Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Multiplayer Transition  (Read 4405 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Warrior

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 187
  • Respect: +54
    • View Profile
Multiplayer Transition
« on: February 16, 2013, 10:57:53 am »
0

As we all know, dominion is generally played with two players at a time, well at least on isotropic. Because of this, I have become familiar with many strategies and how they play out in two player games. When I play with my family IRL, however, we always play with at least 3 players, if not 4. I find myself selecting strategies that are strong in two player games but not necessarily strong in multiplayer games. I am foggy on when to go for green in multiplayer, and how elaborate I should make my engines. How does one change their playing style when playing multiplayer games? When analyzing the board before picking a strategy, what characteristics must a strategy have in order to make it a viable one? I am aware the amount of turns are usually shortened and the amount of resources available for your deck are also limited when playing with more players, and to an even greater extent when playing with four people. If anyone could "enlighten" me with the understanding of how to transition from playing with two to playing with three or four, the help would be much appreciated. Many thanks.

Warrior
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9174
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #1 on: February 16, 2013, 11:23:41 am »
+1

Strategies that rely on getting lots of certain cards suffer because there are fewer cards to go around. Alt VP and engine strategies that work in 2p may not work with more players because opponents could quickly take down provinces when a single opponent would have stalled, giving you time to really get kicking. Watch out for attacks that scale hard, like Pirate Ship, and keep in mind that there can be multiple players attacking. There doesn't need to be a village for you to get hit by double Torturer. On the other hand, if both opponents are playing Militia every turn, you can do something else and your opponents will still slow each other down.

(edit to fix phone typo)
« Last Edit: February 16, 2013, 10:36:05 pm by eHalcyon »
Logged

jaybeez

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 335
  • Shuffle iT Username: jaybeez
  • Respect: +395
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #2 on: February 16, 2013, 06:18:23 pm »
+1

I think this article by -Stef- applies doubly if you're in the 3rd or 4th position: http://dominionstrategy.com/2012/09/10/taking-risks-driving-the-p2-seat/

It's not as important overall as the strategic difference of the cards like what eHalcyon is talking about.  But it's something to keep in mind.
Logged

Markov Chain

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 115
  • Respect: +77
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #3 on: February 16, 2013, 11:21:17 pm »
+1

4-player games are much more vulnerable to ending on piles.  If there is a very good card that players want several copies of (Fool's Gold, Fishing Village, Caravan, Minion), it will run out quickly.  If there is only one action worth $2 and there are many occasions to buy it (either +buy or curse-filled decks that leave players with $2), it will also run out.  If two piles are gone, duchies are likely to become the third, and anyone who waits for provinces may be caught short.

In addition, watch out for cards which automatically drain piles: Ambassador, Swindler, and Jester will exhaust piles quickly. 
Logged

serakfalcon

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 278
  • Shuffle iT Username: serakfalcon
  • Respect: +229
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #4 on: February 17, 2013, 10:23:01 pm »
+1

Quote
In addition, watch out for cards which automatically drain piles: Ambassador, Swindler, and Jester will exhaust piles quickly. 
I've also noticed its a lot easier to get drowned in curses. In a 2-player game, especially with trashing, the effects of a curser might not be too pronounced, and you can get by. With a 4-player game, if several people have already bought the curser you will be drowned in curses if you try to go without. Same thing applies with ruins...
Side note: Jester is really hilarious with a 4 player game. I don't really like the card in 2 player, but in 4 player its amazing
Logged

Agile

  • Herbalist
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
  • Respect: +4
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #5 on: February 17, 2013, 11:09:08 pm »
+2

I was going to post a similar topic to this.

I feel like the site has done a great job of delving into 2-player strategy at a deep level, but I feel like multiplayer strategy isn't dealt with very much here. I would be really interested to see some more discussion on how multiplayer affects strategy at a deeper level.

At the basic level multiplayer does a few things, that people have already mentioned:

1. Because the amount of regular kingdom cards doesn't vary based on the group size, there is a wider distribution of sought-after cards (4-3-3 or 3-3-2-2 rather than a 5-5 even split). This I would presume effects cards you want a lot of, particularly if you can chain them together (minions, cities, etc.) and they are therefore weakened if other people go also go for the same cards and thus you get fewer of them in your deck. It also hurts if you are trying to build an engine and there is a part or parts that others want also.

