Both players need the numbers next to the supply piles for the game to be fair. The info needs to presented to the 2 people in the same fashion, or else it's simply not a fair game. If you get to keep track of the score on pen and paper, and I have to chisel the score into a stone tablet, you have an advantage, don't you?

I think it's more important for me that other peoples browser addons can't mess with my computer than this...
Logged

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +233
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #73 on: July 03, 2012, 03:04:44 am »
0

Yes I think it's fair to say it is an advantage. So I understand people's surprise and anger when discovering this. However, toward the end, I think once you know, you can disable them if you don't like them, choose not to play with players that do not allow you to disable it, and finally if you don't care about the memory aspect of the game so much you can get it yourself. Don't see a major problem anywhere.
Logged

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order
« Reply #74 on: July 03, 2012, 03:08:06 am »
+2

A really excellent resolution to the interface-based fairness concern would be for isotropic to offer this feature natively. As isotropic is no longer under active development given its impending replacement with the FunSockets client, this is unlikely. And as I said in the other thread, I'm quite willing to put my money where my mouth is with respect to FunSockets implementing this!
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5378
  • Respect: +21878
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #75 on: July 03, 2012, 03:09:14 am »
+4

For your example of whether .99999 equals 1, you can have a 2-3 line proof for it. Whether people take it is another issue, but you can have it written there, instead of saying "I don't want to waste my time here because while my argument is simple and clear you won't accept it."
When you give them your short proof, they say, but xyz. Now if you are silent they say, oh I'm right? If instead you say, "no that's nonsense" they say "oh explain it." Again, hundreds of pages, no lie, and I know this wasn't unique to those forums, there are other forums that have had the endless argument about that very thing, point nine repeating decimal, this thing that requires only a tiny proof.

It's not that I'm going on about this because I want everyone to know just how much I think that post wasn't worth my time, despite spending time repeating that. You guys are talking to me. I was content to leave it at "that's cuckoo" and wait for someone else to do the work. You've already got threads of me arguing for pages against obvious wrong things here on dominionstrategy.
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5378
  • Respect: +21878
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #76 on: July 03, 2012, 03:14:23 am »
+5

A really excellent resolution to the interface-based fairness concern would be for isotropic to offer this feature natively. As isotropic is no longer under active development given its impending replacement with the FunSockets client, this is unlikely. And as I said in the other thread, I'm quite willing to put my money where my mouth is with respect to FunSockets implementing this!
If enough people wanted a point-counter in FunSockets then it would be a possibility, unless Jay hated the idea, which I think he might, I'm not sure though. It is a kind of thing he hates. No argument about "but people will write their own" would change that, for sure. If he didn't hate it then it wouldn't be a high-priority feature but could happen. I don't imagine it would ever go to the extreme of tracking deck contents.
Logged

Young Nick

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 560
  • Respect: +269
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #77 on: July 03, 2012, 03:14:46 am »
0

How would those who are against the add-on feel if there was no UI, and that those who enabled the add-on would have to type !status or !details just like the non-users? All players have to deal with the clogged messages that display the information and no single opponent has access to the information 100% of the time if the add-on functioned this way.

I figure some would still be against this, but I doubt this would be granting any competitive advantage at all. This is the next logical step.
Logged

jayarsea

  • Pearl Diver
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13
  • Respect: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #78 on: July 03, 2012, 03:18:41 am »
0

How would those who are against the add-on feel if there was no UI, and that those who enabled the add-on would have to type !status or !details just like the non-users? All players have to deal with the clogged messages that display the information and no single opponent has access to the information 100% of the time if the add-on functioned this way.

I figure some would still be against this, but I doubt this would be granting any competitive advantage at all. This is the next logical step.

This would be my strong preference. I am among those who didn't realize that my opponent has been passively receiving information while I must request it.
Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4733
  • Respect: +3327
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #79 on: July 03, 2012, 03:22:16 am »
+3

A really excellent resolution to the interface-based fairness concern would be for isotropic to offer this feature natively. As isotropic is no longer under active development given its impending replacement with the FunSockets client, this is unlikely. And as I said in the other thread, I'm quite willing to put my money where my mouth is with respect to FunSockets implementing this!
Motion seconded as I have said before.

Online Dominion isn't offline Dominion, people.
Time to throw away all pens, papers, stones and chisels and embrace the fact that we can easily track public information on the internet so that everyone can use it.

And all the surprise about: "I didn't know it tracked cards!" Well, boo fricking hoo. Stop overreacting and calm yourselves please.
You are in fact shocked that players on the other side of the internet are using information that's available to everyone?

If I told you that in every game I've played on Iso I kept track with my loyal pen and paper so I always knew what you and I had in our decks, would you be shocked? I think NOT! You would think: "Well, you're free to do what you want, man, we can't stop you from doing it anyway."

Was the extension used under false pretenses? Maybe, but I'm actually surprised it caused such upheaval.
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2788
  • Respect: +1515
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #80 on: July 03, 2012, 03:23:55 am »
+1

A really excellent resolution to the interface-based fairness concern would be for isotropic to offer this feature natively. As isotropic is no longer under active development given its impending replacement with the FunSockets client, this is unlikely. And as I said in the other thread, I'm quite willing to put my money where my mouth is with respect to FunSockets implementing this!
If enough people wanted a point-counter in FunSockets then it would be a possibility, unless Jay hated the idea, which I think he might, I'm not sure though. It is a kind of thing he hates. No argument about "but people will write their own" would change that, for sure. If he didn't hate it then it wouldn't be a high-priority feature but could happen. I don't imagine it would ever go to the extreme of tracking deck contents.
Oddly enough, the Ascension iPad app tracks deck contents but not points. Go figure.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 03:27:23 am by blueblimp »
Logged

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order
« Reply #81 on: July 03, 2012, 03:26:59 am »
0

A really excellent resolution to the interface-based fairness concern would be for isotropic to offer this feature natively. As isotropic is no longer under active development given its impending replacement with the FunSockets client, this is unlikely. And as I said in the other thread, I'm quite willing to put my money where my mouth is with respect to FunSockets implementing this!
If enough people wanted a point-counter in FunSockets then it would be a possibility, unless Jay hated the idea, which I think he might, I'm not sure though. It is a kind of thing he hates. No argument about "but people will write their own" would change that, for sure. If he didn't hate it then it wouldn't be a high-priority feature but could happen. I don't imagine it would ever go to the extreme of tracking deck contents.


Alright, well, for a points-only counter, my hypothetical kickstarter contribution goes down to say.. $50 ;-)

Seriously, that's great to hear. I hope he doesn't hate it, and I hope this kind of messy argument can just never ever happen with FunSockets, because everyone accepts that the official counter exists, knows what it does, and is clear on whether they are playing with it or not.

Also, I'm going to bed now.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 03:28:46 am by Personman »
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

chwhite

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1065
  • Respect: +436
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #82 on: July 03, 2012, 03:28:28 am »
+9

I'm just going to say one thing on this matter, then shut up.

I personally have no issue with the point counter.  I know that it gives a (very) slight advantage to the player who uses it, but it doesn't bother me.  I play against people who use it all the time, no big deal.  If I meet you on Iso, I'm not going to ask you to disable anything, or avoid you, because you use the point counter.

HOWEVER.

There is no defense, I repeat no defense, for not having the courtesy to disable it if asked, since after all a) everybody knows it's controversial, and b) it is confirmed by the DXV himself as a variant rather than accepted within the official rules.  And it should go without saying that this is especially true in a tournament setting: there is no question in my mind that refusing to disable the point counter in a tournament game is not just incredibly rude, but is, yes, cheating.
Logged
To discard or not to discard?  That is the question.

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4733
  • Respect: +3327
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #83 on: July 03, 2012, 03:31:49 am »
0

You can't take the official rules for the offline version and copy paste them for the online version.

But if I continue your reasoning, chwhite, you could play in a tournament and say in the chat box: "Guys, I'm not using the point counter (disabling it), but I'm writing everything down, is that ok?" They can't stop you from doing this even if they don't want you to.

So what's the difference and what's the use?

In my view, we're at a Crossroads, either:
- Make the point counter extension native to Iso, program it in so everyone can use it
- Make any online Dominion software very intrusive on your PC, making it scan constantly for the usage of point counters and let it connect to your inbuilt camera to see if you're writing something down with pen and paper

I think the first one is more viable.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 03:34:03 am by Davio »
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2788
  • Respect: +1515
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #84 on: July 03, 2012, 03:32:18 am »
0

(Edit: In reply to chwhite.) I agree for tournaments, but for everyday play I'd prefer that the other player just decline the auto-match. That's why it's in the status.
Logged

chwhite

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1065
  • Respect: +436
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #85 on: July 03, 2012, 03:53:28 am »
0

But if I continue your reasoning, chwhite, you could play in a tournament and say in the chat box: "Guys, I'm not using the point counter (disabling it), but I'm writing everything down, is that ok?" They can't stop you from doing this even if they don't want you to.

Yes, technically you could do that.  And you'd be at best an inconsiderate jerk for doing so- just because it's impossible to catch all fouls doesn't make it okay to foul.

I really don't see what's so controversial about basic courtesy and sportsmanship here (and make no mistake, this argument is about sportsmanship and NOT about the point counter, which as I've said before I'm quite agnostic about).

(Edit: In reply to chwhite.) I agree for tournaments, but for everyday play I'd prefer that the other player just decline the auto-match. That's why it's in the status.

Yeah, of course.  That's entirely fair.
Logged
To discard or not to discard?  That is the question.

Qvist

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2398
  • Shuffle iT Username: Qvist
  • Respect: +4070
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #86 on: July 03, 2012, 04:25:48 am »
+6

Seriously guys, what going on!?
I'm happy to be part of this community, because I had the impression that everyone is kind and very respectful. I can't understand all the hate which is going on.
The community seems to split apart in two halfs, the Pro- and Contra-PointCounter parts. That's really sad.

I did want to post a long essay, but as I figured out. Most of it was already said by Davio. Especially his bold sentence "Online Dominion isn't Offline Dominion".
But I like to add a few things. I can understand both sides. Each side has brought arguments that sound reasonable. So, I, by myself tried to figure out what s reasonable.

First question to ask: What is cheating? I, for myself, consider it in this context to have information that I'm otherwise shouldn't be able to have.
Second question (half provoking): Why hasn't anybody brought up the question: "Is having logs cheating?" ? The same arguments could be brought up here. The one side could say: You have to memorize, that's part of the skill. The other side could say: Yes, but I easily could write that down.
Third question: Is the official point counter cheating? AFAIK the official point counter even displays the points of multiplayer Masquerade games correctly (please correct me if I'm wrong). This is information you shouldn't have (see question 1) and is IMO more cheating than anything else here mentioned. And counting points is the most important thing you have to do. IMO the discussion should more be "Is using any point counter cheating?" instead of "Is the inofficial point counter cheating?". Because knowing how much worth your Fairgrounds, Vineyard or Silk Roads are, is very important.
Fourth question: Which benefit you have from the uninofficial point counter in comparism to the official point counter? Yes, you know how your and your opponents deck looks like. Yes, it's an advantage. But how big is it? IMO when you know how many points you have, knowing how your deck looks like isn't much of any deal. You can count if you would have enough money for double province if you draw your whole deck and there are more cases in which you really have a benefit.  But remembering what cards you have in your deck is not that hard. You often know it anyway. Maybe you don't know if you have 5, 6 or 7 silvers, but is that important? The number of your key cards you know anyway. And the only case you really want to know exactly what you have is, when alternative victory cards refering the number of specific cards. But then you have the point counter either way...

I mention it again: "Online Dominion isn't Offline Dominion" For those refering to the point counter as a variant. Yes, it is a variant. But online Dominion is a variant already on its own. Online Dominion needs variants for cases like you weren't able to fully concentrate e.g. because your baby starts to cry or whatever. So there are logs to read what happened, there is a point counter to see quickly where you are now and there is the "deck counter" where you can also see by a quick look what you missed.

On the other side I see the arguments of the Contra-group. In tournaments you want to test the skill of the players and this includes to keep track of your cards.

The combination of the "Online" and "Tournament" parts, really makes it difficult to come to an agreement.
My proposal: It should be possible to disable the inofficial point counter at any time. There shouldn't be an option "cannot be disabled". If one of the opponents don't agree with the inofficial point counter, he can just disable it. Where's the problem? Is it really that hard to come to an agreement? I think neither side has the right to either say "The inofficial point counter is cheating and should definitely be prohibited or banned" nor "I only play with the inofficial point counter". It is a controversial topic and it's the easiest way to define: "When all players come to an agreement what to use or not use, then it's fine. If an agreement isn't possible, the compromise would be no inofficial pointer, but with official point counter." I think, that's fair.

yudantaiteki

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 234
  • Respect: +165
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #87 on: July 03, 2012, 04:57:17 am »
0

I assumed everyone knew that the point counter extension allowed you to see what was in decks, although I must say that I don't like the idea that you can see the deck without having to type !details, whereas your opponent does have to do that.  That's really the only thing that bothers me.
Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4733
  • Respect: +3327
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #88 on: July 03, 2012, 04:59:29 am »
+1

Still, I say that you can't have an online tournament, or an online game for that matter, where you can really enforce the "no point counter" rule. So we can either accept that some people will "cheat" (I still don't think it's cheating) without telling us or we can accept the point trackers and make sure that everyone has the same information. Well, everyone already has the same information, it's just that some players don't need to write it down while others do.

You can appeal to sportsmanship all you want, but you can never enforce players to play online tournaments without it. And if the carrot is big enough, players will do all they can to gain an edge. And why shouldn't they?? It's not like the point and card tracker instantly makes a person twice as good. It just helps him a bit to remember some things automatically which he would otherwise write down anyway.

All this discussion about something that will give players maybe a 2% edge. I mean, it's not like having the point tracker instantly makes you godlike like stef, marin or Obi Wan Bonogi....
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

Qvist

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2398
  • Shuffle iT Username: Qvist
  • Respect: +4070
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #89 on: July 03, 2012, 07:00:50 am »
0

I try to make another comparism: Card counting in games like Blackjack.
It's not illegal to count cards in Blackjack although you may be sooner or later get kicked out of casinos if you do so.
If you use external devices or pen&paper to count cards, that would be illegal, no doubt.

I think it's not possible to count cards in online casinos, but just imagine it would be possible.
Of course some would write cards down, and of course there would be plugins for counting cards. Nobody can prevent this.
But still: Counting cards still doesn't mean auto-win, especially as your opponent may do so as well.

What would be the solution?
1.) Prevent card counting at all. In Online Dominion in a browser, that's nearly impossible.
2.) Tolerate card counters, with the restriction to disable it by any opponent at any time. That's what I'm proposing.

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7092
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9369
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #90 on: July 03, 2012, 08:33:53 am »
0

2.) Tolerate card counters, with the restriction to disable it by any opponent at any time. That's what I'm proposing.

I could deal with this if the code weren't transparent.  It's not a perfect solution, but it would be fair.  However, as has been noted, anyone with enough knowledge about programming can change the code; this creates an untenable situation in which you can't guarantee someone is using it and you can't disable it--or even see it!
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

Qvist

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2398
  • Shuffle iT Username: Qvist
  • Respect: +4070
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #91 on: July 03, 2012, 08:41:34 am »
0

2.) Tolerate card counters, with the restriction to disable it by any opponent at any time. That's what I'm proposing.

I could deal with this if the code weren't transparent.  It's not a perfect solution, but it would be fair.  However, as has been noted, anyone with enough knowledge about programming can change the code; this creates an untenable situation in which you can't guarantee someone is using it and you can't disable it--or even see it!

Yeah, but if it's tolerated, nobody needs to do that. Only when you prohibit it, people would start to bypass that restriction.

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6033
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Finals order
« Reply #92 on: July 03, 2012, 08:49:24 am »
0

One of the reasons I have tried to avoid having us all get into this ugly debate is that I think it may be mooted by FunSockets.  Drheld is a great guy but maybe even for him the task of OCR'ing all the images moving around is a little much.
Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4733
  • Respect: +3327
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #93 on: July 03, 2012, 09:04:25 am »
+1

What the discussion boils down to is the believe that some players have access to more information than other players, but this is FALSE.

Every player has access to the same information. The point counter extension (PCE) just stores and shows the information which is available to everyone. The UI of the PCE is not accessible to everyone, but the information is. So the discussion about the PCE is moot. The PCE is not the culprit here, nor is anyone using it.

In banning the PCE from tournament use, you are trying to enforce a rule that is by definition un-enforcable. You can't prevent players from using the public information that's given to them. If you ban the PCE, you might as well ban Pen and Paper. I agree that having a good card memory is a key skill in offline Dominion, but online Dominion is already a variant, like Qvist mentioned. We need to treat it as such, with separate rules.

There wasn't such a Rabble when Iso implemented the option to start with the same 4/3 or 5/2 opening. This is also a variant.

I would even argue that Iso, even with the PCE, is more fair than real life Dominion, because even a pseudo-random computer shuffler is better than the good old 3 times overhand shuffle used in real life which causes clunking like there's no tomorrow.

I would let everyone happily use the PCE for online Dominion. If you want to cry about how that's unfair because you don't use it, just use it, use a pen and paper or stop whining about it. You can't prevent it, so you must accept it.

This is probably better than banning it and having everybody use it secretly anyway.
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

RisingJaguar

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 527
  • Respect: +184
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #94 on: July 03, 2012, 09:13:35 am »
0

Well that was a lot to digest.

The Auto Count thing means they have it set so that it cannot be disabled.

edit: well i'm not sure actually, it seems the Auto Count message is required if you've disabled disabling, but I don't know if Auto Count always means that has occurred.

