Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[achmed_sender]

I just played a game against a decent skilled player. I saw that he spent his coin tokens very fast and did rarely keep some for several turns. So I thought I say him he should probably save them a bit more than he actually did. He became really angry and insulted me a douche and a**h*** by selling myself for a better player than him and now giving dumb advice instead of being okay with my lucky draws and keeping calm. Maybe it was rude from me by saying what he should do better, but blaming luck (especially it was not at all a lucky game, from my perspective) and not accepting advice seems rude for sure. We discussed a bit and then he began with slow-rolling, and eventually I quited.

I just find this strange. I learned a lot from other peoples advice, as in Dominion as elsewhere. Sure, it's a bit depressing if you had unlucky draws, but even then you can learn optimising the situation.

What do you guys think about getting advice during a game? What would change if it's a quite luck-based game?

[Awaclus]

No, giving advice is not mean, but I think that it's generally a good idea to spend coin tokens very fast, unless you are saving them in order to delay your greening.

[flies]

IRL it's a different story, but online it's so hard to communicate tone that I usually feel like I come off like a douche even when commiserating about my opponent's bad luck.

[2.71828.....]

If there is some facet of the game that is an easy fix and I can give my opponent advice about it (without coming across as a jerk), I will try to do so after the game. (this happening very rarely due to players quickly abandoning games.  I try to wait until after they have completely finished so I don't run into the problem of disturbing their play)  Giving advice during the game can too easily (and unfortunately) turn into the situation that you describe.

[sudgy]

I think asking, "May I give some advice?" before saying could help.

And I would say that foolish people are the people who don't take advice, and wise people the people who do take advice.

[achmed_sender]

No, giving advice is not mean, but I think that it's generally a good idea to spend coin tokens very fast, unless you are saving them in order to delay your greening.

I was just quite sure that he could optimize his "bad draws" by money smoothing. Spending a coin to reach $3 for an oasis, but miss familiar next turn seems quite inconsequentual. Of course luck was involved, but his reaction was really not what I expected. The point was really the not the misplay, but the reaction of my advice-providing.

[2.71828.....]

No, giving advice is not mean, but I think that it's generally a good idea to spend coin tokens very fast, unless you are saving them in order to delay your greening.

I was just quite sure that he could optimize his "bad draws" by money smoothing. Spending a coin to reach $3 for an oasis, but miss familiar next turn seems quite inconsequentual. Of course luck was involved, but his reaction was really not what I expected. The point was really the not the misplay, but the reaction of my advice-providing.

Using coin tokens can really depend on the board.  I tend to agree with Awaclus on this, but say there is a key $6 card that I want, I won't use a coin token to bump a $2 to a $3 when I know that probably means I will be able to get $6 next turn.  With potions in play for cards like golum and familiar I do like to keep a token in reserve if possible to insure purchase of that card.  To really know for this board, we would probably need to see the log, but being the conscientious person that you are (not the douche as suggested by your opponent) you have not included the log so as to not disparage your opponent himself, but rather just his behavior.

[WanderingWinder]

I generally find it... rude(?) to give advice in a competitive setting such as this, though obviously that doesn't justify any kind of mean-spirited response.

[Ozle]

Giving advice is pretty bad.

I tried giving advice to someone once....but apparently the Justice courts disapprove of telling a policeman exactly where he can stick his speeding ticket

[markusin]

I refrain from giving advice like that, even if my intentions are good. After all, I'm not seeing what my opponents see and maybe they know they made mistakes but would rather let them pass. But also, sometimes you don't want to hear about what's considered the "right" play and want to challenge convention or trust their intuition or something. I myself can be like that at times.

Occasionally, I have pointed out a key interaction at the start of the game to players who I know are unfamiliar with the cards. Then there is informing your opponent about what the kingdom card is on the next page when Young Witch is on the board. I can't see how anyone can justify getting upset over the reminder about the extra card for Young Witch on the next page.

I will advise my opponent about how to prevent important play errors from recurring (most notably, playing Bank after playing the rest of your treasures). I also try my best to answer any rules questions they may have.

[HiveMindEmulator]

Giving advice isn't so mean, but giving unsolicited advice is rude. A lot of people will be offended. I agree with the others that you should save it for after the game. If the other person sticks around, they probably don't mind talking about it, and if they are offended, they can just leave.