2. It affects victory card distribution, particularly in 4-player games. In a 3-player game there still are 4 of any victory card per player in an equal distribution, but it still probably has some effects on the game (though I am not sure exactly what all the effects would be). However, in a 4-player game there are still only 12 victory cards, so now an equal distribution results in only 3 per player, which could lead to games ending faster, particularly if there is a relatively equal distribution of victory cards bought.

3. Attacks that can stack become much more powerful, attacks which might or might not hit become more reliable with multiple chances, and attacks that do not stack become a bit weaker. Attacks like Torturer, cursers, and cutpurse which can a. hit a player multiple times before their turn and b. hit multiple players at once become stronger. Cards that may be poor in 2-player or in general lack reliability because they may not hit (Pirate ship or even Thief) become stronger to at least some degree as with multiple targets the chance of hitting increases. However, attacks that don't stack become at least a little bit weaker such as Militia as there is less to gain by playing it if it has already been played that turn by another player.

4. As said before, three-piling is more likely in multiplayer

5. Dealing with multiple opponents may affect the optimal strategy for the game. If there is one strategy that three players are taking, a different strategy that normally would be less optimal in a 2-player game may become more viable and even the best strategy for the situation.

------
However, I think it would be interesting to go more in depth into multiplayer strategy. I don't think anyone would really settle for this level of depth of strategy for 2-player situations. I think what makes the site interesting is the depth to which the discussion, analysis and strategy goes for the game, often even to edge cases. In-depth multiplayer strategy still feels relatively untapped though. I think even a set of card rankings in multiplayer would be interesting to see.

Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11414
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +12210
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #6 on: February 17, 2013, 11:37:36 pm »
+2

2. It affects victory card distribution, particularly in 4-player games. In a 3-player game there still are 4 of any victory card per player in an equal distribution, but it still probably has some effects on the game (though I am not sure exactly what all the effects would be).
You can't guarantee you've won when you have 43 points.
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 albums for free

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3431
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2696
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #7 on: February 18, 2013, 12:36:05 am »
+1


2. It affects victory card distribution, particularly in 4-player games. In a 3-player game there still are 4 of any victory card per player in an equal distribution, but it still probably has some effects on the game (though I am not sure exactly what all the effects would be).

Alt-VP strategies (especially slogs) get changed for one thing.  (The duke article mentions how in two-player the opponent needs eight provinces, but in three-player they need only six.)
Logged
If you're wondering what my avatar is, watch this.

Check out my logic puzzle blog!

   Quote from: sudgy on June 31, 2011, 11:47:46 pm

DG

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4074
  • Respect: +2621
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #8 on: February 18, 2013, 07:47:19 am »
+1

The main difference is that your opponents now collectively dictate the flow of the game. You need to watch what they are doing and follow their lead. As an example, in a game with early cursing there may be an option to go for a quick three pile finish with duchies. In a two player game this can be a straight vp prediction based on the decks. In a three player game you might find this option changes depending on whether neither, one, or both of your opponents try to empty the 12 card duchy pile. Another example might be pirates ships where trashing all the treasures from your deck will not prevent opponents getting pirate tokens from each other.

A lot of the endgame subtlety with vp is lost in three player. You essentially can't use the PPR since your opponents will buy out the vp however they like between your turns. Controlling three pile endings is more difficult too for the same reason.

Attacks can become more brutal. Junk enters your deck faster. You can frequently suffer repeated attack from cards like cutpurse or bureaucrat. You can get some combinations of attacks without any player needing to build an engine deck, so then you need to think through the play order for strengths and weaknesses. Ghost ship then torturer is different from torturer then ghost ship, say.

With attacks being collectively punishing, deck defenses become much stronger. If two of your opponents have witches then a moat might become as strong a card for you as your own witch.
Logged

Squidd

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 178
  • Respect: +585
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #9 on: February 18, 2013, 09:39:56 am »
+2

I've also noticed its a lot easier to get drowned in curses. In a 2-player game, especially with trashing, the effects of a curser might not be too pronounced, and you can get by. With a 4-player game, if several people have already bought the curser you will be drowned in curses if you try to go without. Same thing applies with ruins...
Not so. Let's assume no trashing and no reactions (so every time the curser is played, the full complement of curses will be handed out). Let's also assume you never get the curser, but all your opponents play it more-or-less evenly.

When the curses are gone, no matter how many players are in the game, you will have 10 of them. In a 2P, your opponent has 0, and that's a big imbalance. In a 4P, your opponents have 6 or 7 each. You're only a little worse off, and hopefully you've been doing something good while they were busy cursing.