There are three options:
  • Shows status message and can be disabled. (Edit: thought this was the default, but it's not.)
  • Shows status message and can't be disabled.
  • Doesn't show status message and can be disabled. (The default.)
The only thing that you can't do is turn off disabling and not show the status message.

I've attached a screenshot to show what the point counter looks like when you use it (with the other player's name hidden). Next to the cards in the supply, you can see how many each player has. The chat box is what it looks like after typing "!details", which both players can see. You can see current points and deck sizes next to the chat input box (which is the same info you get by typing "!status").
I just want to make sure I have this correct... The screenshot with the card counting did not need anything like !status to start it up correct?  Also it would continue to count it without anything like !status?  I ask because I have NEVER seen that before which makes me a little skeptical that this information is available to everyone (or I am missing the boat or something).  (Attached is the screenshot)

Also for the three options, could someone explain what is meant by not showing the status message (the third option).  Does this mean I would not be informed if they have it in the first place or something like typing !status would be invisible to the other player. 

I hope this question doesn't spring a huge debate as well, but do a lot of players actually keep track of cards say pen/paper or excel sheet? I have never even considered to do that... mainly because its too much work though.  This point counter looks like zero effort which bugs me a bit, but not enough into a frenzy. 
Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7092
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9369
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #95 on: July 03, 2012, 09:17:29 am »
0

One of the reasons I have tried to avoid having us all get into this ugly debate is that I think it may be mooted by FunSockets.  Drheld is a great guy but maybe even for him the task of OCR'ing all the images moving around is a little much.

I understand, but so long as Isotropic is the main online Dominion arena, I think the discussion needed to finally be had.  We've been skirting around it for over a year.
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

yuma

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 694
  • Respect: +609
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #96 on: July 03, 2012, 09:30:39 am »
0

I'm just going to say one thing on this matter, then shut up.

I personally have no issue with the point counter.  I know that it gives a (very) slight advantage to the player who uses it, but it doesn't bother me.  I play against people who use it all the time, no big deal.  If I meet you on Iso, I'm not going to ask you to disable anything, or avoid you, because you use the point counter.

HOWEVER.

There is no defense, I repeat no defense, for not having the courtesy to disable it if asked, since after all a) everybody knows it's controversial, and b) it is confirmed by the DXV himself as a variant rather than accepted within the official rules.  And it should go without saying that this is especially true in a tournament setting: there is no question in my mind that refusing to disable the point counter in a tournament game is not just incredibly rude, but is, yes, cheating.

All of my feeling summed up about this silly argument. Thanks ch.
Logged

Eevee

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1008
  • Shuffle iT Username: Eevee
  • A wild Eevee appears!
  • Respect: +863
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #97 on: July 03, 2012, 09:59:48 am »
+1

I'm just going to say one thing on this matter, then shut up.

I personally have no issue with the point counter.  I know that it gives a (very) slight advantage to the player who uses it, but it doesn't bother me.  I play against people who use it all the time, no big deal.  If I meet you on Iso, I'm not going to ask you to disable anything, or avoid you, because you use the point counter.

HOWEVER.

There is no defense, I repeat no defense, for not having the courtesy to disable it if asked, since after all a) everybody knows it's controversial, and b) it is confirmed by the DXV himself as a variant rather than accepted within the official rules.  And it should go without saying that this is especially true in a tournament setting: there is no question in my mind that refusing to disable the point counter in a tournament game is not just incredibly rude, but is, yes, cheating.

All of my feeling summed up about this silly argument. Thanks ch.

How about announcing "I wont allow disabling the point counter extension" in my status message? Should ensure I only play guys who enjoy the same variant I do.

Because really, the idea of playing without any point counter makes me want to quit the game altogether, and I would REALLY like to have the extension available too because it makes the game that much more fun to me (and I play to have fun).
Logged

DStu

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2627
  • Respect: +1488
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #98 on: July 03, 2012, 10:08:11 am »
+1

One of the reasons I have tried to avoid having us all get into this ugly debate is that I think it may be mooted by FunSockets.  Drheld is a great guy but maybe even for him the task of OCR'ing all the images moving around is a little much.

I still haven't really found the relevant code in the Funsockets client, but without knowing the exact working of the code, I guess to write the addon you should observe the communication with the server, or at least the functions that communicate with the server, or the functions that display the relevant events on the client. Change these functions to also do the counting for you, and you are done. It's significantly harder than for iso, but significantly easier than OCR.
I'm still quite sure that we won't have such a thing for Funsockets if there was some kind of point counter in the official version, but without it someone will probably do...

Or they do (or have done) some encryption/obfuscation of these functions...
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 10:09:34 am by DStu »
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #99 on: July 03, 2012, 10:12:29 am »
+4

First of all, I did not resigned. I withdrew.
Second, I protest. I protest the finals. I have noted this, but I want to do it more publicly here.
Third: the point counter, particularly the undisableable point counter spurred much of the discussion/argument/disagreement that was going on. However, it was not really, as things went on, the heart of the disagreements, and it would certainly not be correct to say that this is the only reason I withdrew - though from the other people looking at stuff, it would certainly look this way, I grant you. But setting the record straight, it's not the only reason.
Fourth, I actually think I gave up a somewhat better than 1 in 4 chance at the Chicago thing, because I think I was the best player, even with one of them cheating in this fashion. But I do not care so much about this. I care more about some of you guys missing out on things, I guess, but again, a heap of cash, and a bunch of fun is WAY less important to me than my reasons for withdrawal. I continue to be amazed at how not understood this is.
Fifth, I will be making several more points about the issues coming up.

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6033
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #100 on: July 03, 2012, 10:24:57 am »
+2

I'd like to add one point: WW's withdrawal, to my knowledge was independent of any decision we made.  Our subsequent attempts at compromise attempted to balance the letter of the rules, please everyone, and encourage WW to return to the match.  We were unsuccessful.
Logged

DStu

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2627
  • Respect: +1488
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #101 on: July 03, 2012, 10:47:36 am »
+1

I continue to be amazed at how not understood this is.
Maybe that's because at least I don't really know what's going on, except point counter discussions...
Logged

Polk5440

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1708
  • Respect: +1786
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #102 on: July 03, 2012, 10:57:20 am »
+2

Interesting. So now I'm curious -- Did anyone actually use the unofficial point counter during the tournament games (quals/semis)?

If I had seen a player using it (and knew about the one-sided change in display), I would have stopped playing right there and requested a restart without it since it seems to violate the tournament rule "Games must be played with randomly selected cards, no veto mode, identical starting hands, and with the official point counter enabled unless all players agree otherwise." On three of the four tournament days I actually did request restarts when people started games without the official point counter, the wrong seating order, or different starting hands (each time we just restarted with the correct parameters and same kingdom). If people did use the unofficial counter, I am surprised no one was challenged on it before the finals. Although I do see that since the unofficial point counter isn't explicitly mentioned in the rules (like veto mode is) that MAYBE a player can argue that it's not against the rules; however, it certainly seems to violate the spirit of "ex ante identical games for everyone" that the rules were trying to achieve.

Also, shouldn't the tournament admin have final say over how the rules are implemented and their interpretation?
Logged

DStu

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2627
  • Respect: +1488
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #103 on: July 03, 2012, 11:00:12 am »
0

As in the official inofficial version you can at least allow your opponent to disable the point counter, you could just (try) to disable it. I saw WW doing this in one of the games. No need to restart, just take it away.  But you can disable the option to disable, and then the mess started (to my knowledge...).
Logged

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #104 on: July 03, 2012, 11:11:23 am »
+1

Interesting. So now I'm curious -- Did anyone actually use the unofficial point counter during the tournament games (quals/semis)?

If I had seen a player using it (and knew about the one-sided change in display), I would have stopped playing right there and requested a restart without it since it seems to violate the tournament rule "Games must be played with randomly selected cards, no veto mode, identical starting hands, and with the official point counter enabled unless all players agree otherwise." On three of the four tournament days I actually did request restarts when people started games without the official point counter, the wrong seating order, or different starting hands (each time we just restarted with the correct parameters and same kingdom). If people did use the unofficial counter, I am surprised no one was challenged on it before the finals. Although I do see that since the unofficial point counter isn't explicitly mentioned in the rules (like veto mode is) that MAYBE a player can argue that it's not against the rules; however, it certainly seems to violate the spirit of "ex ante identical games for everyone" that the rules were trying to achieve.

Also, shouldn't the tournament admin have final say over how the rules are implemented and their interpretation?

I'll admit, I used it my first day of qualifying (the one I lost).

I do allow users to disable it, however, and the second day of qualifying (where I did qualify for semis) I had it disabled.

After seeing how upset WW got in an earlier thread about the unofficial point counter, I turned off the extension for our semifinal game. Timchen was also using it but WW disabled it for every game and no one got upset.

I think the only reason people do get upset is if someone is not allowing it to be disabled, which is bullshit. It really is an advantage, and helps me keep track of a lot of things and analyze certain things during the game instead of after it. I'll agree that it's a huge advantage to the player using it, and I think it is totally unfair in a tournament format, and if you play for isotropic rank it's also unfair.

But anyway, if you play without allowing it to be disabled, that'd kind of dirty, and shouldn't be allowed. And for tournament play, IMO, it should never be allowed. I'm just shocked that anyone would be upset if another player was going to disable it. WW did say there was more to why he withdrew, but that alone would be a good reason to withdraw, for me. Everyone should be allowed the same information, in an equally readable format. I honestly hadn't thought about it much before this, but that clearly seems to be the right thing to do, and I'm sure it will be done in future tournaments (if they're even held on isotropic).
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

rrenaud

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 987
  • Uncivilized Barbarian of Statistics
  • Respect: +1177
    • View Profile
    • CouncilRoom
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #105 on: July 03, 2012, 11:21:11 am »
+3

I convinced drheld to include a message with an up to date screenshot of the UI in the announcement, so people shouldn't be surprised as to what it does.

Quote
11:10 alarmtopia: ★ Cards counted by Dominion Point Counter ★
11:10 alarmtopia: http://goo.gl/iDihS (screenshot: http://goo.gl/G9BTQ)
11:10 alarmtopia: Type !status to see the current score.
11:10 alarmtopia: Type !details to see deck details for each player.

If anyone with gimp/photoshop skills wants to highlight the additions made by the point counter in some visually pleasing way, he will replace that image with yours.
Logged

Captain_Frisk

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1257
  • Respect: +1261
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #106 on: July 03, 2012, 11:22:55 am »
+2

Interesting. So now I'm curious -- Did anyone actually use the unofficial point counter during the tournament games (quals/semis)?

If I had seen a player using it (and knew about the one-sided change in display), I would have stopped playing right there and requested a restart without it since it seems to violate the tournament rule "Games must be played with randomly selected cards, no veto mode, identical starting hands, and with the official point counter enabled unless all players agree otherwise." On three of the four tournament days I actually did request restarts when people started games without the official point counter, the wrong seating order, or different starting hands (each time we just restarted with the correct parameters and same kingdom). If people did use the unofficial counter, I am surprised no one was challenged on it before the finals. Although I do see that since the unofficial point counter isn't explicitly mentioned in the rules (like veto mode is) that MAYBE a player can argue that it's not against the rules; however, it certainly seems to violate the spirit of "ex ante identical games for everyone" that the rules were trying to achieve.

Also, shouldn't the tournament admin have final say over how the rules are implemented and their interpretation?

I'll admit, I used it my first day of qualifying (the one I lost).

I do allow users to disable it, however, and the second day of qualifying (where I did qualify for semis) I had it disabled.

After seeing how upset WW got in an earlier thread about the unofficial point counter, I turned off the extension for our semifinal game. Timchen was also using it but WW disabled it for every game and no one got upset.

I think the only reason people do get upset is if someone is not allowing it to be disabled, which is bullshit. It really is an advantage, and helps me keep track of a lot of things and analyze certain things during the game instead of after it. I'll agree that it's a huge advantage to the player using it, and I think it is totally unfair in a tournament format, and if you play for isotropic rank it's also unfair.

But anyway, if you play without allowing it to be disabled, that'd kind of dirty, and shouldn't be allowed. And for tournament play, IMO, it should never be allowed. I'm just shocked that anyone would be upset if another player was going to disable it. WW did say there was more to why he withdrew, but that alone would be a good reason to withdraw, for me. Everyone should be allowed the same information, in an equally readable format. I honestly hadn't thought about it much before this, but that clearly seems to be the right thing to do, and I'm sure it will be done in future tournaments (if they're even held on isotropic).

I don't use the unofficial point counter - primarily because I didn't people to think that my rating was a result of having it on.  I do use the official one - because I'm lazy - and I'd rather play casually (maybe i'm reading point counter debates in the other window) AND play at a high level (not making stupid end game buys because I wasn't aware of game state).

Because of this - I didn't realize that the unofficial counter had added those sweet sweet  deck counting access.  I had seen !details - which was interesting - but I didn't realize that it was actually displaying the details for the other person all the time.

As for tournaments - rather than banning it outright - I would argue the other way - that it should be required... otherwise the people who do want to track information are just going to get out the pen and paper / excel spreadsheet and track it that way.  At least if you mandate the counter - you've got everyone on a level playing field - and hopefully playing dominion at a higher level than if we were all playing blind.
Logged
I support funsockets.... taking as much time as they need to get it right.

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2788
  • Respect: +1515
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #107 on: July 03, 2012, 11:33:45 am »
0

One of the reasons I have tried to avoid having us all get into this ugly debate is that I think it may be mooted by FunSockets.  Drheld is a great guy but maybe even for him the task of OCR'ing all the images moving around is a little much.

I still haven't really found the relevant code in the Funsockets client, but without knowing the exact working of the code, I guess to write the addon you should observe the communication with the server, or at least the functions that communicate with the server, or the functions that display the relevant events on the client. Change these functions to also do the counting for you, and you are done. It's significantly harder than for iso, but significantly easier than OCR.
I'm still quite sure that we won't have such a thing for Funsockets if there was some kind of point counter in the official version, but without it someone will probably do...

Or they do (or have done) some encryption/obfuscation of these functions...

Yep. In fact it may turn out to be easier than for isotropic, if it's possible to hook the animations, since if you have some uniform animation for cards leaving/entering your deck, that's simpler to deal with than parsing every possible log message.

On the other hand, I would be surprised if they chose not to obfuscate their javascript. (Not that obfuscation really stops anyone, though.)
Logged

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #108 on: July 03, 2012, 11:40:46 am »
0

If you're keeping track of EVERY card the other player buys, you're either taking a long time every turn, or you set up an extension of your own, which may or may not be visible, which to me is cheating.

Both sides of this argument have been stated and restated and restated again. I think there is some merit to the argument that keeping track of the most important stuff in your head is a part of the game itself. You realistically won't keep track of everything everyone has in their decks, and if you do that's either quite a skill or distracting you from the actual strategy/ tactics within the game itself.

Just because the game isn't about "counting cards" to you, doesn't mean it isn't to someone else, basically. I was reading someone talk about the catan world championships a while ago, and they have a similar thing going on. The player who won the championship was someone who very meticulously kept track (in his head, obviously) of what every player had in his hand. Other players focused on more general strategy, from the gist of the review I read. Was his memorization skill, or just a waste of time? If Catan had a similar card counter that kept track of what was in everyone's hands, would that be fair to you? I imagine your answer would be yes, while mine is no.

And that is the crux of the argument really. Is dominion about card counting, or more general strategy? I would argue both.

This is what I was referencing in regards to Catan: http://www.reddit.com/r/boardgames/comments/uuwhu/final_board_of_a_settlers_of_catan_tournament/
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

nightdance

  • Ambassador
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 32
  • Respect: +14
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #109 on: July 03, 2012, 11:53:45 am »
+1

@RisingJaguar, I think if you disable the status message, that means that you cannot see the status message under the person's name in the lobby. When you start a game, it will be obvious that the person is using it and then you can disable it.

My own opinion:

I use the point-counter most of the time, but I sometimes play on other browsers or another computer without it. It is only cheating if there was an intention at securing an advantage that was unknown or not agreed upon by the other player. I have never had this intention. Not allowing it to be disabled seems in my mind to be on the cheating side of the fence, but calling people cheaters is a big accusation. Online dominion ITSELF, is a variant of Dominion. Personally, I also try to play Dominion IRL as much as I can.
Logged

Captain_Frisk

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1257
  • Respect: +1261
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #110 on: July 03, 2012, 11:57:10 am »
0

I'd argue that online dominion and face to face dominion are different variants of the same game.  In online dominion - since you can't enforce someone tracking all the information (since the cost of doing so is very very low) you might as well make it available.  Fortunately - dominion is a strong enough game that it stands up with the card counting aspects of the game removed.

Think of forum mafia vs. real life mafia.  Same basic game - same basic rules - but the difference in having perfect information and recall makes the games have a very different feel.

As for settlers - I agree - might as well make it public because online someone will track it.  I would fully expect expert level players to do so.
Logged
I support funsockets.... taking as much time as they need to get it right.

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #111 on: July 03, 2012, 12:15:35 pm »
0

@CF

I totally agree with you. Online dominion should be treated differently than IRL dominion. I've used the point counter, and I see the benefits.

There comes a point, though, when the "it's better for everyone to have it than only a select few" holds no water. If everyone was able to know the order of everyone's cards in their deck (unrealistic, I know, but bear with me), then you are no longer playing dominion. Wishing Well is a Lab, Navigator becomes less useful, courtyard becomes SO much better, the list goes on. It may be "fair" in that no one player is at an advantage, but you can't really say you're playing dominion any more.

So there does need to be a cutoff somewhere, IMO, and a point/ card counter that isn't readily available to everyone through the game is a good place to start.
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

Powerman

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 766
  • Respect: +602
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #112 on: July 03, 2012, 01:11:49 pm »
+1

The unofficial point tracker is cheating.  Whether or not it is possible to stop, does not change that.  Obviously in online dominion, as in many things in life, cheating will happen no matter what anyone tries to do about it.