[Eevee]

I generally find it... rude(?) to give advice in a competitive setting such as this, though obviously that doesn't justify any kind of mean-spirited response.

Surprising. I always like it when someone gives me constructive criticism for my play, even during a game.

[flies]

I will advise my opponent about how to prevent important play errors from recurring (most notably, playing Bank after playing the rest of your treasures). I also try my best to answer any rules questions they may have.

yeah, if people are making obvious, straightforward mistakes out of apparent lack of experience - or missing the young witch card - i try to point it out as nicely as i can.  It's been a while since I've played with ppl doing that, tho...

[sudgy]

I remember both me and my opponent one time forgot King's Court was on the next page.

[blueblimp]

Given the scenario presented, I can see how the advice could come across as rude.

A: Has $2 to spend, uses only coin token to buy Oasis (instead of getting nothing).
B: Takes turn.
A: Has $2P to spend, can't buy anything because of having no coin token.
B: "Guess you should've kept your coin token, huh? ". Buys Familiar.

[Awaclus]

Actually, now that I rethink it, I can understand why people think that it's rude to give advice during a game. Sometimes if I'm playing against a person who's asking for advice all the time, it starts feeling like I'm playing against myself, so I guess it can go both ways - the person receiving the advice without asking for it might feel like you would rather play against yourself than him.

[WanderingWinder]

I generally find it... rude(?) to give advice in a competitive setting such as this, though obviously that doesn't justify any kind of mean-spirited response.

Surprising. I always like it when someone gives me constructive criticism for my play, even during a game.

It depends. If it something that is obviously a mistake, like what appears that it must be a rules misunderstanding (e.g. playing tactician with no cards to discard), or of course if it is solicited advice, then it's not a problem at all. And actually, I am thinking mostly of myself being on the giving - I hardly ever do, because I assume that they know what they are doing, and though it looks strange and wrong to me, I assume that they actually just think it is the right play. Certainly in the case that the OP is giving, I would take the implicit message to be "Your strategy is bad", which is not really a message I am going to send to my opponent unsolicited in a strategy game, except through the play. Indeed, sometimes I'm just the one who's wrong...

Also, I don't at all mind people asking for advice, but I don't like when they feel entitled to it (and get indignant when I, their opponent, refuse to help them whilst competing against them).

[Eevee]

I generally find it... rude(?) to give advice in a competitive setting such as this, though obviously that doesn't justify any kind of mean-spirited response.

Surprising. I always like it when someone gives me constructive criticism for my play, even during a game.

It depends. If it something that is obviously a mistake, like what appears that it must be a rules misunderstanding (e.g. playing tactician with no cards to discard), or of course if it is solicited advice, then it's not a problem at all. And actually, I am thinking mostly of myself being on the giving - I hardly ever do, because I assume that they know what they are doing, and though it looks strange and wrong to me, I assume that they actually just think it is the right play. Certainly in the case that the OP is giving, I would take the implicit message to be "Your strategy is bad", which is not really a message I am going to send to my opponent unsolicited in a strategy game, except through the play. Indeed, sometimes I'm just the one who's wrong...

Also, I don't at all mind people asking for advice, but I don't like when they feel entitled to it (and get indignant when I, their opponent, refuse to help them whilst competing against them).

But man, it would be pretty great if you actually told me what I did wrong every time we played a game. I think one game like that would teach me more than 20 normal games.

That's why I don't mind being given advice. I don't think I'm entitled to it by any means, but I still like it when someone takes the time and helps me improve.

[2.71828.....]

I generally find it... rude(?) to give advice in a competitive setting such as this, though obviously that doesn't justify any kind of mean-spirited response.

Surprising. I always like it when someone gives me constructive criticism for my play, even during a game.

It depends. If it something that is obviously a mistake, like what appears that it must be a rules misunderstanding (e.g. playing tactician with no cards to discard), or of course if it is solicited advice, then it's not a problem at all. And actually, I am thinking mostly of myself being on the giving - I hardly ever do, because I assume that they know what they are doing, and though it looks strange and wrong to me, I assume that they actually just think it is the right play. Certainly in the case that the OP is giving, I would take the implicit message to be "Your strategy is bad", which is not really a message I am going to send to my opponent unsolicited in a strategy game, except through the play. Indeed, sometimes I'm just the one who's wrong...

