Ok, read the whole topic.
It seems that you've constructed these imaginary rules that restrict your play and ability to win, and you expect other people to be bind by the same rules. It doesn't work like that. People, especially on-line, cannot know what you expect of the game and what do you find "fair". Even if they did, why would they care? They play to win not to make you feel good.
Moreover, the game doesn't care how you won. It doesn't give points for style or elegancy or fairness or whatever. You win the same whether you bought the last province on turn 32 in a slog or you emptied the whole supply turn 4.
Most importantly, where do you draw the line?
First, how do you define "no piledriving early"? How early is too early? No provinces bought? one province? two? Than, if that is not fair, why is opening Mountebank/Chapel or Mint/Fool's Gold on 5/2 opening fair? Isn't that exploiting luck too? How about drawing your Treasure maps both on turn 5? If you play them, is that exploiting the luck too? You may say it's not, and MIGHT think it is. Now, what makes you right and not me? I might feel it's very unfair and that you are exploiting your luck. Same goes to your little 'rule'. It is impossible to make adopt one universal rule of subjective "fairness". If it is in the rules, it's fair. Making subjective, superfluous rules will make playing the game impossible if everybody is playing what they theselves feel "fair", and expect everybody else to obey. You'll end up with game where nobody is allowed to buy a village along with 2 torturers cause double torturer chain is unfair, unfun and doesn't let the other person play out their deck.
How early is too early? No provinces bought is too early IMO unless its a slog
This is entirely capricious and selective. Define "a slog". Also, why is it different? What if it's a colony game? Rushing out a bunch of Silk Roads or gardens isn't okay? etc.
There is a difference between exploiting luck with cards and exploiting luck by ending the game on your first big lucky draw, thus denying anyone the opportunity to have such a turn.
How? I completely don't understand what the difference is. You've had a mega-turn that you somehow mythically weren't allowed to actually do what you wanted on, so now I can? You realize that the situation is basically now flipped, as the first guy didn't really have a chance to mega-turn, since he's artificially prevented from doing so.
Let me offer an analogy.
Great! I love analogies (as you can tell above).
Let's say you play poker with some friends for money. In the FIRST or second game you made some good decisions but you also had extraordinary luck, and you just won 100$ from the other poker players. Immediately after the game you say "Alright guys, I think I'm going to call it a night, see ya later!
This is considered bad form by poker players.
I've never known anyone who considers this bad form. On the other hand, I don't know anybody (personally) who's rich enough (stupid enough?) to be willing to bet $100 on a single hand of poker, particularly in a cash game. Certainly if I go to the casino and rip a good hand on the first go (poker, blackjack, slots... doesn't matter), they don't care if I quit at that point.
Now, if I played a cash game of poker with my friends, and I quite after the first hand, it would be weird. You wouldn't do it. But the thing here is, the reason you're playing poker is to have fun, and it feels weird to quit so fast. So LF is right here, you just play the next game.
exploiting your luck using the mechanics of the cards isn't as annoying as exploiting your luck and taking advantage of the fact that you can choose to end the game at a point which is self-serving and deny other players a reprisal.
What? This doesn't make sense. How are the mechanics of the cards different than the mechanics of the game? I don't even understand which is which. Of course you're doing self-serving - it's a competitive game and you're trying to win. Ending the game while you're ahead is the ENTIRE POINT. Doing it on provinces is no different from doing it on piles in this respect. You always deny other players a reprisal. I really really don't understand what the basis for any of this differences you see is, other than you were unhappy that it happened to you.
Of course feel free to play with whatever house rules you want. I think they make the game worse, but be my guest. Just don't get upset at other people when they play by the published rules.