Someone brought up liking the point counter because it stops them from ending the game when they are behind.  This is exactly the reason I HATE the point counter.  Knowing when to end the game used to be something that separated a good player from a not so good player, but anyone can see "Hm, I'm down 7.  Buying a 6 point province will still cause me to lose.  I'll buy a duchy!"  To me a good player should AT LEAST be able to know who has bought what victory cards in a 2 player game.  The piles all start with 8... know what you buy and do subtraction.  For the unofficial point counter, knowing other splits is HUGE and having something tells goes against the nature of the game.  Having something tell you "You lost the GM split 6-4 and the Peddler split 7-3 BUT you have a small lead" is huge over thinking "Was it 5-5?  Did I win 6-4?"

Secondly, with the logic of "if it's illegal people will still do it" etc. So what?  If people want to cheat by writing down all the cards on paper, oh well.  If they feel they need to get ahead by cheating good for them, I hope it helps them when they aren't able to do that.  But the point is they are cheating.

I don't like the official point counter, but I don't mind playing with it or without it.  Think of offline dominion where all you see is the board (where you aren't even sure of exactly how many cards are always left in each pile) and your deck/ discard with an unknown # of cards.  Online already has given HUGE advantages to people that can't keep track of things on their own, why should even more be available?

With all that said, I don't consider everyone using it to be "cheaters" looking to get an advantage.  I liken it to the Jeopardy! online qualifying tests.  There is NOTHING to stop you from quickly google searching all the right answers and passing the qualifying test.  Does that mean it's not cheating?  Obviously not, as (I hope) we can all agree.  However at the next level you would be exposed, when you clearly DON'T know much.  Similarly here: There is NOTHING to stop you from quickly seeing the deck contents and using that to pass the "qualifying test"...

I think we all agree that we LIKE dominion.  And probably a majority started out playing IRL.  So in general things should be as close to that as possible.  In a perfect world for me the only info given outside of what each player plays/ buys would be the # of VP chips accumulated.  But, it is what it is.
Logged
A man on a mission.

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +233
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #113 on: July 03, 2012, 01:32:02 pm »
0

Powerman you are just so horribly wrong. From your point even using the official point counter is cheating. In the strict sense you are saying even playing dominion itself online is cheating. Who knows, maybe without shuffling with your own hands make you have more leisure thinking about other things and give an advantage to you.

But that is not at all the point. What is cheating just depends on the rules. And the rules can change once everyone in the game agrees. So the point is to respect others. And to discuss and find the solution that everyone can accept.

The worst thing one can do is just to outright call the other group of people cheater. What benefit is there?

 
Logged

Powerman

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 766
  • Respect: +602
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #114 on: July 03, 2012, 01:44:10 pm »
0

Powerman you are just so horribly wrong. From your point even using the official point counter is cheating. In the strict sense you are saying even playing dominion itself online is cheating. Who knows, maybe without shuffling with your own hands make you have more leisure thinking about other things and give an advantage to you.

But that is not at all the point. What is cheating just depends on the rules. And the rules can change once everyone in the game agrees. So the point is to respect others. And to discuss and find the solution that everyone can accept.

The worst thing one can do is just to outright call the other group of people cheater. What benefit is there?

Well, I do think that the official point tracker is technically cheating, but it is probably necessary due to a few situations on Iso not present IRL so I accept it.  And if somehow a player online could somehow play a player that would be terrible.  But since both players are using a different platform, it provides no competitive advantage (as in there is no alternative).  However, having something tell you the cards bought does provide a competitive advantage and there is an alternative (either figure out the deck composition yourself or just don't know it).

I guess it comes down to whether you think (in general) that knowing what cards are in your deck and what cards are in your opponents deck is an advantage.  Now to me, using an external aid to gain an advantage is cheating.  I'm sorry if people that don't like that get mad.
Logged
A man on a mission.

HiveMindEmulator

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2222
  • Respect: +2096
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #115 on: July 03, 2012, 01:47:11 pm »
+2

People are throwing the word "cheat" around a lot. This implies there is some sort of deception going on. I was not aware of what the point counter actually did, but this was not the fault of the people using it. I could have looked it up on my own, the link is right there, so I wouldn't call them "cheaters". They're not trying to cheat anyone. They're just using a tool that is not expressly prohibited by any rules. Now if you ask them to turn it off and they don't, that's a different story. I still don't think it's "cheating" (unless they say it's disabled when it's not), it's just discourteous.

I can see why people use this for casual play. I myself use the official point counter because it allows me to pay less attention during the game, not so that I can devote my brain resources to playing better, but so that I can devote them to doing something else at the same time. In a serious 2-player tournament setting I don't see it really making much of a difference, because you're paying full attention anyway. But as the number of players increases, I can see people having a serious issue with it. Keeping track of stuff in 4 decks is hard. People who are skilled at it want to have that advantage, and people who are not don't want to be disadvantaged. Personally, I don't care, but this kind of thing has to be decided before the start of a tournament (before people even enter) and not on the day of the finals.
Logged

Powerman

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 766
  • Respect: +602
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #116 on: July 03, 2012, 01:54:32 pm »
0

People are throwing the word "cheat" around a lot. This implies there is some sort of deception going on. I was not aware of what the point counter actually did, but this was not the fault of the people using it. I could have looked it up on my own, the link is right there, so I wouldn't call them "cheaters". They're not trying to cheat anyone. They're just using a tool that is not expressly prohibited by any rules. Now if you ask them to turn it off and they don't, that's a different story. I still don't think it's "cheating" (unless they say it's disabled when it's not), it's just discourteous.

I can see why people use this for casual play. I myself use the official point counter because it allows me to pay less attention during the game, not so that I can devote my brain resources to playing better, but so that I can devote them to doing something else at the same time. In a serious 2-player tournament setting I don't see it really making much of a difference, because you're paying full attention anyway. But as the number of players increases, I can see people having a serious issue with it. Keeping track of stuff in 4 decks is hard. People who are skilled at it want to have that advantage, and people who are not don't want to be disadvantaged. Personally, I don't care, but this kind of thing has to be decided before the start of a tournament (before people even enter) and not on the day of the finals.

Good post, except I'm not sure I understand the bolded statement.  Shouldn't people who are "skilled" have an advantage over people who aren't "skilled"?  Isn't that why we hold tournaments (to find out who is most "skilled"?)
Logged
A man on a mission.

Qvist

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2398
  • Shuffle iT Username: Qvist
  • Respect: +4070
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #117 on: July 03, 2012, 01:55:56 pm »
+4

I really was confused reading Powerman's posts. For anymore who feels the same:

Personman != Powerman  :o

It took a few minutes until I noticed.  :P

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #118 on: July 03, 2012, 01:56:56 pm »
0

Re: the word "cheat". I use this word to mean "violate the rules of the game". This may or may not be deceptive, may or may not be intentional. Please read any posts wherein I make use of this word, and its derivatives (i.e. cheating, cheater, cheated), with this definition in mind. Thank you.

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +233
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #119 on: July 03, 2012, 02:05:43 pm »
+1

Re: the word "cheat". I use this word to mean "violate the rules of the game". This may or may not be deceptive, may or may not be intentional. Please read any posts wherein I make use of this word, and its derivatives (i.e. cheating, cheater, cheated), with this definition in mind. Thank you.

Then the way you are using is wrong. See
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cheat

No words about violating the rules at all.
Logged

verikt

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 272
  • Respect: +65
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #120 on: July 03, 2012, 02:06:18 pm »
0

Funny. I saw the !status thing too and never realized that the other player was getting visuals, or how much of an advantage that is. Now that I know, I'm going to block it every time I see it come up. I wouldn't go so far as to call it cheating but I certainly think that someone using the option to hide it is being deceptive and unfair.
Logged

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #121 on: July 03, 2012, 02:09:12 pm »
+2

Re: the word "cheat". I use this word to mean "violate the rules of the game". This may or may not be deceptive, may or may not be intentional. Please read any posts wherein I make use of this word, and its derivatives (i.e. cheating, cheater, cheated), with this definition in mind. Thank you.

Then the way you are using is wrong. See
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cheat

No words about violating the rules at all.

Dude. He told you what he meant. Who cares what the dictionary says?

And besides

"intransitive verb
1
a : to practice fraud or trickery
b : to violate rules dishonestly <cheat at cards> <cheating on a test>"

It pretty clearly does say that. Now let's not all get offended by the word cheating, please.
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

HiveMindEmulator

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2222
  • Respect: +2096
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #122 on: July 03, 2012, 02:11:05 pm »
0

People are throwing the word "cheat" around a lot. This implies there is some sort of deception going on. I was not aware of what the point counter actually did, but this was not the fault of the people using it. I could have looked it up on my own, the link is right there, so I wouldn't call them "cheaters". They're not trying to cheat anyone. They're just using a tool that is not expressly prohibited by any rules. Now if you ask them to turn it off and they don't, that's a different story. I still don't think it's "cheating" (unless they say it's disabled when it's not), it's just discourteous.

I can see why people use this for casual play. I myself use the official point counter because it allows me to pay less attention during the game, not so that I can devote my brain resources to playing better, but so that I can devote them to doing something else at the same time. In a serious 2-player tournament setting I don't see it really making much of a difference, because you're paying full attention anyway. But as the number of players increases, I can see people having a serious issue with it. Keeping track of stuff in 4 decks is hard. People who are skilled at it want to have that advantage, and people who are not don't want to be disadvantaged. Personally, I don't care, but this kind of thing has to be decided before the start of a tournament (before people even enter) and not on the day of the finals.

Good post, except I'm not sure I understand the bolded statement.  Shouldn't people who are "skilled" have an advantage over people who aren't "skilled"?  Isn't that why we hold tournaments (to find out who is most "skilled"?)

By "skilled at it", I mean skilled at counting/remembering.
Logged

Powerman

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 766
  • Respect: +602
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #123 on: July 03, 2012, 02:13:27 pm »
0

Re: the word "cheat". I use this word to mean "violate the rules of the game". This may or may not be deceptive, may or may not be intentional. Please read any posts wherein I make use of this word, and its derivatives (i.e. cheating, cheater, cheated), with this definition in mind. Thank you.

Then the way you are using is wrong. See
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cheat

No words about violating the rules at all.

There are lots of dictionaries though:

Verb
cheat (third-person singular simple present cheats, present participle cheating, simple past and past participle cheated)
(intransitive) To violate rules in order to gain advantage from a situation.
My brother flunked biology because he cheated on his mid-term.
Logged
A man on a mission.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #124 on: July 03, 2012, 02:13:41 pm »
+3

Re: the word "cheat". I use this word to mean "violate the rules of the game". This may or may not be deceptive, may or may not be intentional. Please read any posts wherein I make use of this word, and its derivatives (i.e. cheating, cheater, cheated), with this definition in mind. Thank you.

Then the way you are using is wrong. See
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cheat

No words about violating the rules at all.
Definitions cannot be 'wrong'. They might be not commonly used. The meaning which words have is down to how they are used, and how they are understood, no matter what any given dictionary says. Regardless of how people commonly view things, this is how I use the word, what I have always understood the word to mean in the context of a game, and people should be advised. The important thing with language is that people understand each other, and this is why I posted my clarification.

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +233
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #125 on: July 03, 2012, 02:15:24 pm »
+1

The keyword there is "dishonestly".

And I think people should care about what a word is usually intended to mean. Or do you not mind if I define "idiot" as someone who just unconditionally stand by the rulebook rules and define "bastard"  as someone who is just unwilling to respect people by properly using the word, and then I just call someone posting here idiotic bastard?
Logged

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +233
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #126 on: July 03, 2012, 02:16:58 pm »
0

Re: the word "cheat". I use this word to mean "violate the rules of the game". This may or may not be deceptive, may or may not be intentional. Please read any posts wherein I make use of this word, and its derivatives (i.e. cheating, cheater, cheated), with this definition in mind. Thank you.

Then the way you are using is wrong. See
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cheat

No words about violating the rules at all.

There are lots of dictionaries though:

Verb
cheat (third-person singular simple present cheats, present participle cheating, simple past and past participle cheated)
(intransitive) To violate rules in order to gain advantage from a situation.
My brother flunked biology because he cheated on his mid-term.
Ok, my bad. I guess cheating is not that a strong word after all.
Logged

Mic Qsenoch

  • 2015 DS Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1672
  • Respect: +4275
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #127 on: July 03, 2012, 02:24:39 pm »
+1

Timchen keeps stealing posts right out of my fingers.

Here's a tip if you want your meaning to be clear: don't make up your own definitions, use conventional ones. Do you expect every person to have read that one post where you cleared up what "cheating" means to you?
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #128 on: July 03, 2012, 02:27:12 pm »
+1

Timchen keeps stealing posts right out of my fingers.

Here's a tip if you want your meaning to be clear: don't make up your own definitions, use conventional ones. Do you expect every person to have read that one post where you cleared up what "cheating" means to you?
This is a conventional definition. It is certainly not one I made up. I have never known 'cheat' to mean anything else, besides in the phrase 'cheat on your (person you have a romantic relationship with'.
That there is a dictionary containing this definition as well, is, I think, pretty clear evidence that it's not something I just made up.

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #129 on: July 03, 2012, 02:30:41 pm »
+1

Two definitions:
To violate rules in order to gain advantage from a situation.

To violate rules dishonestly

The point is that this thread has devolved into bitching about the definition of the word cheating. Please stop it. I don't usually advocate locking threads, but this has become senseless bickering about the semantics of others' posts. I don't think this thread is going anywhere useful.
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

Mic Qsenoch

  • 2015 DS Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1672
  • Respect: +4275
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #130 on: July 03, 2012, 02:31:39 pm »
0

Timchen keeps stealing posts right out of my fingers.

Here's a tip if you want your meaning to be clear: don't make up your own definitions, use conventional ones. Do you expect every person to have read that one post where you cleared up what "cheating" means to you?
This is a conventional definition. It is certainly not one I made up. I have never known 'cheat' to mean anything else, besides in the phrase 'cheat on your (person you have a romantic relationship with'.
That there is a dictionary containing this definition as well, is, I think, pretty clear evidence that it's not something I just made up.

The closest thing to your definition that has been posted is:
"To violate rules in order to gain advantage from a situation."

Which is pretty clearly more nefarious than simply "violate the rules of the game". I don't think your definition is totally off the mark but I think it misses out on a pretty clear component of the typical definition. Which is the sort of value-laden concept of trying to help yourself unfairly.
Logged

Mic Qsenoch

  • 2015 DS Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1672
  • Respect: +4275
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #131 on: July 03, 2012, 02:33:14 pm »
+2

The point is that this thread has devolved into bitching about the definition of the word cheating. Please stop it. I don't usually advocate locking threads, but this has become senseless bickering about the semantics of others' posts. I don't think this thread is going anywhere useful.

I was sincerely under the impression that the entire point of this thread was senseless bickering, and of course its going nowhere useful. Its not the destination, its the journey!
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #132 on: July 03, 2012, 02:57:07 pm »
+2

I believe that stopping such discussion is a major problem. That by trying to limit it, you are only put it off until later. That as much as you might want it to go away, it will not. That indeed by trying to stifle discussion on the subject, you in fact only make the problem worse.

The issue at hand with the finals is mildly related to the merits of using a point counter or not, etc. It is much more importantly concerned with integrity and ethics. The primary reason for my withdrawal was due to what I felt to be a lack of integrity from my fellow contestants, as well as from the organizer, and my ethical obligation to not unethically cooperate with others' unethical behaviour in the form of cheating. theory's position was not a pleasant one, but he made poor choices every step of the way, and ultimately, he made his own bed here. I will explain that this does not mean I think him to be an immoral person, but rather someone who has done several things which are wrong. I do not particularly expect many of you to understand the difference, but I feel obligated to explain for those who will.

I intend to post the entirety of what was conversed for all to see. I understand that theory does not want it here, and can indeed stop it from being here. So likely it will be somewhere else. But I feel it is necessary to fully explain the situation, and I feel like the situation needs fully to be explained. Furthermore, I believe that I am fully within my rights to repeat anything which was said to me, particularly when there was no hint of a condition of anonymity at the time it was said. Indeed, there were several people I had told BEFORE theory's request. I will not edit the contents of what was said, except to clean up some formatting issues (lots of '>'s, line breaks in random places that aren't original) and to edit out people's personal information, where such information is not publicly available already. All changes other than the > thing and the extra spaces thing will be noted as changes  made by me, so that they will be plain to see. Oh, I suppose I have also spliced in some of the messages in the middle, to reflect as best as possible the order in which they were actually sent by everyone, as they were not quite all one big chain.

Edit: I am holding off for the moment to give theory the chance to give me some superior reason to not post it. I can't think of one which will suffice, but I want to give him time to have the chance.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 04:14:45 pm by WanderingWinder »
Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4733
  • Respect: +3327
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #133 on: July 03, 2012, 03:52:54 pm »
+4

I must admit that after all these posts, I'm still surprised by people calling using the extension cheating.

Do they not understand the meaning of cheating? The people who are using the PCE aren't ordering their deck in the manner it pleases them. They're not suddenly grabbing Moats in hand whenever an opponent plays an attack card. They're not breaking the rules by sending fake messages to the server. All they do is use the information that everyone has.

Card counting is not cheating, it's not against the rules to count. It is frowned upon though and it will get you thrown off private property. Online you can count cards all you want, but apparently it's less useful as they use decks with a gazillion cards? I'm not sure though as I haven't played online Blackjack. The thing is that online Blackjack is different from real life Blackjack. You can't shuffle a gazillion cards in real life.

The same is true for Dominion.