Also, I don't at all mind people asking for advice, but I don't like when they feel entitled to it (and get indignant when I, their opponent, refuse to help them whilst competing against them).

Giving advice is one thing.  Babying someone through a game is another.  I agree completely with WW here.  If someone plays KC-tactician, I may mention that his KC is trapped away with the tactician and will not be available for his next turn, but beyond simple rules issues such as that, other advice is appropriate only for a post-game discussion if they choose to stick around and have a friendly discussion about the game

[markusin]

I generally find it... rude(?) to give advice in a competitive setting such as this, though obviously that doesn't justify any kind of mean-spirited response.

Surprising. I always like it when someone gives me constructive criticism for my play, even during a game.

It depends. If it something that is obviously a mistake, like what appears that it must be a rules misunderstanding (e.g. playing tactician with no cards to discard), or of course if it is solicited advice, then it's not a problem at all. And actually, I am thinking mostly of myself being on the giving - I hardly ever do, because I assume that they know what they are doing, and though it looks strange and wrong to me, I assume that they actually just think it is the right play. Certainly in the case that the OP is giving, I would take the implicit message to be "Your strategy is bad", which is not really a message I am going to send to my opponent unsolicited in a strategy game, except through the play. Indeed, sometimes I'm just the one who's wrong...

Also, I don't at all mind people asking for advice, but I don't like when they feel entitled to it (and get indignant when I, their opponent, refuse to help them whilst competing against them).

But man, it would be pretty great if you actually told me what I did wrong every time we played a game. I think one game like that would teach me more than 20 normal games.

That's why I don't mind being given advice. I don't think I'm entitled to it by any means, but I still like it when someone takes the time and helps me improve.

Perhaps this kind of thing is best left to end game discussion and game reports. It's not like your opponent doesn't need time to think about what they are doing and what their mistakes are.

[SCSN]

I have a dozen or so text files saved with advice from opponents who just crushed me. The oldest one is from the 2nd of September 2012, it's quite amusing:

21:13 SheCantSayNo: I just started learning this game a week ago and have been playing it pretty much fulltime (holiday lol)
21:13 SheCantSayNo: you're obv. much better than me
21:13 Max K.: hah.
21:13 SheCantSayNo: would you mind giving some advice?
21:13 Max K.: Not at all.
21:14 SheCantSayNo: cool
21:14 Max K.: I'm guessing the curses are clogging up your hands a bit?
21:14 SheCantSayNo: e.g. why do you buy a Chapel as your first move with three coppers, rather than, say, a silver?
21:14 SheCantSayNo: yeah lol
21:14 Max K.: So -- that'd be my first piece of advice -- if there are curses to be given, make sure you are giving some.
21:15 SheCantSayNo: so when you bought a witch, I should have bought one as well
21:15 SheCantSayNo: makes sense
21:15 Max K.: Honestly, I bought the chapel, I thought you would be cursing me.
21:15 Max K.: I wanted to be able to get rid of curses, coppers, and estates as quickly as possible, so that I could have hands full of silvers, golds, and witches
21:16 Max K.: I did buy the silver with my first $4 hand, I think.
21:16 SheCantSayNo: yeah
21:16 SheCantSayNo: why that one instead of, say, a bureaucrat?
21:17 Max K.: So -- there were no +actions this game.
21:17 Max K.: Well -- no +2 actions, I mean.
21:17 Max K.: I figured I would want to spend most of my terminal actions cursing you with the witch.
21:17 SheCantSayNo: clear
21:18 Max K.: The bureaucrat would have been a decent choice too, since it gives a silver.
21:18 Max K.: I guess the big points here were not to have too many actions, since I could only do one (and spies) each turn.
21:18 Max K.: (Two), to make sure to send over curses.
21:18 Max K.: and (three) to get less useful stuff out of my way.
21:18 SheCantSayNo: thank you!
21:19 Max K.: No problem.
21:19 Max K.: Hope it helps.   Welcome to the game.
21:19 SheCantSayNo: thanks! gg and gl
21:19 Max K.: gg.  u2.

