Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 150 151 [152] 153 154 ... 204  All

Author Topic: Interview with Donald X.  (Read 1113805 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5868
  • Respect: +23636
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3775 on: April 23, 2017, 03:56:54 am »
+11

I disagree with that wholeheartedly.  Expansions should strive for variety.  That's not to say complexity is necessarily a bad thing, but it's not an end unto itself.
I'll say it: complexity sucks.

Strategic complexity is fine; I'm not talking about that. Perhaps a misunderstanding along those lines is why there's a disparity here. I'm talking about rules complexity.

Ideally you quickly read the cards and then it takes a while to explore the implications. It's great when you play with a card a bunch and still don't have a handle on it. It's awful when your eyes glaze over at all the text; maybe I'll buy some other card and worry about that one later. When you mentally shorthand the card into something that's wrong and it matters. When you aren't sure what's supposed to happen and make a thread in the rules forum.
Logged

Cave-o-sapien

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 886
  • Respect: +1665
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3776 on: April 25, 2017, 05:39:24 pm »
+1

How good a Dominion player are you?

(objectively and/or subjectively)
Logged

schadd

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 887
  • Shuffle iT Username: schadd
  • lockjaw
  • Respect: +1258
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3777 on: April 25, 2017, 05:42:46 pm »
+3

Logged
I thought you thought it was a slip because I said 'Jake's partners' instead of 'Roadrunner7671.'
6-9
he/him
beloved my john, i'll carry on

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9006
  • Respect: +9814
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3778 on: April 25, 2017, 06:10:18 pm »
+2

How good a Dominion player are you?

(objectively and/or subjectively)

Asked and answered way back when: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=5799.msg148786#msg148786
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

Cave-o-sapien

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 886
  • Respect: +1665
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3779 on: April 25, 2017, 06:48:48 pm »
0

How good a Dominion player are you?

(objectively and/or subjectively)

Asked and answered way back when: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=5799.msg148786#msg148786

Thanks! I actually searched for this question, assuming it had been asked, but my search terms weren't nuanced enough to find it.
Logged

weety4

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 139
  • Respect: +49
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3780 on: April 26, 2017, 04:13:37 am »
0

...expansion should always strive for complexity and not simplicity.

I disagree with that wholeheartedly.  Expansions should strive for variety.  That's not to say complexity is necessarily a bad thing, but it's not an end unto itself.
Huh? It is fairly easy to come up with a village or trasher variant. Anybody can do that. But if a new village is not more complex than Village it'll probably suck.

I disagree with that wholeheartedly.  Expansions should strive for variety.  That's not to say complexity is necessarily a bad thing, but it's not an end unto itself.
I'll say it: complexity sucks.

Strategic complexity is fine; I'm not talking about that. Perhaps a misunderstanding along those lines is why there's a disparity here. I'm talking about rules complexity.

Ideally you quickly read the cards and then it takes a while to explore the implications. It's great when you play with a card a bunch and still don't have a handle on it. It's awful when your eyes glaze over at all the text; maybe I'll buy some other card and worry about that one later. When you mentally shorthand the card into something that's wrong and it matters. When you aren't sure what's supposed to happen and make a thread in the rules forum.
I don't like rule-messy Dominion cards like Possession. But rule difficulty has nothing to do with complexity. A Euro can be more complex than a wargame in spite of far simpler rules.
What I meant is that stuff that makes the first and fairly non-complex deckbuilder more complex is IMO good. Whether that's stuff like Landmark that makes the road to victory more tricky to evaluate or different starting hands via Shelters and so on doesn't matter. Again, Necro is not a difficult card to understand rule-wise yet the addition of variable starting hands makes the game more complex and thus, IMO, better.
« Last Edit: April 26, 2017, 04:20:17 am by weety4 »
Logged

ObtusePunubiris

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 124
  • Respect: +187
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3781 on: April 26, 2017, 08:39:38 am »
0

...expansion should always strive for complexity and not simplicity.

I disagree with that wholeheartedly.  Expansions should strive for variety.  That's not to say complexity is necessarily a bad thing, but it's not an end unto itself.
Huh? It is fairly easy to come up with a village or trasher variant. Anybody can do that. But if a new village is not more complex than Village it'll probably suck.

I disagree with that wholeheartedly.  Expansions should strive for variety.  That's not to say complexity is necessarily a bad thing, but it's not an end unto itself.
I'll say it: complexity sucks.