All of the arguments of the PCE haters don't hold if they don't accept it's a different game, or at least a variant.
But the haters already seem to have lost the possibility to think rationally. Heck, people who advocated the use of the PCE on the forums were actually subject to bans for future tournaments, even if they would agree not to use it!

These kinds of knee-jerk reactions don't get you anywhere people. Stop, sit back, think, get over your initial shock. So many were shocked to find out the PCE didn't just track points, but also cards.

A logical response would have been: "I didn't know it did that, is this information available for us too?" And from here on an insightful discussion could have followed from where we could have gotten somewhere. Instead, the fingers were pointed immediately to players who used it and even the guy who programmed it! It was like Mafia all over again.

I have seriously lost faith in a lot of the people who think using the PCE is cheating. They're so blinded by their initial shock that they just stepped on the bulldozer and have lost the ability to process logical arguments.

The solution is not to ban the PCE, this will have 0 zero empty false result. It won't change ANYTHING! Nothing, nada, nyet! People who want to use a counter will break out the spreadsheet or use offline software. And then the people who wanted to ban the thing are stuck at the same point they were before! They still don't use the information that the other player uses? Are they going to complain if the opponent scribbled some things down on a piece of paper.

Hell, I jotted things down on paper before the Point Counter came out on Iso. Not because I wanted to cheat so badly, just because I wanted to use the information I had to the best of my ability. In real life games, it's a different story. I'm with you guys on that one, don't write anything down, keep it in your head. You just CAN'T expect the same for an online game.

Why do you think Poker Rooms have logs you can browse back to? They can't force players to either forget previous hands or remember them. They settled on using logs to provide players an equal field of play. Some sites even show statistics how many hands you've won or lost.

An online game should treat itself like an online game, not as a one on one copy of the offline experience.

I've seen so many games fail this way....
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

chwhite

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1065
  • Respect: +436
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #134 on: July 03, 2012, 04:18:51 pm »
+2

I must admit that after all these posts, I'm still surprised by people calling using the extension cheating.

And I must admit that, after all these posts, I'm surprised you still think this is just about whether the extension is cheating or not.  As far as I'm concerned, that particular question is almost completely besides the point.
Logged
To discard or not to discard?  That is the question.

rod-

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 213
  • Respect: +49
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #135 on: July 03, 2012, 04:44:55 pm »
+1

I've seen so many games fail this way....
This is where people have their blinders on.  They only remember "Hey, i like to play this game offline, let's do the same thing, but on the internet" and don't think "Hey, this game is good offline, maybe it could be great online". 

I also don't understand it.  I don't see people pushing for a button to push to manually reshuffle their decks or draw their cards...The interface is sleek and streamlined and takes away all of the unnecessary grunt work, leaving you to play the GAME.  A point counter does the same thing.  It doesn't play for you, it doesn't do anything that you can't do on your own, it just does it faster. 
Logged

Lekkit

  • 2011 Swedish Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1253
  • Shuffle iT Username: Lekkit
  • Respect: +673
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #136 on: July 03, 2012, 04:54:59 pm »
0

First of all, if WW wants to withdraw from the tournament, I don't feel like we all have to know why. If he wishes to share that information, that's up to him. But I would never try to force him to share.

Second, I don't consider the use of PCE cheating. I do however think it gives the player with it a slight advantage. But probably as much advantage as playing a Shanty Town and then your Militia without any other actions in hand.

I do think it's kind of poor sportsmanship to have the PCE without the option of disabling it. Especially if you play without the built in point tracker. I'll probably start disabling it in games with Fairgrounds, Ambassador, Vineyards, Gardens and possibly Horn of Plenty.

Regardless, I don't think any lesser of any of you, wether you play with the PCE, like it or hate it.
Logged

Fabian

  • 2012 Swedish Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 666
  • Respect: +541
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #137 on: July 03, 2012, 04:57:36 pm »
+1

I do think it's kind of poor sportsmanship to have the PCE without the option of disabling it. Especially if you play without the built in point tracker.

Just to be clear, this isn't possible. If you play without the !disable option, point tracker is automatically set to "required" and can't be changed.
Logged

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #138 on: July 03, 2012, 05:00:18 pm »
0

I'm primarily posting to clear up one small misconception I saw a few pages back. Doing exactly what the extension does manually, and almost as precisely, is kind of annoying, but really not very time consuming at all, as you can clearly see by watching me do it throughout the finals yesterday. I did stop caring towards the ends of some games, because I felt it no longer mattered, but keeping up with it really wasn't a big deal at all. It's just a really pointless hoop to make me jump through when I could just have the extension instead. Also, it might be more irritating for other people than it is for me, and in THAT way I perhaps do have an advantage that I shouldn't. If everyone could just use the extension, that advantage disappears...

In this case I made the spreadsheet publicly available, so that I think it can only be argued that I was playing at a disadvantage. My opponents (or at least jtl005) were certainly using it during the games, as you can see in the video by the labeled selection boxes of other users showing up in the spreadsheet, and jtl005 asking me where the sheet for game 2 was in chat.

I'm still waiting for anyone who shares Donald's and Kirian's objections to my earlier logic to present them in not-insulting terms. Until then, I don't have a lot more to say on the topic in general, as I think we've all repeated ourselves enough by now.
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +233
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #139 on: July 03, 2012, 05:06:27 pm »
+3

Wow. Personman, I would say this is a bit excessive.

I am pretty sure you will not be allowed to do so, suppose you have won and went to the nationals. Sure I understand once online there are no ways for the tournament director to forbid you from doing so... but why? Can people not just agree on not using the point counter and rely on their own heads?
Logged

Fabian

  • 2012 Swedish Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 666
  • Respect: +541
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #140 on: July 03, 2012, 05:09:55 pm »
0

The thought of playing a 35 minute game because the people involved are updating their spreadsheets constantly makes me want to quit Dominion outright, ugh. Then again I'm easily annoyed when a Dominion game isn't played at a reasonable speed regardless so I dunno.
Logged

questioneer

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 57
  • Respect: +12
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #141 on: July 03, 2012, 05:12:33 pm »
0

Hey just wanted to chime in here.  I recently ran the Detroit Area Qualifier.  It went fantastic!  However, this issue of card counting did come up as some of the players that came had played online and were used to the counter.

One of the players that made it to the finals had pen and paper to use to count cards and point track.  I allowed it and people didn't make a big deal out of it.  After the tourny, we discussed it online here.  It seems that everyone was against having any items out during FTF tournys.

After asking DXV, it seems he was against it also.  So for next time we will not allow these items.  However for an online Qualifier, theory or DXV or somebody just needs to make a ruling on the issue and move on.

I don't think its cheating at all.  Just a different way to play.  Online is just a different way to play vs FTF- simple as that.

If Wandering wind wants to withdraw, then that is his right.  Play on.  Afterwards, work together to make the online Qualifier clearer and better for people.

Honestly, people are blowing their breath over something petty- grow up, work together, play on, improve the system and move on.

It might help if there were some universal Dominion tourny rules and procedures.  Personally I like the tournament point system for the online Qualifier here.
Logged

Obi Wan Bonogi

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 254
  • Respect: +342
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #142 on: July 03, 2012, 05:20:38 pm »
+3

A very similar debate to this raged for years in the online poker community regarding statistic tracking programs.  At the end, the majority of the sites drew a line by allowing trackers that tracked your personal history and disallowed anything that pooled a large database of statistics compiled by different players or bots.  Essentially anything that could be accomplished by pencil and paper(no matter how tedious) was allowed and anything that went beyond that was disallowed.  The stat trackers for poker are WAY closer to cheating the game than the counter at debate here, and in the end they were allowed(for the most part). 

Personally, I think this debate is a lot of ruffled feathers over something that is pretty inconsequential.  I don't use the point counter.  But I would never call someone that chose to use it in plane view a cheater.  I think at the highest level of play the counter is very close to a complete non-factor, perhaps preventing a blunder here and there.  If anything, the point counter is a tool for up and coming players to get a better handle on the game. 
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 05:28:05 pm by Obi Wan Bonogi »
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5378
  • Respect: +21878
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #143 on: July 03, 2012, 05:25:21 pm »
+4

In this case I made the spreadsheet publicly available, so that I think it can only be argued that I was playing at a disadvantage. My opponents (or at least jtl005) were certainly using it during the games, as you can see in the video by the labeled selection boxes of other users showing up in the spreadsheet, and jtl005 asking me where the sheet for game 2 was in chat.
Show this to Jay at the tournament and I think there's a decent chance he will DQ you. Also, my estimate of the chance of a future online qualifier happening is zero.
Logged

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #144 on: July 03, 2012, 05:35:55 pm »
0

The thought of playing a 35 minute game because the people involved are updating their spreadsheets constantly makes me want to quit Dominion outright, ugh. Then again I'm easily annoyed when a Dominion game isn't played at a reasonable speed regardless so I dunno.

If you actually watch the video, you will see that I waste almost no time at all updating the spreadsheet. I do it almost entirely during other people's turns, and often let a few changes stack up before making them at once.

As you will see if WW does in fact publish the email thread (I really think he ought to respect theory's wishes and not do so, but I can't stop him) the ruling was reversed half an hour before the game started. I had initially intended and been explicitly allowed to use the extension, and made it clear that I would use a public spreadsheet instead if it were ruled against. In the end, it was ruled against, so I used a spreadsheet.

Wow. Personman, I would say this is a bit excessive.

I am pretty sure you will not be allowed to do so, suppose you have won and went to the nationals. Sure I understand once online there are no ways for the tournament director to forbid you from doing so... but why? Can people not just agree on not using the point counter and rely on their own heads?

This argument about bringing the qualifiers in line as much as possible with what will happen at Nationals keeps coming up over and over, and it continues to baffle me. Online Dominion is nothing like paper Dominion for so many other reasons - the psychology of being face to face, the presence of the log, the chance to misclick, no requirement to shuffle, the official point counter - that bringing up one additional difference and trying to make a principled stand on those grounds just baffles me.

I also disagree that it is strange or excessive for me to bother with a spreadsheet. Different people in different communities and from different backgrounds have different priorities, of course, so mine may seem strange and excessive to other people. But to me it is the bare minimum that I, as rational person trying to win at Dominion, should do. It's kind of too bad that the finals didn't include a serious Wishing Well engine game, so that you could see me get really excessive - I've had a lot of practice at tracking my exact progress through my deck and always maximizing my Wishing Well odds.
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

Captain_Frisk

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1257
  • Respect: +1261
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #145 on: July 03, 2012, 05:37:19 pm »
+2

Also, my estimate of the chance of a future online qualifier happening is zero.

Let's not punish the many for the sins of a few. 

@Personman - measure twice - cut once.
Logged
I support funsockets.... taking as much time as they need to get it right.

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #146 on: July 03, 2012, 05:39:08 pm »
0

In this case I made the spreadsheet publicly available, so that I think it can only be argued that I was playing at a disadvantage. My opponents (or at least jtl005) were certainly using it during the games, as you can see in the video by the labeled selection boxes of other users showing up in the spreadsheet, and jtl005 asking me where the sheet for game 2 was in chat.
Show this to Jay at the tournament and I think there's a decent chance he will DQ you. Also, my estimate of the chance of a future online qualifier happening is zero.


Then I guess he'll have to DQ the actual winner, jtl005, who is on record as having used it during the game.

To be clear, I explained in great detail exactly what I would do before the tournament started, and it was approved as non-DQable by the organizer.
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6033
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #147 on: July 03, 2012, 05:40:10 pm »
+3

From my perspective what happened:

1. WW raises the issue that Pman wants to use an undisableable card counter

2. I tell Pman, don't use it

3. Pman insists on using it

4. [insert long flamewar betwen WW and Pman, while I'm asleep, wherein WW withdraws]

5. Not noticing that WW withdrew, I tell Pman in no uncertain terms that he should not use it but I'd prefer it if everyone used that rather than Pman taking 15-minute turns writing everything down [those of you who played in the BGGDL era will know what I'm referring to]

6. Pman takes that as an endorsement to use it

7. In an attempt to bring WW back rrenaud proposes that no one is allowed to use the counter, and if you wanted to take notes we couldn't stop you, but anyone judged in our view to be "excessively delaying", or timed out by the isotropic timer, would be DQ'd

8. WW did not reenter the tournament and under those rules the match was played.  Pman updated a spreadsheet that everyone had access to.

I have no authority over what Jay does and does not want to do at Nationals.  I approved Pman's proposed spreadsheet in the sense that I wouldn't kick him out of the finals for using it.

My view on this echoes OWB.  The point counter is of so little use to anyone competing at the top level that I'm dismayed it has turned into such a nasty debate. 
Logged

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #148 on: July 03, 2012, 05:42:17 pm »
0

I think that's actually a pretty unfortunately inaccurate account of what happened, and I'm now kind of thinking that the email thread should be published despite your objections...

Here is my version of a similar rundown:

1. WW raises the issue that Pman wants to use an undisableable card counter

2. Theory "asks" that I not use it.

3. After some discussion, Theory clarifies that it is explicitly legal, but that he will be "disappointed" if I use it.

4. WanderingWinder threatens me with a lawsuit, calls me a huge variety of names, and then withdraws.

5. I really should have let things rest here, but instead I try to continue the discussion, since I think that soft pressure of the kind that Theory was applying is a really awful thing to bring to a competitive environment.

6. Theory and I have a really nice private chat in which we come to understand that (I think) he understands my logic perfectly, but wishes that everyone could make concessions to the desires of the group and play with each other harmoniously. This is a noble and understandable desire, but I am too concerned with the ease with which my opponents can cheat to take this path.

7. Half an hour before the game is scheduled to start, rrenaud suggests the "no point counter, slow play is punishable" ruling, and Theory adopts it. I protest that I will do an exactly equivalent thing (use the spreadsheet) with no chance of it causing me to slow play, and that thus this ruling is silly. Nevertheless, it us upheld and I abide by it.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 05:49:08 pm by Personman »
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5378
  • Respect: +21878
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #149 on: July 03, 2012, 05:43:30 pm »
+12

I'm still waiting for anyone who shares Donald's and Kirian's objections to my earlier logic to present them in not-insulting terms. Until then, I don't have a lot more to say on the topic in general, as I think we've all repeated ourselves enough by now.
I don't know why you think someone will explain how you are justifying immorality without insulting you. Do they start off with a speech about how morals are arbitrary?

Morals are arbitrary. There are a bunch of atoms moving around, and later on they are in different positions. What are morals, in this context? Mere high-level abstractions.

Also, here's a handy way to justify whatever evil thing you were going to do anyway:

Quote
1. Everyone likes to be able to trust each other and treat each other without suspicion.
2. People like to win.
I know, right?

Quote
3. People sometimes succumb to the temptation to secure advantages via illegitimate means, especially if they are 100% certain that they cannot be caught.
For example, it's advantageous for your wife to cheat on you. Maybe she'll get pregnant and increase the fitness of her offspring. That's no sleight against your genes; genetic diversity is one to one with genetic fitness. It is for sure better to cheat on you.

Quote
4. The point counter can be trivially modified to be undetectable. As blueblimp points out, at present there is no reason to believe anyone has done so (but neither is there particular reason to believe that they haven't).
Similarly your wife can trivially cheat on you without you catching on. You can try to argue against this, but man, you are at the office all day, and it's a long commute, and she's always out buying groceries or getting her hair done or something.

Quote
5. Even if no one is actually cheating, the existence of an easy and undetectable way to cheat breeds suspicion and resentment.
Even if she isn't cheating, the fact that she easily could breeds suspicion and resentment.

Quote
6. It also provides an incentive for otherwise honest players to begin cheating - "My opponent is probably using an undetectable point counter, I guess I will too".
For all she knows, you're probably cheating on her, with some floozy at work. Why not also cheat on you?

Quote
7. The only resolution to problems of unenforceability is to legalize the unenforceable action.
The only resolution to problems of unenforceability is to legalize the unenforceable action.

Quote
8. Therefore, to maintain the trusting nature of the community, and to avoid providing unfair advantages to those willing to cheat in undetectable ways, the extension should always be legal in competitive play. This is an unfortunate conclusion for those who have a strong preference for Dominion play without the extension, but I believe it is nevertheless an inescapable fact of online life. The alternative is to incentivize and reward unethical behavior.
Therefore, to maintain the trusting nature of the community, and to avoid blah blah blah, your wife should be free to have sex with whoever. This is an unfortunate conclusion for those who prefer monogamy, but it is an inescapable fact of modern life. The alternative is to incentivize and reward unethical behavior. And we wouldn't want that! Then people would do unethical things!

It's a neat trick that you can solve the problem of "x is unethical" by saying "let's redefine x to not be unethical." Problem solved!

I have nothing against people with open marriages or people who like point counters. Your argument is crazy nonsense though, and it turns out humanity is better than that.
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5378
  • Respect: +21878
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #150 on: July 03, 2012, 05:43:51 pm »
+4

Let's not punish the many for the sins of a few. 
"This is why we can't have nice things."
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5378
  • Respect: +21878
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #151 on: July 03, 2012, 05:44:41 pm »
+1

Then I guess he'll have to DQ the actual winner, jtl005, who is on record as having used it during the game.

To be clear, I explained in great detail exactly what I would do before the tournament started, and it was approved as non-DQable by the organizer.
Not his call! It won't be according to Jay anyway, not ever.
Logged

questioneer

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 57
  • Respect: +12
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #152 on: July 03, 2012, 05:45:07 pm »
0

In this case I made the spreadsheet publicly available, so that I think it can only be argued that I was playing at a disadvantage. My opponents (or at least jtl005) were certainly using it during the games, as you can see in the video by the labeled selection boxes of other users showing up in the spreadsheet, and jtl005 asking me where the sheet for game 2 was in chat.
Show this to Jay at the tournament and I think there's a decent chance he will DQ you. Also, my estimate of the chance of a
 future online qualifier happening is zero.