[serakfalcon]

I'll usually wait to give advice after I crushed someone so they realize I'm not babying them.
Generally I like it when people give me advice, but there's been at least once where someone about my skill level told me my strategy was dumb and then resigned blaming shuffle-luck, when my strategy was to mess with their shuffle. So that was weird.
Either way I don't think it justifies being a jerk and trying to get you to quit.

On the other hand, I wholly support rick-rolling people who slow-roll.

[jsh357]

I used to give advice when people weren't ending the game soon enough while ahead, (Many times, I was in a position where I could come back and they could clearly pile the game out but were still going for VP) but I realized it was probably sounding condescending.  I'm a bit backwards in that I only seem to offer advice when I'm losing...  Of course I have stopped playing online, so the situation hasn't come up in a while.  Other than that, I only ever offer advice when people ask for it (which has happened). 

[lespeutere]

Just another (minor) issue to add: for non-native speakers, there's always a chance of sounding impolite, especially when coming from a culture that is known for regarding direct criticism not as impolite but as mostly helpful; of course there are people from that same culture who disagree and of course there are examples from the forums that people from other countries share the former attitude. This may even be the case between US and British players but there is obviously much less of a language barrier.

(I am totally unsure about 'cultural' differences between Switzerland and Germany, though, with regard to direct criticism and such.)

[Davio]

I generally find it... rude(?) to give advice in a competitive setting such as this, though obviously that doesn't justify any kind of mean-spirited response.

Surprising. I always like it when someone gives me constructive criticism for my play, even during a game.

It depends. If it something that is obviously a mistake, like what appears that it must be a rules misunderstanding (e.g. playing tactician with no cards to discard), or of course if it is solicited advice, then it's not a problem at all. And actually, I am thinking mostly of myself being on the giving - I hardly ever do, because I assume that they know what they are doing, and though it looks strange and wrong to me, I assume that they actually just think it is the right play. Certainly in the case that the OP is giving, I would take the implicit message to be "Your strategy is bad", which is not really a message I am going to send to my opponent unsolicited in a strategy game, except through the play. Indeed, sometimes I'm just the one who's wrong...

Also, I don't at all mind people asking for advice, but I don't like when they feel entitled to it (and get indignant when I, their opponent, refuse to help them whilst competing against them).

Giving advice is one thing.  Babying someone through a game is another.  I agree completely with WW here.  If someone plays KC-tactician, I may mention that his KC is trapped away with the tactician and will not be available for his next turn, but beyond simple rules issues such as that, other advice is appropriate only for a post-game discussion if they choose to stick around and have a friendly discussion about the game

It'd be pretty funny for you to mention their KC is trapped when in fact it isn't.

With KC-durations, you only leave the KC out if they're actually still modifying the duration. With Tactician you know during clean-up that you only get one play of it and remove the KC. It would only be confusing to let the KC out and think you can just draw 15 cards!

KC-Outpost is another case; You only discover on your next turn that the KC can't give you more turns so you have to leave it out during the clean-up for your current turn.

[2.71828.....]

I generally find it... rude(?) to give advice in a competitive setting such as this, though obviously that doesn't justify any kind of mean-spirited response.

Surprising. I always like it when someone gives me constructive criticism for my play, even during a game.

It depends. If it something that is obviously a mistake, like what appears that it must be a rules misunderstanding (e.g. playing tactician with no cards to discard), or of course if it is solicited advice, then it's not a problem at all. And actually, I am thinking mostly of myself being on the giving - I hardly ever do, because I assume that they know what they are doing, and though it looks strange and wrong to me, I assume that they actually just think it is the right play. Certainly in the case that the OP is giving, I would take the implicit message to be "Your strategy is bad", which is not really a message I am going to send to my opponent unsolicited in a strategy game, except through the play. Indeed, sometimes I'm just the one who's wrong...

Also, I don't at all mind people asking for advice, but I don't like when they feel entitled to it (and get indignant when I, their opponent, refuse to help them whilst competing against them).

Giving advice is one thing.  Babying someone through a game is another.  I agree completely with WW here.  If someone plays KC-tactician, I may mention that his KC is trapped away with the tactician and will not be available for his next turn, but beyond simple rules issues such as that, other advice is appropriate only for a post-game discussion if they choose to stick around and have a friendly discussion about the game

It'd be pretty funny for you to mention their KC is trapped when in fact it isn't.

