Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Optimizing your level  (Read 33397 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Graystripe77

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 421
  • 1.61803398874989...
  • Respect: +94
    • View Profile
    • Dreamkeeperscomic.com
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #25 on: September 04, 2011, 05:36:03 pm »
0

Someone called "Facepalm" just challenged me with the same sort of trick Paralyzed has been pulling, except with Militia instead of Goons.  I declined.

Just wanted to warn folks.

Same thing here, same dude
Logged

ackack

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 302
  • Respect: +19
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #26 on: September 04, 2011, 07:43:43 pm »
0

Haha, I was watching a friend of mine play earlier and he got matched by Facepalm and accepted thinking it was an automatch. I was embarrassed, after the fact, that I hadn't caught that it was clearly a KC-Militia-Masq setup.
Logged

dougz

  • Isotropic Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 88
  • Respect: +440
    • View Profile
    • Online Dominion
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #27 on: September 05, 2011, 10:38:56 pm »
0

Starting with tonight's update, games that have cards forced (or prohibited) via the "require card(s)" box will no longer count towards the leaderboard.
Logged

chwhite

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1065
  • Respect: +442
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #28 on: September 05, 2011, 10:45:48 pm »
0

Starting with tonight's update, games that have cards forced (or prohibited) via the "require card(s)" box will no longer count towards the leaderboard.

Wow.  I think something needed to be done but maybe this is a bit much?  I kinda feel that people who just go, say, "!Possession" shouldn't have to have their games stricken like these set-up artists.
Logged
To discard or not to discard?  That is the question.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4381
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #29 on: September 05, 2011, 10:50:39 pm »
0

Presumably that's what the veto system is for, though whether that's what you'll get... well, I think this too is gameable. There's not going to be a perfect solution from all sides.

biopower

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 149
  • Respect: +4
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #30 on: September 05, 2011, 10:59:36 pm »
0

Presumably that's what the veto system is for, though whether that's what you'll get... well, I think this too is gameable. There's not going to be a perfect solution from all sides.

At the very least it's much less gameable than what Paralyzed (who incidentally, is now Level 50 and #1) has been doing.
Logged

chwhite

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1065
  • Respect: +442
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #31 on: September 05, 2011, 11:03:40 pm »
0

Presumably that's what the veto system is for, though whether that's what you'll get... well, I think this too is gameable. There's not going to be a perfect solution from all sides.

I'd be in favor of games which have a certain small number of prohibitions (exactly what that number is is kinda fuzzy, maybe you can prohibit 3 things) to stay on the leaderboard.

OTOH, it would probably be best to not count any games with requirements that aren't "Colony/Platinum".
Logged
To discard or not to discard?  That is the question.

guided

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 940
  • Respect: +94
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #32 on: September 05, 2011, 11:21:16 pm »
0

First off, let me say that leaderboard distortions have never bothered me overmuch, and I wouldn't have complained had Doug chosen to make no changes at all. That said, if we are going to try to remove distortions from the leaderboard, I think certain things are quite clear:

Requiring Colony should definitely not count. It is a huge win-rate advantage to only playing Colony games, get really good at them, and play lots of them against opposition who are not Colony specialists. Back before requirements were displayed to your opponent, almost all of the top slots on the leaderboard were Colony specialists (based on their Popular Buys data)

As far as allowing some small number of prohibitions, well, I don't see why anyone who wants to prohibit even one card they're not good at should feel entitled to have their mildly-rigged games rated equally with completely un-rigged games. If you need some prohibitions to have fun playing, by all means, make some prohibitions and have fun! But if you genuinely want to compare your skill with others via mathematical ratings, then leave your prohibitions at the door, because rigged games make mathematical comparisons meaningless.

Removing games with any requirements/prohibitions from the ratings is basically the minimum requirement for producing meaningful ratings. A big step in the right direction, here. Better still would be to have a "rated game" type that only reveals the board after all players have accepted the game, and only count those games. But that's a bit more implementation work, of course.
Logged

ackack

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 302
  • Respect: +19
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #33 on: September 06, 2011, 12:12:35 am »
0

Removing games with any requirements/prohibitions from the ratings is basically the minimum requirement for producing meaningful ratings. A big step in the right direction, here. Better still would be to have a "rated game" type that only reveals the board after all players have accepted the game, and only count those games. But that's a bit more implementation work, of course.

Seems like a very small step from the veto system, at this point, so maybe that can happen in the future. I'm not completely sold on the veto system yet - it seems likely to effectively remove certain cards from the game universe - but I do appreciate that Doug is trying some different things to address the issues people have. And I agree that removing restricted games from the leaderboard is a huge step forward.
Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7096
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9411
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #34 on: September 06, 2011, 01:04:27 am »
0

Removing games with any requirements/prohibitions from the ratings is basically the minimum requirement for producing meaningful ratings. A big step in the right direction, here. Better still would be to have a "rated game" type that only reveals the board after all players have accepted the game, and only count those games. But that's a bit more implementation work, of course.