Hey, Donald as a GM for one of these qualifiers, in my mind what you and Jay rule on this issue is the law of the land.  I will fully support your decisions- if that that helps you guys in any way.
Logged

ftl

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2028
  • Respect: +1295
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #153 on: July 03, 2012, 05:46:53 pm »
0

Eh, I can entirely see why there won't be any more online qualifiers, considering that Personman's point is that you can't stop people from using stuff like point counters and spreadsheets.

I had assumed that in this community, people would play fairly and honestly and not use such things if not agreed to by all players, but I guess not. Hence, no more online qualifiers. Makes sense to me.
Logged

O

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 836
  • Respect: +602
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #154 on: July 03, 2012, 05:49:33 pm »
0

>Goes without internet really for a few days
>Comes back to see massive shitstorm
>Utterly confused about what's happening
>Finds out its about absolutely nothing of importance.

Despite my preference (which I have but won't post), who seriously gives that much of a <redacted> to care so obsessively about something that influences .1% of tournament games played at a high level. I mean, identical starting hands and shuffling patterns IRL have such a larger effect than this..

PPE: Jesus Christ. Wanderwinder had legitimate concerns. Personman has a legitimate point addressing those concerns and while his play was potential a minor point of viable discussion, screaming "CHEATER" at the top of your lungs doesn't help anyone, Kirian and Ftl.
Logged

Captain_Frisk

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1257
  • Respect: +1261
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #155 on: July 03, 2012, 05:52:11 pm »
0

I have nothing against people with open marriages or people who like point counters. Your argument is crazy nonsense though, and it turns out humanity is better than that.

Donald X. Epic Burn.  This is starting to get better than the Peterson /  Sirlin / Knizia fiasco.
Logged
I support funsockets.... taking as much time as they need to get it right.

chwhite

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1065
  • Respect: +436
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #156 on: July 03, 2012, 05:56:43 pm »
+11

I know I'm going to regret fanning the flames like this, but I can't hold out anymore.

I think that's actually a pretty unfortunately inaccurate account of what happened, and I'm now kind of thinking that the email thread should be published despite your objections...

Here is my version of a similar rundown:

1. WW raises the issue that Pman wants to use an undisableable card counter

2. Theory "asks" that I not use it.

3. After some discussion, Theory clarifies that it is explicitly legal, but that he will be "disappointed" if I use it.

4. WanderingWinder threatens me with a lawsuit, calls me a huge variety of names, and then withdraws.

5. I really should have let things rest here, but instead I try to continue the discussion, since I think that soft pressure of the kind that Theory was applying is a really awful thing to bring to a competitive environment.

6. Theory and I have a really nice private chat in which we come to understand that (I think) he understands my logic perfectly, but wishes that everyone could make concessions to the desires of the group and play with each other harmoniously. This is a noble and understandable desire, but I am too concerned with the ease with which my opponents can cheat to take this path.

7. Half an hour before the game is scheduled to start, rrenaud suggests the "no point counter, slow play is punishable" ruling, and Theory adopts it. I protest that I will do an exactly equivalent thing (use the spreadsheet) with no chance of it causing me to slow play, and that thus this ruling is silly. Nevertheless, it us upheld and I abide by it.


Even if we assume this version of events to be the correct one, you're still in the wrong.

What would have been so hard about being a good sport, respecting the wishes of your opponents AND the tournament organizer (and as it so happens the designer of the game), and just agreeing to turn off the point counter as soon as you were asked, even if you didn't 100 percent agree with their reasoning?  What would have been so bad about a little human decency?  For shame.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 06:05:45 pm by chwhite »
Logged
To discard or not to discard?  That is the question.

Powerman

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 766
  • Respect: +602
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #157 on: July 03, 2012, 05:58:33 pm »
0

Quote from: blueblimp
A little note here: from what I remember, the Donald X. ruling is that if one player is taking notes on paper, that is a variant. To play a variant legitimately, both players need to agree.

..and all players are given ample opportunity to opt out of games with the extension variant, as you yourself have just noted. I want to give you the benefit of the doubt, but it's hard not to read this as fairly pointless antagonism.

Quote from: Kirian
This addon will be barred from future IsoDom tournaments, should they happen.

You can do whatever you want in tournaments you run, but I beg you to consider the following line of argument:

1. Everyone likes to be able to trust each other and treat each other without suspicion.
2. People like to win.
3. People sometimes succumb to the temptation to secure advantages via illegitimate means, especially if they are 100% certain that they cannot be caught.
4. The point counter can be trivially modified to be undetectable. As blueblimp points out, at present there is no reason to believe anyone has done so (but neither is there particular reason to believe that they haven't).
5. Even if no one is actually cheating, the existence of an easy and undetectable way to cheat breeds suspicion and resentment.
6. It also provides an incentive for otherwise honest players to begin cheating - "My opponent is probably using an undetectable point counter, I guess I will too".
7. The only resolution to problems of unenforceability is to legalize the unenforceable action.
8. Therefore, to maintain the trusting nature of the community, and to avoid providing unfair advantages to those willing to cheat in undetectable ways, the extension should always be legal in competitive play. This is an unfortunate conclusion for those who have a strong preference for Dominion play without the extension, but I believe it is nevertheless an inescapable fact of online life. The alternative is to incentivize and reward unethical behavior.

I think you asked for someone to dispute this?  (if you were referring to some other post, my bad!)  First off, what you say in 4 basically is "Cheaters will cheat".  I assume you are American (as this was US only) and from my understanding of RL events (I know this is the internet) is RL cheating (AKA breaking the rules or laws) while not always caught, is never permissible  because it is done.  Let's look at speeding.  Who amongst us has not at some point gone over the speed limit?  I'm tempted to say no one, but we'll just say for ease that only 90% of people have gone over the speed limit.  Now, does this mean we abandon our speed limits because they are often ignored, and rarely caught?  No, obviously not.  There are police that watch roads and catch some people who speed, we'll say 10% (not that high, but w/e).  So 90% of the 90% (or 81%) of our population speeds (breaking the rules) and gets away with this.  But this doesn't mean we need to abolish speed limits.  Not a perfect example, I know.  But oh well.
Logged
A man on a mission.

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #158 on: July 03, 2012, 06:02:30 pm »
+1

Quote from: Donald X
long rebuttal

Thank you! It is very helpful to know what you are talking about. I'm glad you decided that it was worth your time. Also it was funny!

First, my not-serious response: I'm totally poly, so whatever, man! (I actually am, but this obviously does not invalidate your argument).

My actual response is that games are different from life. In life, I agree wholeheartedly that we must trust each other, and that is, in the end, usually more rewarding to be worthy of trust than to betray it. There are exceptions; as you've said, it's all just a bunch of atoms moving around, and there's no real moral consistency to anything. But on the whole I think we're on the same page here.

I just don't think the same ideals can apply to games with stakes played over the internet. There's a reason that my side won this debate in the Poker community but hasn't done so so convincingly here: it's bigger, and there's more at stake. Under those conditions, the system will converge towards the strictly, logically fair alternative much more quickly, and analogies to real-life morals and community values stop holding water. (Of course, there are other, insoluble fairness issues in online poker, like collusion. But since people really like playing online poker, they kinda just have to ignore them.)

I don't think we need to have a 100-page discussion about this. I respect the desire to have an online community in which rules are not made on the presumption of dishonesty. It's a nice dream, and maybe I am too cynical in thinking that we cannot achieve it here (though see my earlier point re trolls on isotropic). I personally prefer it when rules ARE made on that assumption, because then I don't have to be afraid that I am being a chump by not taking advantage of my trivial ability to cheat, and can instead rest assured that my actions are legal and that everyone else is doing it too. But it's okay for us to have this difference of opinion, and there is room for both kinds of people to play and enjoy this wonderful game that you have made for us.

As theory put it very well at some point during the email discussion, the primary take away from the whole thing is that rules need to be hammered out a bit better ahead of time.
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

Ozle

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3625
  • Sorry, this text is personal.
  • Respect: +3353
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #159 on: July 03, 2012, 06:04:00 pm »
+5

Quote
I think you asked for someone to dispute this?  (if you were referring to some other post, my bad!)  First off, what you say in 4 basically is "Cheaters will cheat".  I assume you are American (as this was US only) and from my understanding of RL events (I know this is the internet) is RL cheating (AKA breaking the rules or laws) while not always caught, is never permissible  because it is done.  Let's look at speeding.  Who amongst us has not at some point gone over the speed limit?  I'm tempted to say no one, but we'll just say for ease that only 90% of people have gone over the speed limit.  Now, does this mean we abandon our speed limits because they are often ignored, and rarely caught?  No, obviously not.  There are police that watch roads and catch some people who speed, we'll say 10% (not that high, but w/e).  So 90% of the 90% (or 81%) of our population speeds (breaking the rules) and gets away with this.  But this doesn't mean we need to abolish speed limits.  Not a perfect example, I know.  But oh well.

A better example could be athletes taking drugs

We know some athletes take drugs, we cant stop that. Every now and then one gets caught, but in all liklihood a load more are taking some and not getting caught.

Therefore should we allow drug taking so that everyone is on a level playing field?
Logged
Try the Ozle Google Map Challenge!
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=7466.0

Sullying players Enjoyment of Innovation since 2013 Apparently!

ftl

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2028
  • Respect: +1295
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #160 on: July 03, 2012, 06:09:31 pm »
0

Heh. Unlike previous analogies, I think that one fits perfectly. Don't like the speeding or cheating-on-spouse analogy, but that one is good.
Logged

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +233
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #161 on: July 03, 2012, 06:09:46 pm »
+2

Quote
This argument about bringing the qualifiers in line as much as possible with what will happen at Nationals keeps coming up over and over, and it continues to baffle me. Online Dominion is nothing like paper Dominion for so many other reasons - the psychology of being face to face, the presence of the log, the chance to misclick, no requirement to shuffle, the official point counter - that bringing up one additional difference and trying to make a principled stand on those grounds just baffles me.

@Personman: Thing is-- this tournament is the qualification for the nationals. All in all I think the objective of the online qualifier is to find someone among us who is the most likely to win the national. Thus, if memorization is a part that would be tested in the nationals, I'd rather it is also tested in the qualifier. I hope it is easy to see how this is obviously different from other things you have listed.

On the other hand I do find WW sometimes a bit hard to communicate. But if a large portion of your insistence on using the point counter is based on his response I think it went too far.

@Donald: a great response. Exactly what I would like to see yesterday.
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6033
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #162 on: July 03, 2012, 06:10:59 pm »
+3

Whoa whoa whoa.

I never, ever approved the point counter or labeled it "explicitly legal".  I don't care about all your other statements, I haven't gone back and analyzed the dozens of emails exchanged, but I absolutely, most certainly, would never say anything of the sort. 

What I did say (initially) is that if you use it, I couldn't DQ you.  This is partially because you would have instead simply taken notes (and made the game take 3x as long) -- an understandable temptation, and partially because I felt constrained by the fact that the tournament rules were silent on the subject.  Had I the foresight to anticipate this issue, I would have simply banned it, no questions asked. 

I am uninterested in the factual dispute of what happened.  As far as I'm concerned, the finals happened, they could have gone better, but they happened and they're over.  But I don't want anyone to think that I supported the use of the extension.  Moreover, what we were forced to do in the middle of a tournament, constrained by existing tournament rules, is not equivalent to what we would do in the future.
Logged

Powerman

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 766
  • Respect: +602
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #163 on: July 03, 2012, 06:11:37 pm »
0

A better example could be athletes taking drugs

We know some athletes take drugs, we cant stop that. Every now and then one gets caught, but in all liklihood a load more are taking some and not getting caught.

Therefore should we allow drug taking so that everyone is on a level playing field?

That is a better example.  Why didn't I think of that?  ::)
Logged
A man on a mission.

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #164 on: July 03, 2012, 06:12:51 pm »
0

Speeding: as with Donald's example, my response is that games are not real life. Additionally, going over the speed limit is not an arbitrary advantage: you are legitimately more likely to die and/or kill someone.

Athletes: This won't win me any sympathy points, I'm sure, but I think professional physical sports are pretty stupid. I mean, they are fun and great and people should play them, but when millions of dollars (not to mention, often, the lives of fans) are at stake, it just gets absurd. And then there's all the impossible murkiness around prostheses and other body mods - if a fake leg can help me run better, but it's illegal to have the operation voluntarily, should I try to get run over by a car? It's just a mess, and I really don't care what sports regulatory bodies end up doing. I would be fine with them legalizing steroids.
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #165 on: July 03, 2012, 06:14:15 pm »
0

Whoa whoa whoa.

I never, ever approved the point counter or labeled it "explicitly legal".  I don't care about all your other statements, I haven't gone back and analyzed the dozens of emails exchanged, but I absolutely, most certainly, would never say anything of the sort. 

What I did say (initially) is that if you use it, I couldn't DQ you.  This is because I felt constrained by the fact that the tournament rules were silent on the subject.  Had I the foresight to anticipate this issue, I would have simply banned it, no questions asked. 

I don't know the difference between a tournament organizer telling me I won't be DQ'd and an action being explicitly legal. In my mind you've just directly contradicted yourself.
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9156
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #166 on: July 03, 2012, 06:26:20 pm »
0

Whoa whoa whoa.

I never, ever approved the point counter or labeled it "explicitly legal".  I don't care about all your other statements, I haven't gone back and analyzed the dozens of emails exchanged, but I absolutely, most certainly, would never say anything of the sort. 

What I did say (initially) is that if you use it, I couldn't DQ you.  This is because I felt constrained by the fact that the tournament rules were silent on the subject.  Had I the foresight to anticipate this issue, I would have simply banned it, no questions asked. 

I don't know the difference between a tournament organizer telling me I won't be DQ'd and an action being explicitly legal. In my mind you've just directly contradicted yourself.

In tournaments as in life, not everything is black and white.  I believe theory is saying that he did not consider the point counter "explicitly legal" but his hands were tied and he had to allow it because neither was it explicitly illegal.  "I can't stop you from doing this thing" is a far cry from "go forth with my blessing."
Logged

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #167 on: July 03, 2012, 06:40:23 pm »
0

Athletes: This won't win me any sympathy points, I'm sure, but I think professional physical sports are pretty stupid. I mean, they are fun and great and people should play them, but when millions of dollars (not to mention, often, the lives of fans) are at stake, it just gets absurd. And then there's all the impossible murkiness around prostheses and other body mods - if a fake leg can help me run better, but it's illegal to have the operation voluntarily, should I try to get run over by a car? It's just a mess, and I really don't care what sports regulatory bodies end up doing. I would be fine with them legalizing steroids.

Say what? What does this have to do with the comparison between competitive sports and competitive gaming? I think it's a pretty good analogy. And the fact that people may or may not take it more seriously than they should is irrelevant. I think people have taken this point counter extension more seriously than they should, and yet here we are. We still should strive for fairness, as they should in sports.

You're competing for an IRL dominion tournament. As far as I'm concerned, it should be as close to IRL dominion as possible. And it totally would be possible if people weren't dicks and would just follow the rules on an honor system. It'd be great for a bunch of other things, too.  Apparently that's not really possible with our crowd. Wouldn't have expected that.
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #168 on: July 03, 2012, 06:40:49 pm »
0

Quote from: eHalcyon
In tournaments as in life, not everything is black and white.  I believe theory is saying that he did not consider the point counter "explicitly legal" but his hands were tied and he had to allow it because neither was it explicitly illegal.  "I can't stop you from doing this thing" is a far cry from "go forth with my blessing."

Ok, but blessing or no, if something isn't illegal, and it is advantageous, I don't think it can be immoral to do it.

That may sound insane, but here's why it's not: I think that competitive events should have explicit, enforced sportsmanship guidelines. These can never be precise, but they don't need to be. As soon as there is the potential to be DQ'd for slow play, trash talk, or other unsportsmanlike conduct, it stops being advantageous. The Magic: The Gathering Infraction Procedure Guide handles this extremely well.

Quote from: zxcvbn2
As far as I'm concerned, it should be as close to IRL dominion as possible.

And as I've said at length earlier in this thread, I think that's a completely absurd notion.

Quote from: zxcvbn2
Say what? What does this have to do with the comparison between competitive sports and competitive gaming? I think it's a pretty good analogy.

And I think it isn't, because I don't think it's possible to resolve the issues with physical sports, whereas I do think it is possible to resolve them in abstract games.

I've never heard of any controversy about top chess players taking nootropics, and I guess that might become an issue in abstract gaming circles some day. If that day comes, we can hash out the issues then, but certainly some isotropic players may be taking them right now, and those same players may be competing in tournaments. Should we send drug-testing teams to everyone's house? Should we add explicit no-drugs clauses to our tournament rules and hope everyone abides by them?
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 06:49:34 pm by Personman »
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

Ozle

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3625
  • Sorry, this text is personal.
  • Respect: +3353
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #169 on: July 03, 2012, 06:48:53 pm »
+1

"if something isn't illegal, and it is advantageous, I don't think it can be immoral to do it."

One of the craziest things I have heard so far:

So would you agree your GF/BF  cheating with your Friend/Dad/Sibling on you wouldnt be immoral? Thats not illegal and it has an advantage for her?

Logged
Try the Ozle Google Map Challenge!
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=7466.0

Sullying players Enjoyment of Innovation since 2013 Apparently!

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #170 on: July 03, 2012, 06:49:42 pm »
+1

Ok, but blessing or no, if something isn't illegal, and it is advantageous, I don't think it can be immoral to do it.

That may sound insane, but here's why it's not: I think that competitive events should have explicit, enforced sportsmanship guidelines. These can never be precise, but they don't need to be. As soon as there is the potential to be DQ'd for slow play, trash talk, or other unsportsmanlike conduct, it stops being advantageous. The Magic: The Gathering Infraction Procedure Guide handles this extremely well.