With KC-durations, you only leave the KC out if they're actually still modifying the duration. With Tactician you know during clean-up that you only get one play of it and remove the KC. It would only be confusing to let the KC out and think you can just draw 15 cards!

KC-Outpost is another case; You only discover on your next turn that the KC can't give you more turns so you have to leave it out during the clean-up for your current turn.

And there I go displaying my own ignorance.  I was sure I was right.  But I am not.  (I admit, I didn't quite believe you, so I went out and played a bot, and sure enough KC-tactician recycled my KC back into the deck).  So I will change my example to the aforementioned "play bank before all my other treasures" example that markusin brought up

[terminalCopper]

I have a dozen or so text files saved with advice from opponents who just crushed me. The oldest one is from the 2nd of September 2012, it's quite amusing:

21:13 SheCantSayNo: I just started learning this game a week ago and have been playing it pretty much fulltime (holiday lol)
21:13 SheCantSayNo: you're obv. much better than me
21:13 Max K.: hah.
21:13 SheCantSayNo: would you mind giving some advice?
21:13 Max K.: Not at all.
21:14 SheCantSayNo: cool
21:14 Max K.: I'm guessing the curses are clogging up your hands a bit?
21:14 SheCantSayNo: e.g. why do you buy a Chapel as your first move with three coppers, rather than, say, a silver?
21:14 SheCantSayNo: yeah lol
21:14 Max K.: So -- that'd be my first piece of advice -- if there are curses to be given, make sure you are giving some.
21:15 SheCantSayNo: so when you bought a witch, I should have bought one as well
21:15 SheCantSayNo: makes sense
21:15 Max K.: Honestly, I bought the chapel, I thought you would be cursing me.
21:15 Max K.: I wanted to be able to get rid of curses, coppers, and estates as quickly as possible, so that I could have hands full of silvers, golds, and witches
21:16 Max K.: I did buy the silver with my first $4 hand, I think.
21:16 SheCantSayNo: yeah
21:16 SheCantSayNo: why that one instead of, say, a bureaucrat?
21:17 Max K.: So -- there were no +actions this game.
21:17 Max K.: Well -- no +2 actions, I mean.
21:17 Max K.: I figured I would want to spend most of my terminal actions cursing you with the witch.
21:17 SheCantSayNo: clear
21:18 Max K.: The bureaucrat would have been a decent choice too, since it gives a silver.
21:18 Max K.: I guess the big points here were not to have too many actions, since I could only do one (and spies) each turn.
21:18 Max K.: (Two), to make sure to send over curses.
21:18 Max K.: and (three) to get less useful stuff out of my way.
21:18 SheCantSayNo: thank you!
21:19 Max K.: No problem.
21:19 Max K.: Hope it helps.   Welcome to the game.
21:19 SheCantSayNo: thanks! gg and gl
21:19 Max K.: gg.  u2.

You made my day
It reminds me the day when I saw chapel for the first time and thought to myself that it's completely useless in a game without witch ...

[markusin]

I generally find it... rude(?) to give advice in a competitive setting such as this, though obviously that doesn't justify any kind of mean-spirited response.

Surprising. I always like it when someone gives me constructive criticism for my play, even during a game.

It depends. If it something that is obviously a mistake, like what appears that it must be a rules misunderstanding (e.g. playing tactician with no cards to discard), or of course if it is solicited advice, then it's not a problem at all. And actually, I am thinking mostly of myself being on the giving - I hardly ever do, because I assume that they know what they are doing, and though it looks strange and wrong to me, I assume that they actually just think it is the right play. Certainly in the case that the OP is giving, I would take the implicit message to be "Your strategy is bad", which is not really a message I am going to send to my opponent unsolicited in a strategy game, except through the play. Indeed, sometimes I'm just the one who's wrong...

Also, I don't at all mind people asking for advice, but I don't like when they feel entitled to it (and get indignant when I, their opponent, refuse to help them whilst competing against them).

Giving advice is one thing.  Babying someone through a game is another.  I agree completely with WW here.  If someone plays KC-tactician, I may mention that his KC is trapped away with the tactician and will not be available for his next turn, but beyond simple rules issues such as that, other advice is appropriate only for a post-game discussion if they choose to stick around and have a friendly discussion about the game

It'd be pretty funny for you to mention their KC is trapped when in fact it isn't.