... This also assumes that the curser automatically curses. If you're getting hit by more Torturers, you'll have to take the curse more often. If you're being swindled more, your coppers will probably be hit faster. Your mileage may vary.
Logged

DG

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4074
  • Respect: +2621
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #10 on: February 18, 2013, 09:41:35 am »
+2

Quote
When the curses are gone, no matter how many players are in the game, you will have 10 of them.

You get them sooner. If each opponent plays one witch between your shuffles, you get one curse in a two player game and three curses in a four player game. This makes it difficult to trash as you go along and keep your deck under control. A chapel can be almost worthless in a four player mountebank game.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2013, 09:43:42 am by DG »
Logged

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1853
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #11 on: February 18, 2013, 09:58:48 am »
+1

A lot of the endgame subtlety with vp is lost in three player. You essentially can't use the PPR since your opponents will buy out the vp however they like between your turns. Controlling three pile endings is more difficult too for the same reason.

Of course you can. Leave 3 Provinces if you think your opponents will pick one up each. This is where tracking your opponents' decks is a useful skill to have. Pretty often I break 3-player PPR and leave only 2 Provinces because I'm fairly sure that only one of my opponents can pick up a Province on his next turn.
Logged

DG

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4074
  • Respect: +2621
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #12 on: February 18, 2013, 11:31:49 am »
+1

Quote
Of course you can. Leave 3 Provinces if you think your opponents will pick one up each.

I think you're taking a very big gamble here with 18 vp that will only pay off if the next series of three hands are all province buying hands. Add this to the chance of one of the players playing different tactics (or unexpectedly), or the chance of miscounting the scores of any of the  players, or the chance of other piles emptying, or there being buys and gains in the kingdom, and the likelihood of the scores being in the correct range with the 3 provinces left on your turn, and so on, and the PPR changes from an occasional strategy to a rarity.

I've quickly done a simulation for fishing village/jack-of-all-trade decks and the PPR gives a 2% advantage in 2-player games and no measurable advantage in 3 player (any advantage is less than the variance of 100, 000 simulations).
Logged

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1853
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #13 on: February 18, 2013, 11:39:01 am »
+2

I've quickly done a simulation for fishing village/jack-of-all-trade decks and the PPR gives a 2% advantage in 2-player games and no measurable advantage in 3 player (any advantage is less than the variance of 100, 000 simulations).

We are talking about simulations vs. high level, adaptable endgame play here. The applicability of 3-player PPR (which I guess we'll just call APPR) depends highly on the kingdom and on what strategies your opponents are using, but there is no doubt, at least from my personal experience, that there is a lot more subtlety in 3-player endgame play than is implied by simulations.

I think you're taking a very big gamble here with 18 vp that will only pay off if the next series of three hands are all province buying hands. Add this to the chance of one of the players playing different tactics (or unexpectedly), or the chance of miscounting the scores of any of the  players, or the chance of other piles emptying, or there being buys and gains in the kingdom, and the likelihood of the scores being in the correct range with the 3 provinces left on your turn, and so on, and the PPR changes from an occasional strategy to a rarity.

1. There is no "chance" of miscounting scores or other piles emptying, because my assumption that the player is reasonably skilled at these scenarios accounts for this.
2. The point is that you leave 3 Provinces (or 2 depending on your confidence in the other players' decks) if you absolutely need to Duchy-dance a little bit to win. As long as the game doesn't end prematurely, then you were better off eschewing the Province than if you ignored endgame strategy.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2013, 11:41:42 am by dondon151 »
Logged

DG

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4074
  • Respect: +2621
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #14 on: February 18, 2013, 01:52:33 pm »
+1

Quote
We are talking about simulations vs. high level, adaptable endgame play here.

The PPR work best in situations where there is very little adaptable play apart from a change in vp purchasing. I'm not particularly talking about high end play here btw so that perhaps explains our points of view.

Quote
There is no "chance" of miscounting scores or other piles emptying, because my assumption that the player is reasonably skilled at these scenarios accounts for this.