Emphasis mine. And that's the issue. Hate to be all sappy, but the whole point of sportsmanship is to strive for fairness and good will outside of what the rules explicitly allow.

For instance, there's no explicit rule that teams shake hands at the end of a hockey series, but they do it. An even better example, IMO, is in baseball, where you can get thrown out if the umpire thinks you tried to intentionally hit a batter. There's nothing in the rules explicitly stating that you can't intentionally hit a batter (at least that I can find). But it's still reason for ejection in that sport.

Though I'm sure you don't like this reasons because they involve sports and aren't directly comparable. I find it a very fair analogy, fwiw.
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #171 on: July 03, 2012, 06:54:10 pm »
0

Quote from: zxcvbn2
Emphasis mine. And that's the issue. Hate to be all sappy, but the whole point of sportsmanship is to strive for fairness and good will outside of what the rules explicitly allow.

The world is big, and the internet brings us all together. What is sportsmanlike in your town may not be in mine. Without explicit guidelines, situations like this will always arise. That is why a game similar to Dominion, but with a much larger and more competitive community, has to have them. Ask any Magic judge, and e will tell you that the sportsmanship entries in the IPG are absolutely vital to the success of the game and the creation of a healthy tournament atmosphere.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 06:58:36 pm by Personman »
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

nopawnsintended

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220
  • Respect: +186
    • View Profile
    • My Website
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #172 on: July 03, 2012, 06:55:34 pm »
+3

Quote from: Donald X
long rebuttal
I don't think we need to have a 100-page discussion about this. I respect the desire to have an online community in which rules are not made on the presumption of dishonesty. It's a nice dream, and maybe I am too cynical in thinking that we cannot achieve it here (though see my earlier point re trolls on isotropic). I personally prefer it when rules ARE made on that assumption, because then I don't have to be afraid that I am being a chump by not taking advantage of my trivial ability to cheat, and can instead rest assured that my actions are legal and that everyone else is doing it too. But it's okay for us to have this difference of opinion, and there is room for both kinds of people to play and enjoy this wonderful game that you have made for us.

I presumed honesty in the tournament because the spirit of the rules (Re: Polk5440's comment) was that players have a level playing field.  I didn't assume that others would take advantage of loopholes in the rules because I wouldn't ever find it optimal -- and I never thought anyone else would either.  It seems like such a hassle to defy the spirit of a tournament, just to secure 1/10th of a point to 5 points of a level of playing ability.

You might not agree with my premise, and hence, we come to different conclusions.  You say under bullet point 2 that people want to win.  I think that's right, but incomplete.  In any competition, I want to win, but I want winning to mean something, and it won't mean anything if I deliberately tilt the field in my favor. 

That is, winning (right) > losing (right) > winning (wrong). 

In other words, if I took advantage of a tracking technique that is not explicitly mentioned in the rules (yet not explicitly prohibited, but explicitly frowned upon; see theory's comments) and won the match, I'd doubt myself.  I'd feel bad.  I wouldn't know if I could do it without the (dubious, not sanctioned) technique, and that would always eat away at me when I think about my victory.  I think that's why people are surprised that you have been so persistent to push for deck tracking in the finals.  If WW objected and theory frowned upon it, why not just play the game "blind"?  If you win despite your uncertainty that your competition is cutting corners, it's that much more of an accomplishment.

This argument applies to manually-entered speadsheets with deck contents as well as unofficial point trackers.  I know this has been hammered on from both sides, but my view is that a big part of the game is knowing the state of the game based on playing it.  I stuck to that in the tournament, and I will in future competitions, but I guess I'm a chump for that.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 06:59:03 pm by nopawnsintended »
Logged

Powerman

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 766
  • Respect: +602
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #173 on: July 03, 2012, 06:58:38 pm »
0

Personman, if you had a way to say order your deck in anyway you wanted, and no one would find out about it, would you do it?
Logged
A man on a mission.

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #174 on: July 03, 2012, 07:00:49 pm »
0

Personman, if you had a way to say order your deck in anyway you wanted, and no one would find out about it, would you do it?

If only I had this ability, and I knew that, absolutely not.

If everyone did, yes! And I've often thought that stacking your deck instead of shuffling it would be a really interesting Dominion variant, though it would be slow, and a lot of people wouldn't like to play it.

If WW objected and theory frowned upon it, why not just play the game "blind"?  If you win despite your uncertainty that your competition is cutting corners, it's that much more of an accomplishment.

I hate repeating myself this much for fear of turning into that 100 page thread Donald was scared of, but one more time:

I advocated that the rules allow as much information tracking as possible, because I do not trust internet strangers not to cheat.
Once the rules were set in stone, I publicly announced my intentions to take full advantage of them, extended that advantage to my opponents in a gesture of good will (and at no real loss to me, since hopefully they would be taking full advantage of the rules on their own anyway), and did so.

I see no reason why I ought to accede to an opponent's request NOT to take full advantage of the rules. It would be like asking my opponent not to buy Provinces.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 07:18:55 pm by Personman »
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #175 on: July 03, 2012, 07:05:10 pm »
0

Personman, if you had a way to say order your deck in anyway you wanted, and no one would find out about it, would you do it?

If only I had this ability, and I knew that, absolutely not.

If everyone did, yes! And I've often thought that that would be a really interesting Dominion variant, though it would be slow, and a lot of people wouldn't like to play it.

So something's okay because everyone does it? I'm sorry, but there are so many things wrong with that. I don't care if everyone in the world played the most wrong and most unfair variant, I want to play the most fair way. I think Monopoly is pretty comparable. Everyone plays the wrong way. It's just a variant. It makes the game suck, so I never play that way. In professional tournaments, you play by the official rules, period.
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #176 on: July 03, 2012, 07:13:57 pm »
+6

There are two discussions (well probably more) that are happening and getting intertwined here. One is whether or not point trackers should generally be allowed in tournaments like this. The vast majority of the arguments of the pro-point tracking crowd are geared toward this set of arguments. Guess what: I don't actually think that there's an objective answer here. Now, it's a variant for sure, but I am not going to say that it's objectively a worse variant than actual dominion. I like the memory aspect to the game, and other people do not. And there are enforceability issues. Indeed, I could see myself being convinced that, in general, for online tournament play, which is to say tournament play in general perhaps, if you hold that online is a better format for tournaments generally, as I do, that the variant with point counters, assuming equal access to all participants, is better than the one without. There are legitimate disagreements of opinion and discussions to be had here, and ultimately, whichever more people like more is the one to use, because the whole point is to have fun for the most people.

However. There are other issues here. One of these is what was to be done in the tournament that we just had. And that should be based on the rules that we had, not the rules as they should be. Because if you arbitrarily decide to go on the rules as they should be, you end up with all kinds of people doing their own different things.

And of course, the biggest thing, IMO, is the ethical questions.

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #177 on: July 03, 2012, 07:22:07 pm »
0

Great post, WW. I agree with 100% of it, though of course my beliefs about the answers to some of the questions you raise are different.

The part I'm having the hardest time with is why you think it is me and not you who was attempting to change the rules. Many, many earlier tournament matches had been played with the extension in use, and there had been 0 complaints! Suddenly outlawing it in the finals seems like a drastic and inappropriate change.
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #178 on: July 03, 2012, 07:30:30 pm »
0

I must admit that after all these posts, I'm still surprised by people calling using the extension cheating.

Do they not understand the meaning of cheating? The people who are using the PCE aren't ordering their deck in the manner it pleases them. They're not suddenly grabbing Moats in hand whenever an opponent plays an attack card. They're not breaking the rules by sending fake messages to the server. All they do is use the information that everyone has.

Card counting is not cheating, it's not against the rules to count. It is frowned upon though and it will get you thrown off private property. Online you can count cards all you want, but apparently it's less useful as they use decks with a gazillion cards? I'm not sure though as I haven't played online Blackjack. The thing is that online Blackjack is different from real life Blackjack. You can't shuffle a gazillion cards in real life.

The same is true for Dominion.

All of the arguments of the PCE haters don't hold if they don't accept it's a different game, or at least a variant.
But the haters already seem to have lost the possibility to think rationally. Heck, people who advocated the use of the PCE on the forums were actually subject to bans for future tournaments, even if they would agree not to use it!

The point is, mentally counting your cards is not cheating. Using external aids absolutely is. It is not only frowned upon, it is in fact cheating. And "it doesn't make a difference anyway to make it cheating" is an unconvincing argument, because then you would not be so upset about people calling it cheating. Whether it SHOULD be cheating is a different debate. But under the rules as they are, it is cheating, as has been explained repeatedly. And so I'm shocked that you're shocked that people are calling it cheating, because that is precisely what it is. It is a circumvention of the rules, and I can only assume that it is done in order to gain an advantage. If you want to play 'online dominion' by some other ruleset than the dominion ruleset, that is A OK with me. But don't treat it like it is the same thing, and until you have some other, accepted, comprehensive ruleset that is out there and accepted by your opponents, then you can't say you are following that. Because it doesn't exist. Online dominion CAN be a variant, but doesn't need to be. And at this point, your variant does not have a codified set of rules. If you want it to be a thing, make those.

Personman, you actually did a pretty crappy job of keeping track of who had what. I watched the videos. I could point out all the little mistakes, but I don't really have the time. I generally do better than you did, and have never played with such a memory aid. Regardless, don't act like it's not an advance, even over just taking notes, which is itself also against the rules of dominion qua dominion.

RE: What happened. The timelines. Well I can post my version, which will differ from those posted somewhat, but this is why I want to post what was actually sent back and forth. It is objectively what actually happened.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #179 on: July 03, 2012, 07:33:55 pm »
+3

Great post, WW. I agree with 100% of it, though of course my beliefs about the answers to some of the questions you raise are different.

The part I'm having the hardest time with is why you think it is me and not you who was attempting to change the rules. Many, many earlier tournament matches had been played with the extension in use, and there had been 0 complaints! Suddenly outlawing it in the finals seems like a drastic and inappropriate change.
Man, it is not my fault if your earlier opponents did not complain about it. How am I supposed to complain about it, when I don't even know you're doing it, and why should I complain about it if your opponents agree? And how am I to know whether they agree or not. Of course it's against tournament rules. cf. http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=876.msg13546#msg13546 . As well as the tournament rules stating that games are to be played with official point counter. Which in and of itself makes the tournament be played as a variant, true, but one we agreed to by signing up. But there is no provision in the rules ALLOWING you to do this, and therefore, as a game-related activity, it is forbidden, in precisely the same way I can't do a billion other things which are obviously illegal and can't all be individually proscribed.

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #180 on: July 03, 2012, 07:35:19 pm »
0

Quote
Personman, you actually did a pretty crappy job of keeping track of who had what. I watched the videos. I could point out all the little mistakes, but I don't really have the time. I generally do better than you did, and have never played with such a memory aid. Regardless, don't act like it's not an advance, even over just taking notes, which is itself also against the rules of dominion qua dominion.

Oh, I know. In many cases I stopped caring. In one game (the pirate ship one, where I was probably just dead anyway) stopping caring was a fairly bad mistake, but I think that's the only game where it really mattered.

Man, it is not my fault if your earlier opponents did not complain about it. How am I supposed to complain about it, when I don't even know you're doing it, and why should I complain about it if your opponents agree? And how am I to know whether they agree or not.

From your perspective I can see how that is reasonable, and it was reasonable for you to bring up the question. But can't you see how from my perspective, having assumed it was legal and having played many games with it so far, and having seen other players using it, it would seem strange for (what seemed to be) the rules to suddenly change?

Once again, we all know that the real issue was a lack of time to get a comprehensive ruleset put together. This really isn't anyone's fault. Theory did his best to bring us an awesome tournament in a short time, and there were some inherent problems with that. I'm still super glad he did, and I'm sure jtl005 is as well!
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 07:40:45 pm by Personman »
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #181 on: July 03, 2012, 07:36:50 pm »
0

Also, my estimate of the chance of a future online qualifier happening is zero.

Let's not punish the many for the sins of a few. 
There are other reasons why not to have online tournaments. Case in point: it's incredibly difficult to enforce the rules.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #182 on: July 03, 2012, 07:41:00 pm »
+2

Quote from: Donald X
long rebuttal

Thank you! It is very helpful to know what you are talking about. I'm glad you decided that it was worth your time. Also it was funny!

First, my not-serious response: I'm totally poly, so whatever, man! (I actually am, but this obviously does not invalidate your argument).

My actual response is that games are different from life. In life, I agree wholeheartedly that we must trust each other, and that is, in the end, usually more rewarding to be worthy of trust than to betray it. There are exceptions; as you've said, it's all just a bunch of atoms moving around, and there's no real moral consistency to anything. But on the whole I think we're on the same page here.

I just don't think the same ideals can apply to games with stakes played over the internet. There's a reason that my side won this debate in the Poker community but hasn't done so so convincingly here: it's bigger, and there's more at stake. Under those conditions, the system will converge towards the strictly, logically fair alternative much more quickly, and analogies to real-life morals and community values stop holding water. (Of course, there are other, insoluble fairness issues in online poker, like collusion. But since people really like playing online poker, they kinda just have to ignore them.)

I don't think we need to have a 100-page discussion about this. I respect the desire to have an online community in which rules are not made on the presumption of dishonesty. It's a nice dream, and maybe I am too cynical in thinking that we cannot achieve it here (though see my earlier point re trolls on isotropic). I personally prefer it when rules ARE made on that assumption, because then I don't have to be afraid that I am being a chump by not taking advantage of my trivial ability to cheat, and can instead rest assured that my actions are legal and that everyone else is doing it too. But it's okay for us to have this difference of opinion, and there is room for both kinds of people to play and enjoy this wonderful game that you have made for us.

As theory put it very well at some point during the email discussion, the primary take away from the whole thing is that rules need to be hammered out a bit better ahead of time.
tl;dr morals don't matter and screw trust when it comes to games? I couldn't disagree more on both counts. Especially the first count. Which I think you're misreading Donald? (I read that as him being sarcastic).
Remind me to never have anyone of you over to my house, or preferably within a large radius of me, who thinks morality doesn't matter.
Ethics is everything, man. Ethics asks the question, "What should I do?". And if you reject that, you fall entirely into chaos.

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #183 on: July 03, 2012, 07:51:49 pm »
0

Wait, can you single out the quote of mine where you think I said "ethics don't matter"? That couldn't be further from my actual beliefs.
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

dghunter79

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 259
  • Respect: +285
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #184 on: July 03, 2012, 07:53:01 pm »
+5

The doping and speeding analogies illuminate some of the hidden depths of Personman's argument.

Speeding, as was said, is something basically everyone does.  The speed limit is not really enforced unless you're driving way, way over it.  As a result, just about everyone drives a decent ten miles over the speed limit.  As a result, there's a lot of pressure to drive ten miles over the speed limit.  But there's still a rule on the books saying you can't.  But it's not enforced; you can drive ten over right by a police cruiser.  They won't pull you over.  But maybe they will!

Doping is also against the rules, but for a time in the 90s, this rule was not enforced in professional sports.  This created a lot of pressure to violate the rules.  Players saw other players taking performance enhancements, and thus performing better, and they weren't being punished.

If you are caught in the jurisdiction of a rules-system like this, than you are trapped in a sort of double-bind.  The system is constantly sending you conflicting messages: "don't break the rules," and "break the rules."

An ethically designed system of rules actually should, I think, take into account the enforaceabililty of each rule so as to avoid placing its constituents in this double-bind.  If a rule can't be enforced, either because there aren't enough resources or because the rule is by its nature unenforceable, then there's a larger burden in justifying the rule's existence.  The rule should in this case be necessary to protect a larger principle.  That is, a good rule should be principled, or it should be enforceable, or both.  But it can't be both arbitrary and unenforceable.

It was exactly these criteria that were honored in the evolution from Throne Room to King's Court.  The rule that Throne Room <i>must</i> find an action was unenforceable.  And it was arbitrary.  So it was deleted.  King's Court, the newer card, <i>may</i> find an action.

So Personman's argument for changing the rules based on their unenforceability is perfectly valid.  Either he's wrong, and the rules can be enforced, or he's right, and the rule needs to be justified on higher grounds.  That principled justification seems like it's going to be especially challenging if you don't also object to the tepid point-counter that's much more mainstream.

Personman's argument isn't an excuse to violate the rules -- it doesn't make it okay to cheat on your spouse.  But it is part of a good argument for <i>changing</i> the rules.  Or, redefining the terms of the marriage, to Throne Room the marriage metaphor. 

Or, to Throne Room the Throne Room metaphor, Personman's argument doesn't allow that people who cheated with Throne Room weren't cheating.  They were.  But it does hold King's Court to be an ethically superior card.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #185 on: July 03, 2012, 07:53:35 pm »
0

Wait, can you single out the quote of mine where you think I said "ethics don't matter"? That couldn't be further from my actual beliefs.

I am referring to "it's all just a bunch of atoms moving around, and there's no real moral consistency to anything."

chwhite

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1065
  • Respect: +436
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #186 on: July 03, 2012, 08:00:06 pm »
+1

tl;dr morals don't matter and screw trust when it comes to games? I couldn't disagree more on both counts. Especially the first count. Which I think you're misreading Donald? (I read that as him being sarcastic).
Remind me to never have anyone of you over to my house, or preferably within a large radius of me, who thinks morality doesn't matter.
Ethics is everything, man. Ethics asks the question, "What should I do?". And if you reject that, you fall entirely into chaos.