With KC-durations, you only leave the KC out if they're actually still modifying the duration. With Tactician you know during clean-up that you only get one play of it and remove the KC. It would only be confusing to let the KC out and think you can just draw 15 cards!

KC-Outpost is another case; You only discover on your next turn that the KC can't give you more turns so you have to leave it out during the clean-up for your current turn.

Are you sure about not having to leave KC out with Tactician? Is that written in an FAQ or something, or at least inferred based on a general rule about KC and durations?

EDIT:2.71828 tested this out and proved that what Davio said is true. I'm still curious about where in the rules is that functionality described.

[GendoIkari]

You have to be very careful giving advice. Now, if you're playing against someone who makes an obvious mistake that implies he may not understand a rule, then correcting that is one thing; it's good sportsmanship to explain the correct rule.

But critiquing someone's strategic or tactic decisions, if they haven't specifically asked, is a fine line. First off, I would probably never do it during the game. It just seems like it can cause more problems that way, though I can't give a good argument for why.

Now, if you win the game, you have to be very careful what you say afterwards. I once played an IRL game against someone I didn't know; he won Tournament first (don't remember what he chose). I won Tournament and chose Princess, as it was a board where we were both making lots of money per turn, but there as no other +buy to be had. The +buy won me the game. Afterwards, I commented that he probably would have won if he'd chosen Princess. My intent was to actually complement his overall play, to say "you're clearly a good player, you practically beat me and basically should have won, except for one little thing you would have." But instead it came across as rubbing it in; he already knew how he'd screwed up, and he didn't need his opponent telling him.

If you lose, you probably have more room to work with. Hard to come off as arrogant when you lost, unless you say you felt it was just luck. But either way, it's all in the phrasing. Saying "you should have...." is pretty much always wrong. But I've had games where I've asked my opponent "why did you do ____? I would have thought that ___ would be stronger here, did I miss something?" And that generally is ok, whether you won or lost. The important thing is to not imply that you know better.

If it IS a situation where you're pretty sure you do know better; that you think that you're a stronger player than your opponent, then you should probably start by asking if they are OK with you giving them some advice before doing so.

[Davio]

If you play or modify a Duration card with another card, that
other card also stays in your play area until it is no longer doing
anything. For example if you play Throne Room on Merchant
Ship, both cards stay in play until the Clean-up phase of your next
turn. The Throne Room stays in play to remind you that you are
getting the effect of Merchant Ship twice on that next turn.

Confusing is the following

Because you must discard at
least one card in order to gain the bonuses from Tactician, it is
not possible to Throne Room a Tactician to get + 10 cards, +2
Buys, and + 2 Actions.

This would make you think that you can't even pick Tact as a TR target, but of course you can.

This is funny: http://boardgamegeek.com/article/4119598#4119598
Donald X. says that with TR-TR-Dur-Dur you should leave both TRs out.
Here he amends it: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/5394670#5394670
And says that with KC-KC-KC-Dur-Dur-Dur you only leave the 2nd and 3rd KC out.
But finally he comes to: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=210.msg14030#msg14030
In which he mentions that only KC's and TR's directly affecting Durations stay out.

Here's the part about Tact: http://boardgamegeek.com/article/5397175#5397175

[2.71828.....]

If you play or modify a Duration card with another card, that
other card also stays in your play area until it is no longer doing
anything. For example if you play Throne Room on Merchant
Ship, both cards stay in play until the Clean-up phase of your next
turn. The Throne Room stays in play to remind you that you are
getting the effect of Merchant Ship twice on that next turn.

Confusing is the following

Because you must discard at
least one card in order to gain the bonuses from Tactician, it is
not possible to Throne Room a Tactician to get + 10 cards, +2
Buys, and + 2 Actions.

This would make you think that you can't even pick Tact as a TR target, but of course you can.

This is funny: http://boardgamegeek.com/article/4119598#4119598
Donald X. says that with TR-TR-Dur-Dur you should leave both TRs out.
Here he amends it: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/5394670#5394670
And says that with KC-KC-KC-Dur-Dur-Dur you only leave the 2nd and 3rd KC out.
But finally he comes to: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=210.msg14030#msg14030
In which he mentions that only KC's and TR's directly affecting Durations stay out.

