1
Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Bot freeze on Scepter play
« on: October 22, 2023, 02:22:44 pm »
Lord Rattington played a Scepter then just stopped. Game #132472959. Anyone else seen this
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Filter to certain boards:
Pages: [1]
Pages: [1]
2
Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Inability to report/block disconnected players from wash-up screen
« on: September 30, 2023, 08:43:10 am »
I recently returned to dominion online after several years away. As well as a lot of new cards (and some sadly departed ones - plus a lot of not so sadly departed to be honest) and changes to the interface that in the main seem positive, though in some cases a lot to get used to, I've noticed one thing that's extremely annoying: A huge increase in the amount of malicious disconnection.
In the week or two I've been back, I've already completely lost count of the number of games where, having pulled off one particularly good turn or otherwise got into a position where I'm pretty safely ahead, for instance when the point gap is bigger than the remaining VP, I've just seen my opponent disconnect (sometimes with a derisory/abusive chat message), and had to wait out the force-resign timer. I'd say about 1/4 people whom I beat are beaten by this force-resign method at the moment.
This is, to say the least, really annoying. There's clearly no way to prevent it, and it used to happen very occasionally, but now it seems like near-standard behaviour for a lot of players, and it must be horrendously distorting the ratings because not everyone will sit there and wait to force a resignation (which I'd guess is why they do it). I was trying to work out why this might have increased so much over time, and then I suddenly remembered that you can block and/or report players, and that this was what I used to do.
So, I tried to do that after my most recent irritating force-resign situation (big Bridge Troll turn got me to an unassailable position on a board with no alt-VP to speak of), and realised I couldn't block or report them from the wash-up screen anymore. This is because, once they've disconnected, they seem to show up on the wash-up as "empty slot". In order to block the player, I had to manually go into my blocklist after copying the name from the log. I couldn't find any way to report them.
This increased friction in blocking players who are doing this, and seeming inability to report them, strikes me as a good explanation for why this behaviour seems so much more common now. It's bad enough I'm considering not really bothering learning all the new cards since I last played and continuing to play, because for every 30m or so spent actually playing there's a good 5-10m spent waiting out force-resign timers right now, and it's just irritating and dissatisfying.
So, am I right about this? Is there actually a way to block and/or report I'm just being too blind to see? If so, what *is* causing this situation? Have I just been tremendously unlucky? Am I working my rating back up after a long time away and just playing against a segment of the player pool that was always much more open to cheating, and really it's always been this way?
In the week or two I've been back, I've already completely lost count of the number of games where, having pulled off one particularly good turn or otherwise got into a position where I'm pretty safely ahead, for instance when the point gap is bigger than the remaining VP, I've just seen my opponent disconnect (sometimes with a derisory/abusive chat message), and had to wait out the force-resign timer. I'd say about 1/4 people whom I beat are beaten by this force-resign method at the moment.
This is, to say the least, really annoying. There's clearly no way to prevent it, and it used to happen very occasionally, but now it seems like near-standard behaviour for a lot of players, and it must be horrendously distorting the ratings because not everyone will sit there and wait to force a resignation (which I'd guess is why they do it). I was trying to work out why this might have increased so much over time, and then I suddenly remembered that you can block and/or report players, and that this was what I used to do.
So, I tried to do that after my most recent irritating force-resign situation (big Bridge Troll turn got me to an unassailable position on a board with no alt-VP to speak of), and realised I couldn't block or report them from the wash-up screen anymore. This is because, once they've disconnected, they seem to show up on the wash-up as "empty slot". In order to block the player, I had to manually go into my blocklist after copying the name from the log. I couldn't find any way to report them.
This increased friction in blocking players who are doing this, and seeming inability to report them, strikes me as a good explanation for why this behaviour seems so much more common now. It's bad enough I'm considering not really bothering learning all the new cards since I last played and continuing to play, because for every 30m or so spent actually playing there's a good 5-10m spent waiting out force-resign timers right now, and it's just irritating and dissatisfying.
So, am I right about this? Is there actually a way to block and/or report I'm just being too blind to see? If so, what *is* causing this situation? Have I just been tremendously unlucky? Am I working my rating back up after a long time away and just playing against a segment of the player pool that was always much more open to cheating, and really it's always been this way?
3
Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Cannot reliably get Rennaisance Previews
« on: September 28, 2018, 06:46:18 am »
So I've been happily playing Rennaisance Previews games all week.
However, today (Preview day #5), I've searched for Preview games four times (2P, Wait for Expansions) and three of the four matches have been games with no Rennaisance cards. These games are unrated like the Preview games would be, and so as I really wanted to play Previews, and didn't have much time, I explained the problem I was having in chat and then resigned. To make things worse, the one game I matched that did have Rennaisance cards started with my opponent randomly abusing me in the chat then resigning, which was baffling. I don't want to keep searching for Rennaisance Previews only to keep getting games with no Rennaisance cards. Is anyone else having this problem?