Hrm, I think that first makes the assumption that all cards are "equal" on some level, which of course we know they're not.  It's not unreasonable to ask:  if you were to run a tournament, are there any cards you would prohibit from all tables?  In my opinion, Possession would be on that list, but I guess others might feel differently.  I do agree what you're speaking of would be a step in the right direction though.
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

guided

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 940
  • Respect: +94
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #35 on: September 06, 2011, 01:46:49 am »
0

Hrm, I think that first makes the assumption that all cards are "equal" on some level
I assume no equality beyond the entirely obvious fact that they're all official Dominion cards. Unless you can get Donald to publicly disown some of them, or get an overwhelming consensus among the entire competitive community that some of them are totally unsuitable for competitive play, the only reasonable baseline is that all official cards are included.

Possession is a card a lot of people don't like. If you think it's unsuitable for competition... well, I'll just say I disagree. I don't like Swindler's variance-inducing ways, but I wouldn't for an instant presume to strike it from rated games for the whole community (nor from a tournament I was organizing).
Logged

chwhite

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1065
  • Respect: +442
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #36 on: September 06, 2011, 02:20:19 am »
0

First off, let me say that leaderboard distortions have never bothered me overmuch, and I wouldn't have complained had Doug chosen to make no changes at all. That said, if we are going to try to remove distortions from the leaderboard, I think certain things are quite clear:

Requiring Colony should definitely not count. It is a huge win-rate advantage to only playing Colony games, get really good at them, and play lots of them against opposition who are not Colony specialists. Back before requirements were displayed to your opponent, almost all of the top slots on the leaderboard were Colony specialists (based on their Popular Buys data)

As far as allowing some small number of prohibitions, well, I don't see why anyone who wants to prohibit even one card they're not good at should feel entitled to have their mildly-rigged games rated equally with completely un-rigged games. If you need some prohibitions to have fun playing, by all means, make some prohibitions and have fun! But if you genuinely want to compare your skill with others via mathematical ratings, then leave your prohibitions at the door, because rigged games make mathematical comparisons meaningless.

Removing games with any requirements/prohibitions from the ratings is basically the minimum requirement for producing meaningful ratings. A big step in the right direction, here. Better still would be to have a "rated game" type that only reveals the board after all players have accepted the game, and only count those games. But that's a bit more implementation work, of course.

I think one thing that's getting lost in the shuffle is that the leaderboard isn't just for bragging rights at the top: it's also useful for players of all skill levels to find opponents of similar skill.  Many of the players who do things like ban Possession and Tournament and Pirate Ship etc. are mid-level players for whom the level is more a useful signaling device to find enjoyable opponents.  And I fear that eliminating all games with constraints could screw them over.

Good point on Colony/Platinum, which I did not know: I knew that a lot of top players required Colony/Plat, but I thought it was a simple matter of finding the longer game more strategic and enjoyable, and hadn't considered the extent to which it could be gaming the system as well.

FWIW, I never play with constraints, though I'll accept challenges with constraints as long as they're not obvious setups. 

Also, re: the veto system, I agree that it can be gamed too.  I've played like eight games on the veto system now, and there's  one card I've rejected every time I've seen it, at least three times so far.  It's Duke     .  Probably not what you were expecting. :P
Logged
To discard or not to discard?  That is the question.

Reyk

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 146
  • Respect: +24
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #37 on: September 06, 2011, 03:44:26 am »
0

Starting with tonight's update, games that have cards forced (or prohibited) via the "require card(s)" box will no longer count towards the leaderboard.

Well done, dougz! Thx for all the great work!
Logged

Reyk

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 146
  • Respect: +24
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #38 on: September 06, 2011, 04:49:22 am »
0

I've played like eight games on the veto system now, and there's  one card I've rejected every time I've seen it, at least three times so far.  It's Duke     .  Probably not what you were expecting. :P

Really? For me all the additional victory cards change the dynamics in an interesting way. Duke is no exception. These WanderingWinder games starting Copper/Horse Traders/Duchy are great stuff! And would be one reason for me not to always play with Colony/Platinum.
Logged

guided

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 940
  • Respect: +94
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #39 on: September 06, 2011, 10:25:02 am »
0

I'm really bad at Duke games. But I don't reject them :P
Logged

jonts26

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2746
  • Shuffle iT Username: jonts
  • Respect: +3668
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #40 on: September 06, 2011, 10:34:57 am »
0

If there's one card I might unequivocally veto, it's probably ambassador. Those games are so boring.
Logged

DG

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4074
  • Respect: +2624
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #41 on: September 06, 2011, 10:55:27 am »
0

Quote
If there's one card I might unequivocally veto, it's probably ambassador. Those games are so boring.