Here's the part about Tact: http://boardgamegeek.com/article/5397175#5397175

I don't like it. 

When you Throne Room or King's Court a Duration, the Throne Room / King's Court also stays in play until the Duration is cleaned up, to remind (emphasis mine) you that the Duration's next-turn effect needs to happen twice or thrice.

It seems to me that the only reason to keep the KC or TR out with a duration is to "remind" you that you need to multiply the duration effects for your next turn.  Why can't you just put a token or two on the card to "remind" you and reshuffle the KC/TR back in the deck.

You only keep TR and KC in play if they directly played (emphasis mine) a duration card.

It seems to me that TR and KC directly play tactician.  Note that Donald X. does not say "directly affects the duration card on the player's next turn." (I know, I know.  I am being slightly unreasonable here.  But still....) They play it once, discard hand, gain benefit for next turn.  Play it twice, discard hand, no cards left so do not gain benefit.  Play it three times, discard hand, no cards left for no next turn benefit.

I think that people should be "reminded" that they unnecessarily played KC/TR with their tactician even though they don't gain the benefit.  I know that this isn't actually the rule, but to me it just feels like this is the way it should be played.  I know I am directly disagreeing with Donald X., but I still want to make my case

Now from Donald X. here: (scroll up to the previous comment-I just copied Davio's link)

You do not leave out Tactician if it is not actually doing anything on your next turn (and similarly don't leave out a Throne for Tactician).

the argument can be made that the "second and third tacticians" from the KC-tactician should be discarded since they aren't actually doing anything, but that still does not convince me that the KC should be discarded as well.

So again, I don't like it.  I am not saying that it is wrong or that it should be changed (Unless Donald X. comes out and modifies his previous rules clarifications no changes should be made), it just doesn't feel right to me

[jaybeez]

I have a dozen or so text files saved with advice from opponents who just crushed me. The oldest one is from the 2nd of September 2012, it's quite amusing:

21:13 SheCantSayNo: I just started learning this game a week ago and have been playing it pretty much fulltime (holiday lol)
21:13 SheCantSayNo: you're obv. much better than me
21:13 Max K.: hah.
21:13 SheCantSayNo: would you mind giving some advice?
21:13 Max K.: Not at all.
21:14 SheCantSayNo: cool
21:14 Max K.: I'm guessing the curses are clogging up your hands a bit?
21:14 SheCantSayNo: e.g. why do you buy a Chapel as your first move with three coppers, rather than, say, a silver?
21:14 SheCantSayNo: yeah lol
21:14 Max K.: So -- that'd be my first piece of advice -- if there are curses to be given, make sure you are giving some.
21:15 SheCantSayNo: so when you bought a witch, I should have bought one as well
21:15 SheCantSayNo: makes sense
21:15 Max K.: Honestly, I bought the chapel, I thought you would be cursing me.
21:15 Max K.: I wanted to be able to get rid of curses, coppers, and estates as quickly as possible, so that I could have hands full of silvers, golds, and witches
21:16 Max K.: I did buy the silver with my first $4 hand, I think.
21:16 SheCantSayNo: yeah
21:16 SheCantSayNo: why that one instead of, say, a bureaucrat?
21:17 Max K.: So -- there were no +actions this game.
21:17 Max K.: Well -- no +2 actions, I mean.
21:17 Max K.: I figured I would want to spend most of my terminal actions cursing you with the witch.
21:17 SheCantSayNo: clear
21:18 Max K.: The bureaucrat would have been a decent choice too, since it gives a silver.
21:18 Max K.: I guess the big points here were not to have too many actions, since I could only do one (and spies) each turn.
21:18 Max K.: (Two), to make sure to send over curses.
21:18 Max K.: and (three) to get less useful stuff out of my way.
21:18 SheCantSayNo: thank you!
21:19 Max K.: No problem.
21:19 Max K.: Hope it helps.   Welcome to the game.
21:19 SheCantSayNo: thanks! gg and gl
21:19 Max K.: gg.  u2.

Thanks for sharing this.  I'm kind of amazed (and mildly bummed out) that you went from this to where you are in about 14 months, considering how long it's taken me to get where I am in terms of my Dominion game...