Have you explained somewhere what all the different columns mean?
I think this is ok, but it would be nice to record somewhere (like the OP, or the FAQ or the Rules and Regulations post) that if players agree, they may change other things about the match, like total number of games or starting player regulation.
I try (relatively unsuccessfully) to get some Apothecaries. We each get two Mountebanks, and I get some Goons, too. On five he opts for Ventures, which I think in the end is what cost him with all those Coppers flying around, even though he is somehow able to get 6 -- six!! -- Platinums. I opt for a Contraband once I have enough terminal actions. Late I also pick up two Counting Houses. Why two? I can always count on the first one being drawn on a reshuffle. My last turn is Counting House, Contraband (Colonies blocked), then two Provinces for the win. That's right. Counting House-Contraband is a thing now.
Late, I have a big turn and decide to leave 3 provinces in the supply instead of 4. The odds are with me, I think, but it is not to be. Thinking about this later, if I had not Processed my first Haggler earlier in the game, piles might have been low enough for me to empty piles on my last turn.
...due to good counting, Adam extends the match.
Game 1
http://dom.retrobox.eu/?/20130515/log.5085f5130cf270038ff92212.1368664030572.txt
Game 2
http://dom.retrobox.eu/?/20130515/log.5085f5130cf270038ff92212.1368665424236.txt
Game 3
http://dom.retrobox.eu/?/20130515/log.5085f5130cf270038ff92212.1368666395869.txt
Game 4
http://dom.retrobox.eu/?/20130515/log.5085f5130cf270038ff92212.1368668184410.txt
Game 5
http://dom.retrobox.eu/?/20130515/log.5085f5130cf270038ff92212.1368669295903.txt
Mic Q wins 4 to 2 against Rabid
Game 2
http://dom.retrobox.eu/?/20130516/log.51201cbee4b04e88c8da4f9a.1368738698940.txt
Chapel Witch board, early shuffle luck win.
Mic Q wins 4 to 2 against Rabid
Game 2
http://dom.retrobox.eu/?/20130516/log.51201cbee4b04e88c8da4f9a.1368738698940.txt
Chapel Witch board, early shuffle luck win.
was that pure base? but where does the Nobles come from?
really missing the good old days of dominion online now more then ever.You know you can play on Goko too?
graveyardThis is Dominion, not M:tG.
graveyardThis is Dominion, not M:tG.
Can all the people who have one exactly 3 games so far tie please? And those they played against loose? Thank you.
Can all the people who have one exactly 3 games so far tie please? And those they played against loose? Thank you.
Its too late for that, some have already won. And also, I think you would get behind people with 5 points that win on this round, but I cannot say I understand the tie-breakers all that well.
Hi Adam,
I'm sitting sick at home, really missing the good old days of dominion online now more then ever.
So I decided to watch your video and comment on it on a turn by turn basis as I went through the video.
Hope you can appreciate it ;) The last game is missing, sorry to read you lost it.
3: Buying silver here is ok-ish, but I think I'd get a Sage.
14: Here I'd pick up ironworks over festival, but apart from that I agree.
[...]
15: double vineyard and GM yes, but why the Nomad Camp? Ironworks is still unbought but gets you a sage on every activation.
sorry, you just lost this one.
1/2: a coinflip? no way. This is an interesting board where opening buys will be very important.
I think I'd go for Ironmonger-courtyard.
Somehow you play quite fast when you still have a lot of options
From here on I just kept praying you'd at some point realize.
Your chances diminish when you reshuffle and the picture of the nobles on top of your graveyard disappears.
But then you play the final courtyard, hoping to draw two silvers. My only hope for you was you'd draw both nobles, and yes... ;)
congrats.
The last game is missing, sorry to read you lost it.
chatting: 1st player advantage my a$$. You just played better.
His opening is super speculative.
but mirroring does lose for the second player on this board.
but mirroring does lose for the second player on this board.
Mirroring from 2P, assuming I play absolutely perfectly (which if you've watched enough of my videos is a laughable idea) gives you a disadvantage of maybe 60%-40%, whereas doing some high-risk mediocre reward thing (like your Game 4 opening) can only make the situation worse. Is this really what you're saying?
play two golds then contraband
3.)really missing the good old days of dominion online now more then ever.You know you can play on Goko too?
It's the moment you've all been waiting for, the Base set (plus Haven, Hoard, Nobles) match you've been dying to see. We're here to prove that Base (with help) Dominion is a rich game with diverging strategies complex engines. Maybe...Five very good games from both of you and also a very good analysis. I read through the logs and had some comments but you beat me to almost all of them.
I'm a little dubious on whether Council Room is right for my deck, it draws a lot but could have shortened the game too much for me to overcome the VP deficitI'll admit it's close but I'd say the Council Room is not a good plan. You really don't want to help him. In fact, I would have sneaked in 1-2 Spies. Maybe around turn 9, Festival/Spy in stead of village/gold.
Game 3: ... so I try something elsethis one's my favorite. Very good call on going engine here.
Game 6: Although I think the engine player needs to get a Moneylender, and not a MineThat's a very... polite way to say things. Engine should easily beat Gardens here, but not like this. Very un-Rabid like, usually he's very good at boards like these.
QuoteGame 6: Although I think the engine player needs to get a Moneylender, and not a MineThat's a very... polite way to say things. Engine should easily beat Gardens here, but not like this. Very un-Rabid like, usually he's very good at boards like these.
I've been trying to get in touch with SirPeebles for my last match, but he hasn't responded to my PMs :(
I think it would be better to give us 1 weak and start quarterfinals in 1 weak, if you and the 6 people who already qualified aggree.
Sure, I could give up, but why would I give up a good excuse to play some Dominion? With good opponents too!