While I'm pretty much completely in agreement with you on this particular brouhaha, I'd definitely prefer if we kept this discussion focused on ethics rather than morality.  (I'd be quite happy to have a discussion about the relationship and difference between ethics and morality, actually, but it's probably too much of a tangent for this thread.)
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 08:01:24 pm by chwhite »
Logged
To discard or not to discard?  That is the question.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #187 on: July 03, 2012, 08:02:20 pm »
0

tl;dr morals don't matter and screw trust when it comes to games? I couldn't disagree more on both counts. Especially the first count. Which I think you're misreading Donald? (I read that as him being sarcastic).
Remind me to never have anyone of you over to my house, or preferably within a large radius of me, who thinks morality doesn't matter.
Ethics is everything, man. Ethics asks the question, "What should I do?". And if you reject that, you fall entirely into chaos.

While I'm pretty much completely in agreement with you on this particular brouhaha, I'd definitely prefer if we kept this discussion focused on ethics rather than morality.  (I'd be quite happy to have a discussion about the relationship and difference between ethics and morality, actually, but it's probably too much of a tangent for this thread.)
I was very precise in where I used which.

Edit: but I agree with your main point. It is pretty pointless to speculate whether or not a person has morals, if you are not that person. But I do think that, ethically, one ought to espouse morality.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 08:05:48 pm by WanderingWinder »
Logged

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #188 on: July 03, 2012, 08:04:36 pm »
0

Wait, can you single out the quote of mine where you think I said "ethics don't matter"? That couldn't be further from my actual beliefs.

I am referring to "it's all just a bunch of atoms moving around, and there's no real moral consistency to anything."

That was a quote from Donald, which I see now is what you were reading as sarcastic. I don't think it was sarcastic at all, but we'll have to ask him. Or, well, that's not quite right. I think that both Donald and I are moral humans who happen to also believe that our morality is at heart arbitrary and self-chosen.

I don't want to open this can of worms too far, but it may be helpful to know that I am an atheist. I also believe strongly (as it seemed to me Donald was also saying) that atheism is consistent with morality, and that choosing to be moral is a good idea for atheists for a large number of reasons.
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

Captain_Frisk

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1257
  • Respect: +1261
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #189 on: July 03, 2012, 08:05:52 pm »
0

I was very precise in where I used which.
Fork request!

I don't know the difference - but will be finding out shortly - and would be interested in any discussions on the subject that aren't focused at a higher level than Personman v. Wanderingwinder - in which I state that I enjoy the point tracker - and am in favor of its use to further greater dominion analysis and strategy, but in which I also find Personman's refusal to disable unsportsmanlike and thus unacceptable.
Logged
I support funsockets.... taking as much time as they need to get it right.

ftl

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2028
  • Respect: +1295
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #190 on: July 03, 2012, 08:21:33 pm »
+3

Ah, so this thread will also degenerate into a religious debate now? Why on earth did you have to bring that up, Personman? So am I, does it matter here? I thought we were talking about Dominion and cardcounting aids...

This is why we can't have nice things.   
Logged

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #191 on: July 03, 2012, 08:27:20 pm »
+1

No, I really hope it won't. I felt it was necessary to refute WW's conclusion that because I believe the universe is just a big pile of atoms floating around, I must also not think ethics are important.
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #192 on: July 03, 2012, 08:30:39 pm »
0

No, I really hope it won't. I felt it was necessary to refute WW's conclusion that because I believe the universe is just a big pile of atoms floating around, I must also not think ethics are important.

My presumption is not based on that premise, but your statement "there's no real moral consistency to anything."

chwhite

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1065
  • Respect: +436
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #193 on: July 03, 2012, 08:40:44 pm »
0

I was very precise in where I used which.

Edit: but I agree with your main point. It is pretty pointless to speculate whether or not a person has morals, if you are not that person. But I do think that, ethically, one ought to espouse morality.

Interesting.  I must admit it looked to me like you were muddying the waters a bit.  I also think it makes much more sense to say that "I do think that, morally, one ought to espouse ethical behavior". 

We are pretty clearly operating under somewhat different definitions here.  Which is why I wanted to keep things focused on ethics and save the philosophy for another forum (though, as I've said before, I'm glad to talk philosophy in those other fora).
Logged
To discard or not to discard?  That is the question.

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #194 on: July 03, 2012, 08:43:09 pm »
0

No, I really hope it won't. I felt it was necessary to refute WW's conclusion that because I believe the universe is just a big pile of atoms floating around, I must also not think ethics are important.

My presumption is not based on that premise, but your statement "there's no real moral consistency to anything."

I guess, much like explicitly legal things and things you can't be DQ'd for, I see those as the same. If the universe is just a big pile of atoms, how can there be true moral consistency? Only certain clumps of those atoms even feel themselves to have any notion of what "moral" means, and of those such clumps, no two share exactly the same such notion. I certainly think we can try our best and be better off for it, and I do.
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #195 on: July 03, 2012, 08:48:39 pm »
0

Distinction as I have studied it: A moral man does what he thinks is right. An ethical man knows what is in fact right.

chwhite

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1065
  • Respect: +436
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #196 on: July 03, 2012, 08:52:23 pm »
+1

Distinction as I have studied it: A moral man does what he thinks is right. An ethical man knows what is in fact right.

Aha.  That explains things somewhat.  The distinction as I've always understood it:

Morality is ultimately a function of the individual, ethics is a function of the community/society.
Logged
To discard or not to discard?  That is the question.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #197 on: July 03, 2012, 08:53:45 pm »
0

Distinction as I have studied it: A moral man does what he thinks is right. An ethical man knows what is in fact right.

Aha.  That explains things somewhat.  The distinction as I've always understood it:

Morality is ultimately a function of the individual, ethics is a function of the community/society.
Your definition of ethics inherently rejects the possibility of an objective ethical code, a rejection which I reject.

Edit: I should say, the definition that you give here, rather than 'your definition'.

verikt

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 272
  • Respect: +65
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #198 on: July 03, 2012, 09:12:19 pm »
0

I find this interesting. But can we split this into two, or maybe 3 threads? If we could move the philosophy part to general discussion I'd be glad to join. Then have this thread be about either the point counter extension or tournament etiquette.
Logged

chwhite

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1065
  • Respect: +436
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #199 on: July 03, 2012, 09:49:36 pm »
+1

Distinction as I have studied it: A moral man does what he thinks is right. An ethical man knows what is in fact right.

Aha.  That explains things somewhat.  The distinction as I've always understood it:

Morality is ultimately a function of the individual, ethics is a function of the community/society.
Your definition of ethics inherently rejects the possibility of an objective ethical code, a rejection which I reject.

Edit: I should say, the definition that you give here, rather than 'your definition'.

Well, I consider ethics to be objective.  Granted, I am using "objective" in the more limited pragmatic sense, rather than the Platonic one, which I find to be at its core unintelligible.  Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.
Logged
To discard or not to discard?  That is the question.

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5332
  • Respect: +2741
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #200 on: July 03, 2012, 09:51:41 pm »
+1

I'll admit, I used it my first day of qualifying (the one I lost).

I do allow users to disable it, however, and the second day of qualifying (where I did qualify for semis) I had it disabled.
Unenforceable rules are dumb.  It's a truth I hold to be self-evident.  It creates an environment where those who violate the rules have an advantage over those who don't, and punishes good ethics. 

I use paper and pencil when I play dominion games online.  That subverts the rules of dominion, I'm pretty sure, haven't read base rules in a while.  But to me it's like an ethical tautology that I should not be expected to obey a rule with a 0% rate of enforcement.  If the rate of enforcement is lower than it needs to be to discourage the behavior I do split the difference and act honestly out of integrity.  But when the enforcement capability is totally and fully zero, I see no point in abiding.  To me it would be like entering a tournament to see who could bully a kid most cruelly.  Because one of the metrics of the competition is, "who will act the least ethically and score 40% more wishing well draws that way?".

This doesn't directly relate to the point tracker because it is a pain to make it invisible (to my knowledge), so there's enforceability.  Just 2 centsing around
Logged
Also you probably are an expert if you buy two bureaucrats early.

dghunter79

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 259
  • Respect: +285
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #201 on: July 03, 2012, 09:55:40 pm »
+1

Distinction as I have studied it: A moral man does what he thinks is right. An ethical man knows what is in fact right.

Aha.  That explains things somewhat.  The distinction as I've always understood it:

Morality is ultimately a function of the individual, ethics is a function of the community/society.

In common usage, they're the same thing.  If there's a distinction, it's that morality refers to subjective feelings of right and wrong, supposed unreachable by rational discourse.  Beliefs.  Whereas ethics refers to the logical relationships between moral principles and behavior.  As in "principle X states that murder is wrong, thus if you hold to X, it is wrong to murder Joe."  So, there is sort of a subjective:objective thing in morals:ethics -- but it's only the logical relationships between principles and behavior that are objectively knowable, or can be quantified as true or false.  Not the actual values of any particular moral principle, which are unknowable without the aid of the supernatural.

But the words are used interchangeably at every level of discourse, and the distinction seems kind of vacuous.

chwhite

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1065
  • Respect: +436
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #202 on: July 03, 2012, 10:01:19 pm »
0

But the words are used interchangeably at every level of discourse, and the distinction seems kind of vacuous.

I wouldn't go quite that far.  It's nearly always a "code of ethics" (in school, professions, etc.) rather than a "code of morality", and there's a very good reason for that.  The distinction is important here, where hopefully we can and must agree on what the ethical thing to do is, despite having moral codes that may conflict with each other, or come from different sources.

So, there is sort of a subjective:objective thing in morals:ethics

Yes.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 10:04:07 pm by chwhite »
Logged
To discard or not to discard?  That is the question.

GigaKnight

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 169
  • Respect: +54
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #203 on: July 03, 2012, 10:21:55 pm »
+4

I'll admit, I used it my first day of qualifying (the one I lost).

I do allow users to disable it, however, and the second day of qualifying (where I did qualify for semis) I had it disabled.
Unenforceable rules are dumb.  It's a truth I hold to be self-evident.  It creates an environment where those who violate the rules have an advantage over those who don't, and punishes good ethics. 

I use paper and pencil when I play dominion games online.  That subverts the rules of dominion, I'm pretty sure, haven't read base rules in a while.  But to me it's like an ethical tautology that I should not be expected to obey a rule with a 0% rate of enforcement.  If the rate of enforcement is lower than it needs to be to discourage the behavior I do split the difference and act honestly out of integrity.  But when the enforcement capability is totally and fully zero, I see no point in abiding.  To me it would be like entering a tournament to see who could bully a kid most cruelly.  Because one of the metrics of the competition is, "who will act the least ethically and score 40% more wishing well draws that way?".

This doesn't directly relate to the point tracker because it is a pain to make it invisible (to my knowledge), so there's enforceability.  Just 2 centsing around

Whether or not you like the rule or want to follow the rules is, in my view, utterly irrelevant.  If you don't obey the rule, you're playing a different game.  Period.  If you play with the PCE, you're not playing Dominion.  You're playing Dominion + PCE.  I personally have no problem with a group of people playing Dominion + PCE but, in this case, the tournament is/was a Dominion + Point Tracker + Identical Starting Hands tournament.  If you add PCE to that, you're playing a different game.  I don't get how this can be any more clear.

People keep saying "well I don't want to" and "you can't enforce it" and "I told people".  Ok, so what?  That doesn't change the fact that they weren't playing the game of the tournament.  I don't like unenforceable rules but if I want to play in the tournament, I play by them.  If somebody else cheats by violating the rule, that's on them.  It sucks for me to lose like that, but I have to decide whether I value my integrity or winning more.

If you enter an online checkers tournament and decide you want to settle your matches by playing chess instead, you shouldn't be surprised when your opponents decline.  And you shouldn't expect the tournament organizers to be "understanding" because that is clearly not the intention of the tournament.
Logged

rod-

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 213
  • Respect: +49
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #204 on: July 03, 2012, 10:28:49 pm »
0

Re: Marriage / Tournament analogy
----
This is why you form an explicit agreement upon entry into the tournament / wedding / whatever.  You codify what is and is not allowed.  You make a binding contract of a social nature.

The social contract involved in entering into the qualifier tournament included absolutely no particulars that stated that (external) point counters were disallowed, in fact, the isotropic counter was to default to ON. 

If you enter into an open marriage, you don't get to say "Yeah, i said you could have sex with other people, but i'm upset because you went and did it with a girl."  Girls are people, too!

Unless, of course, you say it outright, from the beginning.  Then it's a rule. 
Logged

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5332
  • Respect: +2741
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #205 on: July 03, 2012, 10:31:58 pm »
0

Sure, I'm playing a different game.  I popped all my Wishing Wells and won at whatever it is.
Logged
Also you probably are an expert if you buy two bureaucrats early.

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +233
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #206 on: July 03, 2012, 10:36:23 pm »
0

@Gigaknight: so is your point that if you entered this tournament, you won't play with an opponent with PCE enabled, but is willing to play with a player who writes everything down on a paper?
Logged

DG

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4069
  • Respect: +2608
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #207 on: July 03, 2012, 10:39:54 pm »
+15

I'm finding this whole discussion way off balance. Dominion is a game. The taking part is more important than the winning. It's meant to be a fun experience with friendly people.

In that context, all the tosh being written here about "unenforceable rules are dumb" and "if the rules don't prohibit this then I can do it" and "I don't want someone else to be secretly have an advantage so I'll have that advantage instead" seems plainly wrong. In a friendly game of Dominion you observe the rules as a courtesy to your fellow players even if they can't be enforced. In a friendly game of Dominion you don't try to bend the rules in unforeseen ways. In a friendly game of Dominion you don't make unwarranted assumptions about your opponents behaving badly. In a friendly game of Dominion you do not put your opponents at a disadvantage that you wouldn't appreciate yourself.

I'm sure that everyone at Rio Grande would like Dominion to still be a friendly game and are dismayed that such a weasely attitude is being shown by so many players once a tournament is organized.
Logged

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #208 on: July 03, 2012, 10:49:49 pm »
+1

Fun and camaraderie are wonderful things, but in a tournament where the winner gets a trip to US Nationals in Chicago, fairness becomes a more important concern.
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

ftl

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2028
  • Respect: +1295
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #209 on: July 03, 2012, 10:56:16 pm »
0

And the three aren't mutually exclusive, unless someone decides to act unfairly.

Perhaps this is why Jay didn't want tournaments in the first place... (if I'm remembering right, at first Jay didn't want tournaments? I think I remember Donald saying something like that, but I am not sure?)
Logged

dghunter79

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 259
  • Respect: +285
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #210 on: July 03, 2012, 11:05:38 pm »
+1

But the words are used interchangeably at every level of discourse, and the distinction seems kind of vacuous.

I wouldn't go quite that far.  It's nearly always a "code of ethics" (in school, professions, etc.) rather than a "code of morality", and there's a very good reason for that.  The distinction is important here, where hopefully we can and must agree on what the ethical thing to do is, despite having moral codes that may conflict with each other, or come from different sources.

So, there is sort of a subjective:objective thing in morals:ethics

Yes.

I feel like I didn't make myself clear.  "Ethics" is a way of describing all the different possible moralities using clear, accessible systematized language.  It isn't about reaching consensus on what's right and wrong.  A "Code of Ethics" is a code because it has the word code, not because it has the word ethics.  "Ethics" doesn't describe a code, it describes all possible codes.

Codes are great, though.  Very useful.  They are an excellent substitute for absolute  moral truth, which we humans will never have, and for agreement, which we humans will never have.  We can all agree on the code, and then agree on what the code says.  But that's not the same as having certainty on what "the ethical thing to do is."  Let alone certainty and agreement!

GigaKnight

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 169
  • Respect: +54
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #211 on: July 03, 2012, 11:09:41 pm »
+1

@Gigaknight: so is your point that if you entered this tournament, you won't play with an opponent with PCE enabled, but is willing to play with a player who writes everything down on a paper?

No, that's not what I'm saying.  I would expect the tournament organizers to rule on PCE / note-taking and then, as a participant in the tournament, I would follow that rule.  If players want to cheat once a firm ruling is in place, I can't stop them.  I can report them if I have evidence of cheating, though.  And, in this case, I think theory erred by not ruling that PCE / note-taking was illegal.  If I were the organizer and Personman had told me that he would do it anyway, I would DQ him on the spot.

It's no different to me than if somebody wrote an undetectable hack.  If somebody told me in seriousness that they were going to use it, I would DQ them.  The people who don't care about integrity will use whatever tools they have access to, regardless of the policy.  If any of them would tell me about it, I would just regard them particularly stupid while DQing them.

At some point, you simply have to acknowledge that you can't control your opponents.  Some people care more about winning than integrity; that's reality.  All you can do is decide which is more important to you and then give input on things to change in the future.

Now, if future tournaments want to use the PCE to minimize cheating, that's fine too.  But this tournament had no expectation of the PCE and theory should have, IMO, brought the formal rules inline with the intentions.  It's a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't position for him to be in, though.
Logged

yudantaiteki

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 234
  • Respect: +165
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #212 on: July 03, 2012, 11:14:10 pm »
0

One other aspect is that you have to weigh the difficulty of dealing with the "open information" vs. the ease with which the add-on gives you that information.  Keeping track of score is not very hard, whereas keeping track of people's decks is not something that many people will do.  You could go farther and show the cards remaining in your deck as well as the percentage chance of drawing each type of card (since that's completely open to you) but hardly anyone is going to try to keep track of that themselves during the game.
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #213 on: July 03, 2012, 11:27:45 pm »
0

Fun and camaraderie are wonderful things, but in a tournament where the winner gets a trip to US Nationals in Chicago, fairness becomes a more important concern.
You do realize that this makes my point exactly?

Captain_Frisk

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1257
  • Respect: +1261
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #214 on: July 03, 2012, 11:30:16 pm »
+8

Fun and camaraderie are wonderful things, but in a tournament where the winner gets a trip to US Nationals in Chicago, fairness becomes a more important concern.
You do realize that this makes my point exactly?