I think this is a false assumption too and I almost made a point about scores in my original response. There are a lot of short cuts you can take to check to the scores in two player that don't work in three player, such as checking the piles to see how many estates have been trashed. Knowing your own deck can also sometimes let you directly deduce your opponent's deck in two player. I'd say it is more than twice as difficult to count the scores of two opponents compared to one since you need to track every vp change from the start of the game to the finish and I don't think it is realistic to advise real life Dominion players to always use a 3 player PPR based on their perfect knowledge of scores.
Logged

RD

  • Thief
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 92
  • Respect: +68
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #15 on: February 23, 2013, 02:42:02 pm »
0

1. Because the amount of regular kingdom cards doesn't vary based on the group size, there is a wider distribution of sought-after cards (4-3-3 or 3-3-2-2 rather than a 5-5 even split). This I would presume effects cards you want a lot of, particularly if you can chain them together (minions, cities, etc.) and they are therefore weakened if other people go also go for the same cards and thus you get fewer of them in your deck. It also hurts if you are trying to build an engine and there is a part or parts that others want also.

I think the bigger problem is that (for instance) a 5-5-0 split plays so differently from the 5-5 split we're used to.

Take Minion. Lots of times you actually can't build a very strong engine with 5 Minions. In 2P that usually doesn't stop you from trying: if the opponent gets the rest of the Minions then hey they'll probably be stuck with the same problem. We say Minion engines are very strong because uncontested they are typically very strong, and if they're contested in 2P the point is moot.

But in 3P you can be in the situation of having to play that 5 Minion engine against a player who didn't have to buy any Minions. On the other hand if nobody else wants to join you in 5-Minion hell, maybe you benefit. They might not contest you at all until it's too late.

Accordingly, I think flexibility gets a lot more important. If possible one should delay the decision of whether to contest the split. You could perhaps say that with more players, each individual player has less control over the game, so they have to play more reactively.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2013, 02:49:06 pm by RD »
Logged

Jacob marley

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 153
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jacob Marley
  • Respect: +137
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #16 on: February 27, 2013, 01:01:52 pm »
0

I've also noticed its a lot easier to get drowned in curses. In a 2-player game, especially with trashing, the effects of a curser might not be too pronounced, and you can get by. With a 4-player game, if several people have already bought the curser you will be drowned in curses if you try to go without. Same thing applies with ruins...
Not so. Let's assume no trashing and no reactions (so every time the curser is played, the full complement of curses will be handed out). Let's also assume you never get the curser, but all your opponents play it more-or-less evenly.

When the curses are gone, no matter how many players are in the game, you will have 10 of them. In a 2P, your opponent has 0, and that's a big imbalance. In a 4P, your opponents have 6 or 7 each. You're only a little worse off, and hopefully you've been doing something good while they were busy cursing.

... This also assumes that the curser automatically curses. If you're getting hit by more Torturers, you'll have to take the curse more often. If you're being swindled more, your coppers will probably be hit faster. Your mileage may vary.

I disagree.  Recently I played a 3 player Sea Hag/Sage slog on Goko where through shuffle luck (and some poor play by opponents) I got to play my Sea Hag more often and ended 3 and 4 curses ahead of my opponents respectively.  I was able to get to Goons first as a result, and once I had built up a VP token lead, end on 3 piles for the win.  Given that in three and four player games there are more curses per player on average, getting even a little ahead can pay big dividends.
Logged

ftl

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2056
  • Shuffle iT Username: ftl
  • Respect: +1340
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #17 on: February 27, 2013, 08:01:45 pm »
0

Lol I was stupid oops
« Last Edit: February 27, 2013, 08:18:17 pm by ftl »
Logged

DG

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4074
  • Respect: +2621
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #18 on: February 27, 2013, 08:16:15 pm »
0

10 curses for 2 players - 5 each.
20 curses for 3 players - 6.66 each.
30 curses for 4 players - 7.5 each.
Logged

Stealth Tomato

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 507
  • Dorkneel
  • Respect: +479
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #19 on: February 28, 2013, 11:25:17 am »
+1

I was going to post a similar topic to this.

I feel like the site has done a great job of delving into 2-player strategy at a deep level, but I feel like multiplayer strategy isn't dealt with very much here. I would be really interested to see some more discussion on how multiplayer affects strategy at a deeper level.

At the basic level multiplayer does a few things, that people have already mentioned:

1. Because the amount of regular kingdom cards doesn't vary based on the group size, there is a wider distribution of sought-after cards (4-3-3 or 3-3-2-2 rather than a 5-5 even split). This I would presume effects cards you want a lot of, particularly if you can chain them together (minions, cities, etc.) and they are therefore weakened if other people go also go for the same cards and thus you get fewer of them in your deck. It also hurts if you are trying to build an engine and there is a part or parts that others want also.