Strategic complexity is fine; I'm not talking about that. Perhaps a misunderstanding along those lines is why there's a disparity here. I'm talking about rules complexity.

Ideally you quickly read the cards and then it takes a while to explore the implications. It's great when you play with a card a bunch and still don't have a handle on it. It's awful when your eyes glaze over at all the text; maybe I'll buy some other card and worry about that one later. When you mentally shorthand the card into something that's wrong and it matters. When you aren't sure what's supposed to happen and make a thread in the rules forum.
I don't like rule-messy Dominion cards like Possession. But rule difficulty has nothing to do with complexity. A Euro can be more complex than a wargame in spite of far simpler rules.
What I meant is that stuff that makes the first and fairly non-complex deckbuilder more complex is IMO good. Whether that's stuff like Landmark that makes the road to victory more tricky to evaluate or different starting hands via Shelters and so on doesn't matter. Again, Necro is not a difficult card to understand rule-wise yet the addition of variable starting hands makes the game more complex and thus, IMO, better.

So the goal, then, is variation.  One can add things that create complexity with the goal of generating more variety while striving for simplicity OR one can add complexity for its own sake.  Your comment made it sound like you wanted the latter.  If that's not what you meant (and based on your follow up, it seems like it isn't) then perhaps we don't truly disagree.
Logged

weety4

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 139
  • Respect: +49
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3782 on: April 26, 2017, 11:18:03 am »
0

...expansion should always strive for complexity and not simplicity.

I disagree with that wholeheartedly.  Expansions should strive for variety.  That's not to say complexity is necessarily a bad thing, but it's not an end unto itself.
Huh? It is fairly easy to come up with a village or trasher variant. Anybody can do that. But if a new village is not more complex than Village it'll probably suck.

I disagree with that wholeheartedly.  Expansions should strive for variety.  That's not to say complexity is necessarily a bad thing, but it's not an end unto itself.
I'll say it: complexity sucks.

Strategic complexity is fine; I'm not talking about that. Perhaps a misunderstanding along those lines is why there's a disparity here. I'm talking about rules complexity.

Ideally you quickly read the cards and then it takes a while to explore the implications. It's great when you play with a card a bunch and still don't have a handle on it. It's awful when your eyes glaze over at all the text; maybe I'll buy some other card and worry about that one later. When you mentally shorthand the card into something that's wrong and it matters. When you aren't sure what's supposed to happen and make a thread in the rules forum.
I don't like rule-messy Dominion cards like Possession. But rule difficulty has nothing to do with complexity. A Euro can be more complex than a wargame in spite of far simpler rules.
What I meant is that stuff that makes the first and fairly non-complex deckbuilder more complex is IMO good. Whether that's stuff like Landmark that makes the road to victory more tricky to evaluate or different starting hands via Shelters and so on doesn't matter. Again, Necro is not a difficult card to understand rule-wise yet the addition of variable starting hands makes the game more complex and thus, IMO, better.

So the goal, then, is variation.  One can add things that create complexity with the goal of generating more variety while striving for simplicity OR one can add complexity for its own sake.  Your comment made it sound like you wanted the latter.  If that's not what you meant (and based on your follow up, it seems like it isn't) then perhaps we don't truly disagree.
Of course complexity for its own sake. A non-complex game would be Tictactoe and that is utterly trivial and solved.

I don't care much for variety per se. Just adding more cards to Dominion doesn't make it complex/better just like adding new Chess pieces doesn't per se improve the game.
But if those cards achieve something new and innovative that changes how the game works, like the aforementioned Shelters and Landmarks, that's a plus in my book.

The best thing is of course complexity out of simplicity like e.g. in the case of Chess or in the case of rule-wise simple Dominion cards that are nonetheless tricky to play with. And of course complexity that arises out of interaction of cards.
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5868
  • Respect: +23636
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3783 on: April 26, 2017, 05:24:41 pm »
+9

But rule difficulty has nothing to do with complexity.
Other people who speak English use the word "complexity" differently than you do. If you wish to communicate clearly, I recommend being more specific.

And if you don't wish to communicate clearly, I recommend taking the discussion elsewhere.
Logged

weety4

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 139
  • Respect: +49
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3784 on: April 26, 2017, 06:18:01 pm »
0

But rule difficulty has nothing to do with complexity.
Other people who speak English use the word "complexity" differently than you do. If you wish to communicate clearly, I recommend being more specific.