They can actually be very interesting but they just take too long to pan out.
Logged

guided

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 940
  • Respect: +94
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #42 on: September 06, 2011, 10:58:27 am »
0

If there's one card I might unequivocally veto, it's probably ambassador. Those games are so boring.
As an example of why I oppose rated games with even single-card prohibitions, an initial draft of one of my posts specifically mentioned that I don't want "!Ambassador" games counting in the same ratings that are being used to judge my own performance ;) Some people don't like those games and are bad at them, but I do like them and I'm good at them.
Logged

greatexpectations

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1097
  • Respect: +1067
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #43 on: September 06, 2011, 11:10:02 am »
0

i love that the new veto mode binds you into playing a game with an opponent without seeing the cards. i really don't like that the mode allows the two cards to be vetoed.  just seems to me to be too much control by the players in shaping the game they want to play. 

i think that the veto mode is just going to serve to remove all of the interesting cards and attacks from the game. i am not sure if the data is logged anywhere, but i would bet that the cards that are always being vetoed are the attacks, gardens/dukes, and higher variance cards like tournament/kings court.
Logged
momomoto: ...I looked at the tableau and went "Mountebank? That's for jerks."
rrenaud: Jerks win.

jonts26

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2746
  • Shuffle iT Username: jonts
  • Respect: +3668
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #44 on: September 06, 2011, 11:15:54 am »
0

Oh I agree that a proper ratings system would require pure random of all the cards, and I wouldn't suggest otherwise. Vetoing Ambassador is simply an issue of enjoyment for me.
Logged

jonts26

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2746
  • Shuffle iT Username: jonts
  • Respect: +3668
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #45 on: September 06, 2011, 11:25:02 am »
0

i love that the new veto mode binds you into playing a game with an opponent without seeing the cards. i really don't like that the mode allows the two cards to be vetoed.  just seems to me to be too much control by the players in shaping the game they want to play. 

I'm not sure veto mode will skew card selections that much more than simply refusing to play a set that has card X in it, as I'm sure many people do. And really, is it a problem that people are allowed to shape the game to play it in the way that gives them the most enjoyment? Certainly, as far as a rating system goes this is a bad idea, but simply playing the game the way you like is fine too.
Logged

ackack

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 302
  • Respect: +19
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #46 on: September 06, 2011, 11:29:27 am »
0

I'm not sure veto mode will skew card selections that much more than simply refusing to play a set that has card X in it, as I'm sure many people do.

Oh, I think it definitely will. greatexpectations examples are quite good - you might not object to playing with a particular card, but given that you must veto one of 12 cards in the set, ones that make the game more luck dependent (Familiar, Ambassador, King's Court) or slow (Sea Hag, Ambassador, etc.) seem substantially more likely to be vetoed.
Logged

guided

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 940
  • Respect: +94
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #47 on: September 06, 2011, 12:46:13 pm »
0

OK, just read the FAQ on what Veto mode is... and I definitely won't be using it! at least not most of the time. Some of my favorite cards (like Sea Hag and Ambassador) are likely to be vetoed. I might never end up playing a game with Possession again, and Possession games can sometimes be the most interesting games in all of Dominion! As others have pointed out, even a single veto can drastically reduce the chances of playing nasty-but-interesting games in general. Relying on veto will atrophy your skill at those sorts of games I think ;)

It will probably have some effect on the ratings - if I used it I would veto Treasure Map, Swindler, Mountebank, and certain other high-variance cards on sight and probably improve my win rate against lower-ranked opponents significantly - but not in a way that can be used to maliciously game the leaderboard. I definitely like that you're locked in to playing a game before you see the pre-veto board.
Logged

Dave970

  • Ambassador
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 30
  • Respect: +2
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #48 on: September 06, 2011, 02:31:17 pm »
0

Hrm, I think that first makes the assumption that all cards are "equal" on some level
I assume no equality beyond the entirely obvious fact that they're all official Dominion cards. Unless you can get Donald to publicly disown some of them, or get an overwhelming consensus among the entire competitive community that some of them are totally unsuitable for competitive play, the only reasonable baseline is that all official cards are included.

Possession is a card a lot of people don't like. If you think it's unsuitable for competition... well, I'll just say I disagree. I don't like Swindler's variance-inducing ways, but I wouldn't for an instant presume to strike it from rated games for the whole community (nor from a tournament I was organizing).

I do not prohibit cards when I play, but one use I can see for banning certain cards in a setting like a tournament is the average length of time it takes to play the given card.  Some turns are just really boring to sit through and, as was mentioned in the "Pet Peeves" thread, lead me to tab out to other windows and lose any interest or concentration on the current game.  Of course, it's not always a given card's fault... some people have massive actions/cards chains that draw their entire deck every turn, but they don't realize that they never bought any gold, and they continue to perpetuate their chain with their buy.
Logged

guided

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 940
  • Respect: +94
    • View Profile
Re: Optimizing your level
« Reply #49 on: September 06, 2011, 02:37:38 pm »
0

I wouldn't play in a tournament where the director banned cards in an attempt to shorten games. There's no small, targeted way to do that, and any blunt hammer you try ("Let's ban all Villages!") is either not going to work or it's going to create a competitive situation that is unrecognizable to people who know how to play the actual game of Dominion.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5  All
 

Page created in 0.049 seconds with 21 queries.