2. It affects victory card distribution, particularly in 4-player games. In a 3-player game there still are 4 of any victory card per player in an equal distribution, but it still probably has some effects on the game (though I am not sure exactly what all the effects would be). However, in a 4-player game there are still only 12 victory cards, so now an equal distribution results in only 3 per player, which could lead to games ending faster, particularly if there is a relatively equal distribution of victory cards bought.

3. Attacks that can stack become much more powerful, attacks which might or might not hit become more reliable with multiple chances, and attacks that do not stack become a bit weaker. Attacks like Torturer, cursers, and cutpurse which can a. hit a player multiple times before their turn and b. hit multiple players at once become stronger. Cards that may be poor in 2-player or in general lack reliability because they may not hit (Pirate ship or even Thief) become stronger to at least some degree as with multiple targets the chance of hitting increases. However, attacks that don't stack become at least a little bit weaker such as Militia as there is less to gain by playing it if it has already been played that turn by another player.

4. As said before, three-piling is more likely in multiplayer

5. Dealing with multiple opponents may affect the optimal strategy for the game. If there is one strategy that three players are taking, a different strategy that normally would be less optimal in a 2-player game may become more viable and even the best strategy for the situation.

------
However, I think it would be interesting to go more in depth into multiplayer strategy. I don't think anyone would really settle for this level of depth of strategy for 2-player situations. I think what makes the site interesting is the depth to which the discussion, analysis and strategy goes for the game, often even to edge cases. In-depth multiplayer strategy still feels relatively untapped though. I think even a set of card rankings in multiplayer would be interesting to see.

It's also important to note that all of the above make Duchy rushing far more attractive in multiplayer.
There's also the important point that while Provinces per player is not affected in 3-player games, you actually need to build a deck more resistant to greening, because you are much more likely to need 5-6 Provinces to win (4 with sauce only works if your opponents split the rest; 5 and even sometimes 6 needs sauce if one player falls well behind).
Logged

Jacob marley

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 153
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jacob Marley
  • Respect: +137
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #20 on: February 28, 2013, 12:54:35 pm »
0

Stealth Tomato makes an important point.  3 plays differently than 4, and requires a different thought process, so it is not enough talk about going from 2 player to 3+ player.  One also needs to account for the differences between 3 player and 4 player.
Logged

Agile

  • Herbalist
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
  • Respect: +4
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #21 on: February 28, 2013, 06:20:18 pm »
0

Good points Stealth.

I have enjoyed the discussion so far. I am interested to explore some more differences in multiplayer and even between 3 and 4 player games like you mentioned, Jacob.
Logged

Jerk of All trades

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 126
  • Respect: +38
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #22 on: February 28, 2013, 07:39:40 pm »
0

It's been my experience that simple but powerful strategies are much stronger with 4 players.  Double Jack, Wharf-BM, witch-BM, Mountebank-BM being very hard to beat with even the most powerful of engines. Remake or double steward into BM is great.
Cards like grand market, minion, alchemist, scrying pool are less powerful when contested 3 or 4 ways. Without some majorly disruptive attacks the game will end in 12-16 turns. Any engines that take 10 turns or more to setup are not worth it.

I've played a LOT of Bot matches on Androminion, and even though some of the AI is quite bad, my win-rate plummets with a card like wharf on the board.  I've had 2 bots get 9 provinces by turn 11 with wharf BM.
Logged

Agile

  • Herbalist
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
  • Respect: +4
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #23 on: March 01, 2013, 12:22:44 am »
0

From what I have been seeing here and thinking about it, that seems right that the powerful, simple combos are more effective in 4-player and that more elaborate engines aren't. Does that seem to hold true for colony games also or mainly province? It seems like 4-player province games definitely lean big money or big money + ____. However, its interesting to consider the effect of colony games as in 2 player they lend themselves more to engines than BM. 4-player may not lend itself as much towards engines even in colony games, but likely is somewhere in between and it would be interesting to find out what the sweet spot would be.
Logged

Axxle

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1664
  • Most Valuable Serial Killer
  • Respect: +1956
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer Transition
« Reply #24 on: March 01, 2013, 12:51:40 am »
+6

Don't try to get better at multiplayer dominion.  Your family will thank you.
Logged
We might be from all over the world, but "we all talk this one language  : +1 card + 1 action +1 buy , gain , discard, trash... " - RTT
Pages: [1] 2  All
 

Page created in 0.086 seconds with 21 queries.