And if you don't wish to communicate clearly, I recommend taking the discussion elsewhere.
If you think generally that there complexity is unambiguously defined and specifically that "rule complexity" is the only form of complexity (actually I think that the term rule complexity is utter nonsense as rule difficulty has nothing to do with how complex a game is) you are direly mistaken.
For example Chess is a complex game with simple rules.
« Last Edit: April 26, 2017, 06:19:17 pm by weety4 »
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7857
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3785 on: April 26, 2017, 07:41:36 pm »
+9

I think contextually it was understood that the discussion was about complexity of the mechanics.  Actually, it was explicit.
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5868
  • Respect: +23636
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3786 on: April 27, 2017, 03:58:23 am »
+13

But rule difficulty has nothing to do with complexity.
Other people who speak English use the word "complexity" differently than you do. If you wish to communicate clearly, I recommend being more specific.

And if you don't wish to communicate clearly, I recommend taking the discussion elsewhere.
If you think generally that there complexity is unambiguously defined and specifically that "rule complexity" is the only form of complexity (actually I think that the term rule complexity is utter nonsense as rule difficulty has nothing to do with how complex a game is) you are direly mistaken.
For example Chess is a complex game with simple rules.
I was specific, and distinguished between "strategic complexity" and "rules complexity."

You dropped the adjective, as if I thought that "complexity" did not need more specificity, when in fact I went on to advise you to be specific. Then you suggested that I think there is just one type of "complexity," when in fact I specifically cited two kinds of complexity and did not indicate that two was the limit either.

Your posts! They are not doing much for me. What will your next account be called, anyway? I'm trying to sense a pattern here. Well, probably something short?
« Last Edit: April 27, 2017, 03:59:31 am by Donald X. »
Logged

Hockey Mask

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 162
  • Respect: +178
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3787 on: April 28, 2017, 12:02:45 am »
+4

What will your next account be called, anyway? I'm trying to sense a pattern here. Well, probably something short?
weety5
Logged
-The Compulsive Completist

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11460
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +12244
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3788 on: April 28, 2017, 02:51:10 am »
+1

What will your next account be called, anyway? I'm trying to sense a pattern here. Well, probably something short?
weety5

How about horatio88?
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The Twitch channel where I stream DominionThe YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's CC-licensed albums for free

McGarnacle

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1090
  • Shuffle iT Username: McGarnacle
  • So, ya like doughnuts, eh?
  • Respect: +641
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3789 on: April 30, 2017, 10:06:09 pm »
+4

What will your next account be called, anyway? I'm trying to sense a pattern here. Well, probably something short?
weety5

How about horatio88?

I think this is uncalled for.
Logged
This is exactly the kind of deep analysis I come to f.ds for. 

Forum Mafia Record
Town 1/2 50%
Scum 0/0

weety4

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 139
  • Respect: +49
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3790 on: May 04, 2017, 02:52:11 pm »
0

But rule difficulty has nothing to do with complexity.
Other people who speak English use the word "complexity" differently than you do. If you wish to communicate clearly, I recommend being more specific.

And if you don't wish to communicate clearly, I recommend taking the discussion elsewhere.
If you think generally that there complexity is unambiguously defined and specifically that "rule complexity" is the only form of complexity (actually I think that the term rule complexity is utter nonsense as rule difficulty has nothing to do with how complex a game is) you are direly mistaken.
For example Chess is a complex game with simple rules.
I was specific, and distinguished between "strategic complexity" and "rules complexity."

You dropped the adjective, as if I thought that "complexity" did not need more specificity, when in fact I went on to advise you to be specific. Then you suggested that I think there is just one type of "complexity," when in fact I specifically cited two kinds of complexity and did not indicate that two was the limit either.

Your posts! They are not doing much for me. What will your next account be called, anyway? I'm trying to sense a pattern here. Well, probably something short?
I repeat what I said: rule difficulty has nothing to do with any form of complexity. Difficulty and complexity are often not sharply distinguished in such discussions. So much about communicating clearly.

