until i see some better reasoning behind this im gonna go ahead and call bs. it sounds like the kind of thing a clueless sports broadcaster would say. nice for a soundbite, but lacking in substance. how exactly does it ensure more complicated combos work?
I didn't say it ensures them, I said it makes them
more likely to work. As in "you have a higher chance to make the best decision in critical moments".
There are several deck types for which it can be important exactly how many cards of each you have. Ambassador and Chapel games for instance or most alternate VP strategies. (How much are your Fairgrounds? Is it safe to buy Silk Roads over Duchies?) In fact, in these cases they are so important that many people will commit "memory efforts" to counting these things in games without an automatic counter. At least I did before I used the PCE. But that is tiring and you can make mistakes.
To play engines optimally it is often important to have the right ratio of terminals and villages, among other things.
Sure, you can go ahead and just wing that, but as I said your engines/combos are somewhat more likely to work with the optimal ratio.
I mean, come on. These should be pretty obvious. If the use of the PCE didn't provide some benefit over pure memory, nobody would complain that an opponent used them.
3. It also makes it easier to realize why the game turned out in a certain way. It therefore helps people to get better at Dominion. Which should be particularly nice for beginners.
there are two ways you can view this. if you are looking at it after the fact then well game logs already cover all that. and if you are looking for this kind of assistance during a game then that strikes me as a bit sketch. i mean at that point can i just ask a high level friend for input on how to play my current game?
I was talking about the learning aspect here. Being tutored by a high level friend sure helps loads for learning, quite certainly much more than any counter alone ever could! But most people aren't so fortunate as to have high level friends who tutor them during their games. Yes, you can also go through the log afterwards (and sometimes I do), but you don't do that on most games because it takes a lot of time and isn't very fun.
I often had learning effects during a game sparked by following the PCE output. Such as, "oh, my opponent is probably doing better because he has more Menageries" or Warehouses or whatever.
Actually, I must admit that often I don't even read much of the per-turn-text-output of what my opponent does because I find it too cumbersome to read. I more or less follow what he buys and gains (and swindles me) on the PCE.
Even before I used the PCE I didn't read much of the text output either, so I missed a lot about the strategies of my opponent.
I play a lot of 3 and 4 player games too, the PCE is obviously even more important there to know about the composition of my opponents decks.
4. If you don't allow the PCE, it makes the game slower when people take their time memorizing things or retroactively thinking about if they can end it now or going through the logs of the previous turns which can still be seen on Isotropic.
meh, i'm gonna call bs again. the PCE will save you very little that the standard point counter would not already do.
How can my statement be bullshit? It is a factual statement that is obviously true. You know, "when people" as in "if people". (Or is there some linguistic reason that "when" doesn't imply "if" here? I am pretty sure that there isn't. But if so it was a language problem, English is not my first language.)
If and when people take much time to memorize etc., the game is slower. That is a fact. The question is only how many people take much time to memorize.
It is probably the case that in most casual games, most people don't spend much time on that. But in important tournament games, that might very likely be different.
seeing all of the data the PCE provides can just as easily cause as much AP as it will save time.
I don't know what you mean by "AP", buy I guess something along the lines of "wasting time".
I can't be certain about other people, but using the PCE certainly makes
me play faster, not slower.
(#1-#4) and no imperative arguments against it,
there were a few arguments against it.
I don't dispute that, I started my posting by acknowledging that I am aware that this is a matter of taste and personal preferences in the end.
I made my posting to state mine.
the one where the creator of the game said that any form of notetaking or use of extraneous supplies was against the rules comes to mind.
He has also confirmed that
of course it can be played as a variant if the opponents agree.
So it obviously wouldn't be against any rules or even against Donald X's wishes if someone organized a tournament with PCE allowed for people who like that. By participating, you would agree to play this variant just as you agreed to other variants like identical starting hands in other tournaments.
or the fact that the PCE shows information different for users and nonusers
I totally agree that this is far from optimal.
Therefore I really hope that the new game will have a solution where all opponents can see the full output if the (hopefully to be programmed) deck counter option gets enabled (when all opponents agreed to it).
seriously, if everything available via the PCE was a checkbox option on isotropic this wouldn't be an issue. but the PCE is a variant, and should require mutual consent for play.
Well, technically that is the case now because you can either disable the PCE of your opponent or see the auto count message in the lobby and then refuse to play with him or even prohibit all games with point counter automatically.
However, I totally agree that this is an unsatisfactory situation for people who a) don't mind the simple point counter b) don't consent to the PCE and c) find it too cumbersome to check lobby status for auto count before they accept an auto-match.
It is probably too late to advocate any changes on Isotropic now, but I absolutely agree that Funsockets should find a solution that makes is easier for people with preferences a) through c) to get what they want.
The best solution on Isotropic would probably have been to have two checkboxes, one for "point tracker" and one for "deck tracker", both with the three options to require, prohibit or not care (I suppose that is what you meant above).