Geronimoo? Lespeutere? Stealth Tomato? Zauberererererer? I'd hate for people to get bumped out of the finals for not playing the last match...
Edit: Though I'm certain there are people with 3-1-1 records who wouldn't mind.
Geronimoo? Lespeutere? Stealth Tomato? Zauberererererer? I'd hate for people to get bumped out of the finals for not playing the last match...
Edit: Though I'm certain there are people with 3-1-1 records who wouldn't mind.
As one of the potential beneficiaries of the situation (although I actually have 2-3-0), I feel obliged to ask, shouldn't they all receive draws if they could not schedule their match?
BTW, idea for next season, using "number of actually played matches" or similar as tie-breaker to give people less incentive to not play to get a draw.
I think it would be better to give us 1 weak and start quarterfinals in 1 weak, if you and the 6 people who already qualified aggree.
That's really not particularly fair to the people who scheduled their matches. No one in the current top 8 has been involved in a default or missed match.
I'll think on it; something will go in the regs next season for final round problems like this.
I think it would be better to give us 1 weak and start quarterfinals in 1 weak, if you and the 6 people who already qualified aggree.
That's really not particularly fair to the people who scheduled their matches. No one in the current top 8 has been involved in a default or missed match.
I'll think on it; something will go in the regs next season for final round problems like this.
What about giving them two more days, and if they still haven't played their match by then make them ties by default, even if someone had more time during those two days than the other?
25: Yes! that's exactly what I think about develop.
Also about the finals, I'm glad that people who didn't bother to play their round 5 match aren't getting there over people who did. Nice call, Kirian.
so the match against ST I "missed" was not counted then?
Also about the finals, I'm glad that people who didn't bother to play their round 5 match aren't getting there over people who did. Nice call, Kirian.
Actually, there is a tie by default between lespeteure and Stealth Tomate, and both are in the final eight. I think its fair given the posted rules, and I DO NOT suspect anything wrong has been done, but for next season, probably last round should give no draws by default.
The only thing I can add is "snif", but, hey, at least 2 of my drawn matches I could have won if I did not make stupid mistakes (assuming the rival mantained their stupid mistakes in place), so...
Thanks Kirian for the hard job putting this together.
Going into the last round, I could have just been absolutely unavailable all the times my opponent could have played and gotten a draw out of the match. Due to my good tiebreaker score I would have a very good shot at making the finals with that outcome.
I'm not saying that's what anyone here actually did, and there a bunch of info I don't have, but that's a situation where giving people a tie might be unfair.
Going into the last round, I could have just been absolutely unavailable all the times my opponent could have played and gotten a draw out of the match. Due to my good tiebreaker score I would have a very good shot at making the finals with that outcome.
I'm not saying that's what anyone here actually did, and there a bunch of info I don't have, but that's a situation where giving people a tie might be unfair.
Exactly my point, although there was no rule stating that something different than tie by default would be done for the last round, so I don't think its fair to do it after-the-fact. We are not JoaTs.
BTW, idea for next season, using "number of actually played matches" or similar as tie-breaker to give people less incentive to not play to get a draw.
"For scoring purposes, a win, draw, or loss by default still counts as 2, 1, or 0 points. For tie-breaker scores, a win by default counts as 1 point, and a draw or loss by default counts as 0 points."
There already is such a rule... I just never stated it mathematically. I will be certain to do so next season.
kirian, I believe your decision not to give the qualification to anyone from us 4 was right.
BTW, idea for next season, using "number of actually played matches" or similar as tie-breaker to give people less incentive to not play to get a draw.
"For scoring purposes, a win, draw, or loss by default still counts as 2, 1, or 0 points. For tie-breaker scores, a win by default counts as 1 point, and a draw or loss by default counts as 0 points."
There already is such a rule... I just never stated it mathematically. I will be certain to do so next season.
In other words, there is a tiebreaker which was only intended for use in the last round, and therefore was not calculated explicitly in the rankings. All of the players with 7 points and a default are behind those with 7 points and no defaults.
Going into the last round, I could have just been absolutely unavailable all the times my opponent could have played and gotten a draw out of the match. Due to my good tiebreaker score I would have a very good shot at making the finals with that outcome.
I'm not saying that's what anyone here actually did, and there a bunch of info I don't have, but that's a situation where giving people a tie might be unfair.
Exactly my point, although there was no rule stating that something different than tie by default would be done for the last round, so I don't think its fair to do it after-the-fact. We are not JoaTs.
No, but there is a rule about tie-by-default being a technically worse outcome than an actual tie. If we assign lespeutere and Stealth Tomato a tie by default, then both of them have a lower score than someone with 7 points from actual matches. This was not spelled out mathematically, unfortunately; it will be next time.
The difficulty here is one of assigning "blame." Is lespeutere to blame for not playing their match? It would appear not (from his PM to me). Is Stealth Tomato to blame for not playing their match? It would appear not from lespeutere's PM to me... but of course lespeutere sees it differently, and I'll admit it's less clear. It's similarly unclear for the zaubererer-Geronimoo match, based on the post in this thread.
So, do we assign wins by default--that is, blame one or the other player--or ties by default? If we assign the former, then lespeutere and zaubererer go into the playoffs, and Watno and RTT get dropped out. Which is the better player: Someone with a 3-1-0 record, or someone with a (3+/-1)-(0+/-1)-(0+/-1) record?
Basically I had to make a benevolent dictator decision; in this case, I assigned ties by default. This puts all four players below anyone else with 7 points.
I know this will make lespuetere and zaubererer annoyed with me; the other choice, of course, makes Watno and RTT annoyed with me. Thankfully, this tournament is entirely for S&G, and there will be another one soon enough. I hope that those who may be annoyed by this decision will play again next round; there will be a better mathematical decision before-the-fact next time, rather than an ambiguity in the rules.