Not that it makes much sense to discuss a topic with a rude guy who accuses me of sucking at English or at using several accounts.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2017, 03:02:38 pm by weety4 »
Logged

ThetaSigma12

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1681
  • Shuffle iT Username: ThetaSigma12
  • Respect: +1791
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3791 on: May 04, 2017, 03:36:34 pm »
+2

Not that it makes much sense to discuss a topic with a rude guy
That, I think, is painfully obvious.
Logged
My magnum opus collection of dominion fan cards is available here!

weety4

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 139
  • Respect: +49
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3792 on: May 04, 2017, 03:43:36 pm »
0

Not that it makes much sense to discuss a topic with a rude guy
That, I think, is painfully obvious.
Feel free to point out where I was as rude to Donald as he was to me.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11460
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +12244
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3793 on: May 04, 2017, 04:09:09 pm »
+1

Not that it makes much sense to discuss a topic with a rude guy
That, I think, is painfully obvious.
Feel free to point out where I was as rude to Donald as he was to me.

...have you ever written a post where you weren't at least as rude to someone as Donald was to you?
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The Twitch channel where I stream DominionThe YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's CC-licensed albums for free

SuperHans

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 145
  • Shuffle iT Username: SuperHans
  • Respect: +232
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3794 on: May 04, 2017, 05:19:32 pm »
+6

Not that it makes much sense to discuss a topic with a rude guy
That, I think, is painfully obvious.
Feel free to point out where I was as rude to Donald as he was to me.
This is embarrassing.

You know, I have had some similar internet arguments like this years ago where I was obnoxious and wrong, and occasionally to this day I just ask myself: why.
Logged

weety4

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 139
  • Respect: +49
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3795 on: May 04, 2017, 05:28:24 pm »
0

Not that it makes much sense to discuss a topic with a rude guy
That, I think, is painfully obvious.
Feel free to point out where I was as rude to Donald as he was to me.
This is embarrassing.

You know, I have had some similar internet arguments like this years ago where I was obnoxious and wrong, and occasionally to this day I just ask myself: why.
I am happily interested in discussing the numerous forms game complexity. Which is all I actually did here. If some game designer cannot stand that I view "rule complexity", as opposed to rule difficulty, as a nonsensical term, so be it.
Logged

SuperHans

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 145
  • Shuffle iT Username: SuperHans
  • Respect: +232
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3796 on: May 04, 2017, 05:39:02 pm »
0

Not that it makes much sense to discuss a topic with a rude guy
That, I think, is painfully obvious.
Feel free to point out where I was as rude to Donald as he was to me.
This is embarrassing.

You know, I have had some similar internet arguments like this years ago where I was obnoxious and wrong, and occasionally to this day I just ask myself: why.
I am happily interested in discussing the numerous forms game complexity. Which is all I actually did here. If some game designer cannot stand that I view "rule complexity", as opposed to rule difficulty, as a nonsensical term, so be it.
Poe's law in full force. Perhaps I'm just oblivious, but I can't tell if this is trolling or not.
Logged

pacovf

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3462
  • Multiediting poster
  • Respect: +3792
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3797 on: May 04, 2017, 05:40:12 pm »
+1

Let's just stop it right here.
Logged
pacovf has a neopets account.  It has 999 hours logged.  All his neopets are named "Jessica".  I guess that must be his ex.

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5868
  • Respect: +23636
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3798 on: May 04, 2017, 05:45:30 pm »
+6

Not that it makes much sense to discuss a topic with a rude guy who accuses me of sucking at English or at using several accounts.
I am indeed rude. For example I am rude enough to say, that it will be awesome if you do not actually make a new account after this one is banned.
Logged

weety4

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 139
  • Respect: +49
    • View Profile
Re: Interview with Donald X.
« Reply #3799 on: May 04, 2017, 05:46:17 pm »
0

Not that it makes much sense to discuss a topic with a rude guy
That, I think, is painfully obvious.
Feel free to point out where I was as rude to Donald as he was to me.
This is embarrassing.

You know, I have had some similar internet arguments like this years ago where I was obnoxious and wrong, and occasionally to this day I just ask myself: why.
I am happily interested in discussing the numerous forms game complexity. Which is all I actually did here. If some game designer cannot stand that I view "rule complexity", as opposed to rule difficulty, as a nonsensical term, so be it.
Poe's law in full force. Perhaps I'm just oblivious, but I can't tell if this is trolling or not.
Sure, what you is fine but me wanting to stay on topic is trolling. Fair is foul and foul is fair.  ::)
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 150 151 [152] 153 154 ... 204  All
 

Page created in 0.097 seconds with 22 queries.