However, today (Preview day #5), I've searched for Preview games four times (2P, Wait for Expansions) and three of the four matches have been games with no Rennaisance cards. These games are unrated like the Preview games would be, and so as I really wanted to play Previews, and didn't have much time, I explained the problem I was having in chat and then resigned. To make things worse, the one game I matched that did have Rennaisance cards started with my opponent randomly abusing me in the chat then resigning, which was baffling. I don't want to keep searching for Rennaisance Previews only to keep getting games with no Rennaisance cards. Is anyone else having this problem?
4
Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Possible Scheme/Archive Bug
« on: July 25, 2018, 12:54:28 pm »
It's my understanding that I should be able to Scheme an Archive if that Archive is going to be discareded in the clean-up in which I'm resolving the Scheme. In this particular game, I have two Archives in play, one of which was being discarded that turn, and one of which wasn't. They appeared stacked on the interface so, for Scheme selection, I couldn't select which Archive to Scheme. I went for it, hoping it would work it out, but it didn't, and I had to undo and Scheme something else. I really wanted to Scheme an Archive, and believe the rules allowed me to do so, but the interface didn't. Am I right about this? Game #16705918, end of turn 13.
5
Dominion General Discussion / Banning 5 Cards
« on: August 26, 2017, 11:17:13 am »
Donald X recently said he'd appreciate a system where each player can ban up to 5 kingdom cards and still play rated games where the union of the two sets of banned card is banned.
1 - Is this a good idea?
2- What would you ban?
I think it's probably a good idea, and I'd ban the following:
Rebuild
Governor
King's Court
Embassy
Tournament
1 - Is this a good idea?
2- What would you ban?
I think it's probably a good idea, and I'd ban the following:
Rebuild
Governor
King's Court
Embassy
Tournament
6
Rules Questions / Replace/Trader
« on: April 07, 2017, 01:02:18 pm »
So I was playing online the other day and played a replace with a trader in my hand. I trashed a copper to gain an estate, then used trader to gain a silver instead. My opponent still got a curse (though they trashed it with watchtower so it made very little actual difference to the game) and I can't remember if the silver was topdecked.
According to my interpretation of the famous "Blue Dog Rule" (and my interpretation is probably what's at fault here), this is wrong.
AFAIK, the BDR was formulated for Ironworks/Trader, and the upshot there is that, if you gain, say, and action, with Ironworks but use Trader to switch it to a silver, then you get neither +1 action nor +$1, because the Ironworks didn't actually gain you anything, instead Trader gained you silver. So, my reasoning for Replace is the same: Replace tried to gain me an Estate (thus triggering a cursing) but failed, and Trader gained me a silver instead. Since it was Trader, not Replace, that gained me that silver, then it shouldn't even go on top of my deck.
But the coding on ShuffleIT clearly disagrees with me here, so can somebody tell me why?
According to my interpretation of the famous "Blue Dog Rule" (and my interpretation is probably what's at fault here), this is wrong.
AFAIK, the BDR was formulated for Ironworks/Trader, and the upshot there is that, if you gain, say, and action, with Ironworks but use Trader to switch it to a silver, then you get neither +1 action nor +$1, because the Ironworks didn't actually gain you anything, instead Trader gained you silver. So, my reasoning for Replace is the same: Replace tried to gain me an Estate (thus triggering a cursing) but failed, and Trader gained me a silver instead. Since it was Trader, not Replace, that gained me that silver, then it shouldn't even go on top of my deck.
But the coding on ShuffleIT clearly disagrees with me here, so can somebody tell me why?
7
Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / A user report feature?
« on: January 10, 2017, 08:46:56 am »
Hi
Anyone know if there's a user report feature? For the first time on the new client today I had someone slow-play me (wait the maximum wait time between each click of a button in order to attempt to bore me into resigning) when they were too far behind to have a reasonable chance of winning. It happened to me twice on MF and there was somewhere you could go (though I don't remember where now because it was ages) to report abusive play. Is there anywhere I can do that on ShuffleIT, or there a plan for there to be such a place in future?
The account name is "Fat and Furious". Kick that asshole from your tables unless you want to be staring at a screen for half an hour doing nothing while they play 1 card per minute. Eventually they either got bored or messed up and waited too long because I was able to force resign but still, it was a waste of some considerable time.
Anyone know if there's a user report feature? For the first time on the new client today I had someone slow-play me (wait the maximum wait time between each click of a button in order to attempt to bore me into resigning) when they were too far behind to have a reasonable chance of winning. It happened to me twice on MF and there was somewhere you could go (though I don't remember where now because it was ages) to report abusive play. Is there anywhere I can do that on ShuffleIT, or there a plan for there to be such a place in future?
The account name is "Fat and Furious". Kick that asshole from your tables unless you want to be staring at a screen for half an hour doing nothing while they play 1 card per minute. Eventually they either got bored or messed up and waited too long because I was able to force resign but still, it was a waste of some considerable time.
Pages: [1]