It makes both of your points.  To be a polite player, he should have disabled it, you could have enabled it and been on equal footing.

Now why can't you all be like me and let people have an extra contraband veto when you accidentally clicked on trusty steed?
Logged
I support funsockets.... taking as much time as they need to get it right.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #215 on: July 03, 2012, 11:34:17 pm »
0

Fun and camaraderie are wonderful things, but in a tournament where the winner gets a trip to US Nationals in Chicago, fairness becomes a more important concern.
You do realize that this makes my point exactly?

It makes both of your points.  To be a polite player, he should have disabled it, you could have enabled it and been on equal footing.

Now why can't you all be like me and let people have an extra contraband veto when you accidentally clicked on trusty steed?
But this would require me to compromise my ethics. Ethics>some money and cash prize. Which is largely why I withdrew.

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #216 on: July 03, 2012, 11:35:37 pm »
0

Quote
You could go farther and show the cards remaining in your deck as well as the percentage chance of drawing each type of card (since that's completely open to you) but hardly anyone is going to try to keep track of that themselves during the game.

I always calculate odds about draws, even when playing without notes in real life. I don't see why a serious player wouldn't.

Fun and camaraderie are wonderful things, but in a tournament where the winner gets a trip to US Nationals in Chicago, fairness becomes a more important concern.
You do realize that this makes my point exactly?

I don't, yet, no. Please explain how?
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 11:36:40 pm by Personman »
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

Captain_Frisk

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1257
  • Respect: +1261
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #217 on: July 03, 2012, 11:37:31 pm »
0

Fun and camaraderie are wonderful things, but in a tournament where the winner gets a trip to US Nationals in Chicago, fairness becomes a more important concern.
You do realize that this makes my point exactly?

It makes both of your points.  To be a polite player, he should have disabled it, you could have enabled it and been on equal footing.

Now why can't you all be like me and let people have an extra contraband veto when you accidentally clicked on trusty steed?
But this would require me to compromise my ethics. Ethics>some money and cash prize. Which is largely why I withdrew.

If no-one else objects - then it isn't compromising - you're all on equal footing and everyone is in agreement.  Unless there's a piece to this story that one of the other players also wanted it off?
Logged
I support funsockets.... taking as much time as they need to get it right.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #218 on: July 03, 2012, 11:40:33 pm »
0

Fun and camaraderie are wonderful things, but in a tournament where the winner gets a trip to US Nationals in Chicago, fairness becomes a more important concern.
You do realize that this makes my point exactly?

It makes both of your points.  To be a polite player, he should have disabled it, you could have enabled it and been on equal footing.

Now why can't you all be like me and let people have an extra contraband veto when you accidentally clicked on trusty steed?
But this would require me to compromise my ethics. Ethics>some money and cash prize. Which is largely why I withdrew.

If no-one else objects - then it isn't compromising - you're all on equal footing and everyone is in agreement.  Unless there's a piece to this story that one of the other players also wanted it off?
Both of the other players also wanted it off, but made clear that they didn't care enough to actually take some action.

However, this is irrelevant to the point - cheating violating the rules (happy, people?) compromises my ethics, whether or not other people are okay with it.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #219 on: July 03, 2012, 11:41:28 pm »
0

Quote
You could go farther and show the cards remaining in your deck as well as the percentage chance of drawing each type of card (since that's completely open to you) but hardly anyone is going to try to keep track of that themselves during the game.

I always calculate odds about draws, even when playing without notes in real life. I don't see why a serious player wouldn't.

Fun and camaraderie are wonderful things, but in a tournament where the winner gets a trip to US Nationals in Chicago, fairness becomes a more important concern.
You do realize that this makes my point exactly?

I don't, yet, no. Please explain how?
Sure, though I've already explained a number of times. Because this is an event that means something, people need here, more than any other time, to behave fairly by following the rules.

GigaKnight

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 169
  • Respect: +54
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #220 on: July 03, 2012, 11:42:02 pm »
+1

Fun and camaraderie are wonderful things, but in a tournament where the winner gets a trip to US Nationals in Chicago, fairness becomes a more important concern.
You do realize that this makes my point exactly?

It makes both of your points.  To be a polite player, he should have disabled it, you could have enabled it and been on equal footing.

Now why can't you all be like me and let people have an extra contraband veto when you accidentally clicked on trusty steed?
But this would require me to compromise my ethics. Ethics>some money and cash prize. Which is largely why I withdrew.

So I'm not exactly well-versed in the minutia of philosophy.  But, if theory said it was allowed, why wouldn't you use it?  I'm not understanding how your personal ethics would be violated by using a tool allowed by the organizer.

If he didn't say it was allowed, he should have warned Personman not to use it and DQ'd him if he said he was going to break the rules.  I already said that's what I would do, but I'm not seeing another course of action theory could have taken that's internally consistent.  Perhaps somebody can explain one to me?
Logged

Powerman

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 766
  • Respect: +602
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #221 on: July 03, 2012, 11:42:15 pm »
+2

Quote
You could go farther and show the cards remaining in your deck as well as the percentage chance of drawing each type of card (since that's completely open to you) but hardly anyone is going to try to keep track of that themselves during the game.

I always calculate odds about draws, even when playing without notes in real life. I don't see why a serious player wouldn't.

You calculate exact percentages of drawing each card when playing in real life.  Why exactly is the point counter sooo necessary then?
Logged
A man on a mission.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #222 on: July 03, 2012, 11:48:12 pm »
+1

Fun and camaraderie are wonderful things, but in a tournament where the winner gets a trip to US Nationals in Chicago, fairness becomes a more important concern.
You do realize that this makes my point exactly?

It makes both of your points.  To be a polite player, he should have disabled it, you could have enabled it and been on equal footing.

Now why can't you all be like me and let people have an extra contraband veto when you accidentally clicked on trusty steed?
But this would require me to compromise my ethics. Ethics>some money and cash prize. Which is largely why I withdrew.

So I'm not exactly well-versed in the minutia of philosophy.  But, if theory said it was allowed, why wouldn't you use it?  I'm not understanding how your personal ethics would be violated by using a tool allowed by the organizer.

If he didn't say it was allowed, he should have warned Personman not to use it and DQ'd him if he said he was going to break the rules.  I already said that's what I would do, but I'm not seeing another course of action theory could have taken that's internally consistent.  Perhaps somebody can explain one to me?
First of all, theory spent a long time trying not to rule. He asked that it not be used on a number of occasions. At some point, he granted that it was illegal. He also, until within half an hour of the actual final happening, made clear that there would be no DQing for using it.
As for the other points, it's very clear. I agreed to abide by the rules of the tournament. It would require me to violate them, regardless of what theory said, to use the point counter. I refuse to break my agreement, or in fact to violate the rules.
It would also require me to take the time to find it, download it, familiarize myself with it, etc. etc. the DAY OF the event, and moreover, expose my machine to any potential threats which this could pose. It further would require me to change browsers to one I refuse to, or download some kind of extension which I don't trust. So the use of it, even if you ignore the (real) ethical reasons, is not something that was going to happen.

Captain_Frisk

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1257
  • Respect: +1261
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #223 on: July 03, 2012, 11:50:10 pm »
+1

The bottom line is that they are both being unreasonable.  WanderingWinder most likely could have beaten personman with or without tracker, but chose to make a stink about it instead.

Personman should have disabled the f'ing tracker.

How about this?  We stop posting in this thread - and from now on only talk about legitimate dominion STRATEGY.  WW has decided to stop playing with us - and i'm not going to play with Personman or respond to any of his posts going forward.  Problem solved.

So... today I played a game with Masquerade,  Ambassador, Bishop, Council Room, Peddler and Bazaar.

With a 4/3 opening - how would you open?

My opponent - a high ranked player - opened bishop / amba - and I opened masq silver.  I got the bazaar -> councilroom -> bishop -> buy province + peddler engine going faster.

My opponent commented - first one to 5 wins this game.  My retort was that he opened a very slow hand - amba / bishop is very unlikely to hit 5 on t3/t4.

When both amba and masq are on the board - what factors cause you to choose one vs. the other?
Logged
I support funsockets.... taking as much time as they need to get it right.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #224 on: July 03, 2012, 11:55:55 pm »
0

The bottom line is that they are both being unreasonable.  WanderingWinder most likely could have beaten personman with or without tracker, but chose to make a stink about it instead.
I find it unreasonable that you think it unreasonable to hold ethical principles over some kind of desire to win. I see very little reason for me to have competed, and very significant reasons not to.
And in fact, I did not choose to make a stink here until a stink had already been raised.

Powerman

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 766
  • Respect: +602
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #225 on: July 03, 2012, 11:56:24 pm »
0

The bottom line is that they are both being unreasonable.  WanderingWinder most likely could have beaten personman with or without tracker, but chose to make a stink about it instead.

Personman should have disabled the f'ing tracker.

How about this?  We stop posting in this thread - and from now on only talk about legitimate dominion STRATEGY.  WW has decided to stop playing with us - and i'm not going to play with Personman or respond to any of his posts going forward.  Problem solved.

So... today I played a game with Masquerade,  Ambassador, Bishop, Council Room, Peddler and Bazaar.

With a 4/3 opening - how would you open?

My opponent - a high ranked player - opened bishop / amba - and I opened masq silver.  I got the bazaar -> councilroom -> bishop -> buy province + peddler engine going faster.

My opponent commented - first one to 5 wins this game.  My retort was that he opened a very slow hand - amba / bishop is very unlikely to hit 5 on t3/t4.

When both amba and masq are on the board - what factors cause you to choose one vs. the other?

Masq, masq, and masq again on day's ending with a "Y".  AT least those are my factors ;)
Logged
A man on a mission.

clb

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 424
  • Respect: +182
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #226 on: July 03, 2012, 11:59:13 pm »
0

I think that you hit on the major points. Amb will be better at removing more from your hand (2 estates or 2 coppers on occasions) and getting stuff in the way for your opponent, but if you are trying to get to a price point, the +2 cards of masq, leaving you with 6 or 5 cards in hand will get you to the 5 faster.
I think it was Ed Never who did some work along these lines. If I can find it, I will edit and link to it, as I thought it was well reasoned.

Edit: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=3016.msg52133#msg52133
« Last Edit: July 04, 2012, 12:01:33 am by clb »
Logged

shark_bait

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1102
  • Shuffle iT Username: shark_bait
  • Luckyfin and Land of Hinter for iso aliases
  • Respect: +1856
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #227 on: July 04, 2012, 12:00:38 am »
0

When both amba and masq are on the board - what factors cause you to choose one vs. the other?

Imo, there are multiple questions to ask.  Is there an engine?  Do you need to get to $5 fast?  Do you need to get your deck trimmed fast?  Will BM reign supreme?  Is Colony available?

When choosing between those cards, those are the main questions going through my mind.

Engine => Usually ambassador
$5 Fast => Depends on the board
Trimmed => Ambassador
BM => Masquerade
Colony => Ambassador (most of the time)
Logged
Hello.  Name's Bruce.  It's all right.  I understand.  Why trust a shark, right?

Is quite curious - Who is the mystical "Celestial Chameleon"?

Captain_Frisk

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1257
  • Respect: +1261
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #228 on: July 04, 2012, 12:01:09 am »
0

Masq, masq, and masq again on day's ending with a "Y".  AT least those are my factors ;)

This is usually my approach as well - but using almost any measurement (CR win rates etc.) ambassador is absolutely the stronger card of the two - even if I perceive Masq to win the head to head machup. 

Is that because ignoring Ambassador when engines are possible is just damn near impossible?
Logged
I support funsockets.... taking as much time as they need to get it right.

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +233
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #229 on: July 04, 2012, 12:01:36 am »
0

@frisk: dunno. But do u not have to worry more about your imminent lynch in MIV?

@WW: Just a hypothetical question: what would you do if theory ruled that the unofficial point counter is allowed?
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4365
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #230 on: July 04, 2012, 12:04:14 am »
+1

@frisk: dunno. But do u not have to worry more about your imminent lynch in MIV?

@WW: Just a hypothetical question: what would you do if theory ruled that the unofficial point counter is allowed?
Largely what I'm doing here. Withdraw and complain. He doesn't have the authority to do that.

chwhite

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1065
  • Respect: +436
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #231 on: July 04, 2012, 12:06:12 am »
0

Masq, masq, and masq again on day's ending with a "Y".  AT least those are my factors ;)

This is usually my approach as well - but using almost any measurement (CR win rates etc.) ambassador is absolutely the stronger card of the two - even if I perceive Masq to win the head to head machup. 

Is that because ignoring Ambassador when engines are possible is just damn near impossible?

I like Ambassador-Silver here, actually.  Unless there were cheaper cantrips that you're not mentioning, in which case amb-amb.

This is a game where Bishop's free trashing looks incredibly dangerous, so no Bishop until late if at all.  As for why not Masq, well whenever there are villages and draw out I have to think that gearing up to hand over two curses a turn is going to probably win in the long run.
Logged
To discard or not to discard?  That is the question.

clb

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 424
  • Respect: +182
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #232 on: July 04, 2012, 12:07:29 am »
0

This is usually my approach as well - but using almost any measurement (CR win rates etc.) ambassador is absolutely the stronger card of the two - even if I perceive Masq to win the head to head machup. 

Is that because ignoring Ambassador when engines are possible is just damn near impossible?

Since the cases where you want one over the other are situational, then a straight-up CR comparison would have to take into consideration the frequency of those particular cases, the one relative to the other. To do a fair comparison, you would have to have similar effects and similar intended uses.
The over-simplification (which becomes wrong because it is too simple) seems that masq is preferred for games where quick-acquisition of $ or not-cheap cards is dominant but Amb when you are doing anything where you want to control the composition and density of cards in your deck. Perhaps?
Logged

Captain_Frisk

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1257
  • Respect: +1261
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #233 on: July 04, 2012, 12:28:07 am »
0

Masq, masq, and masq again on day's ending with a "Y".  AT least those are my factors ;)

This is usually my approach as well - but using almost any measurement (CR win rates etc.) ambassador is absolutely the stronger card of the two - even if I perceive Masq to win the head to head machup. 

Is that because ignoring Ambassador when engines are possible is just damn near impossible?

I like Ambassador-Silver here, actually.  Unless there were cheaper cantrips that you're not mentioning, in which case amb-amb.

This is a game where Bishop's free trashing looks incredibly dangerous, so no Bishop until late if at all.  As for why not Masq, well whenever there are villages and draw out I have to think that gearing up to hand over two curses a turn is going to probably win in the long run.

Unforunately - I can't provide the link.... but that is a whole seperate discussion.  The problem was that the village was bazaar - so amba + silver doesn't necessarily get to it.  My feeling was masq would let me get the Bazaar - which would enable all of the other shenanigans, and as long as I could play the masq requently enough - I could keep up with amba bloat.  I wish I could remember the other 4 cards - but they didn't stand out.  I'm just going to assume they were scout, adventurer, what else would be useless / unbuyable?  CR was the only source of +buy - which made me angry.
Logged
I support funsockets.... taking as much time as they need to get it right.

Powerman

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 766
  • Respect: +602
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #234 on: July 04, 2012, 12:36:42 am »
0

Masq, masq, and masq again on day's ending with a "Y".  AT least those are my factors ;)

This is usually my approach as well - but using almost any measurement (CR win rates etc.) ambassador is absolutely the stronger card of the two - even if I perceive Masq to win the head to head machup. 

Is that because ignoring Ambassador when engines are possible is just damn near impossible?

Masq just gives so much more flexibility.  If you go Amb. you are committing to your strategy turn 1.  If you go Masq. and say get a lucky 6 on turn 3, you can change to more of a BM-Masq strategy.  But if you hit 5-5, you can easily go for the Engine.  My 2 cents.
Logged
A man on a mission.

chwhite

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1065
  • Respect: +436
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #235 on: July 04, 2012, 12:45:59 am »
0

Masq, masq, and masq again on day's ending with a "Y".  AT least those are my factors ;)

This is usually my approach as well - but using almost any measurement (CR win rates etc.) ambassador is absolutely the stronger card of the two - even if I perceive Masq to win the head to head machup. 

Is that because ignoring Ambassador when engines are possible is just damn near impossible?

Masq just gives so much more flexibility.  If you go Amb. you are committing to your strategy turn 1.  If you go Masq. and say get a lucky 6 on turn 3, you can change to more of a BM-Masq strategy.  But if you hit 5-5, you can easily go for the Engine.  My 2 cents.

I think on this board you need to go engine whether the draws are friendly or not.  I can see the case for opening Masq on the grounds that you really do want that early Bazaar, but Masq-BM has no shot against a player who can ramp up to passing out multiple Curses a turn, then transitioning to grabbing lots of points by Bishopping Peddlers to catch up no matter the Province deficit.
Logged
To discard or not to discard?  That is the question.

Powerman

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 766
  • Respect: +602
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #236 on: July 04, 2012, 12:49:04 am »
0

Masq, masq, and masq again on day's ending with a "Y".  AT least those are my factors ;)

This is usually my approach as well - but using almost any measurement (CR win rates etc.) ambassador is absolutely the stronger card of the two - even if I perceive Masq to win the head to head machup. 

Is that because ignoring Ambassador when engines are possible is just damn near impossible?

Masq just gives so much more flexibility.  If you go Amb. you are committing to your strategy turn 1.  If you go Masq. and say get a lucky 6 on turn 3, you can change to more of a BM-Masq strategy.  But if you hit 5-5, you can easily go for the Engine.  My 2 cents.

I think on this board you need to go engine whether the draws are friendly or not.  I can see the case for opening Masq on the grounds that you really do want that early Bazaar, but Masq-BM has no shot against a player who can ramp up to passing out multiple Curses a turn, then transitioning to grabbing lots of points by Bishopping Peddlers to catch up no matter the Province deficit.