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

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.

1

Other Games / Re: Tears of the Kingdom

« on: Today at 07:54:24 am »

My playing of this game so far has been heavily influenced by my four-year-old, who gets to watch for 15 minutes before bed if she gets ready quickly enough. So I've done all of the towers and Dragon's tears since she loves those, but only the Wind Temple and not much of the Depths since it's too scary for her.

Overall I think it's great and a lot of fun, but I don't think it's touching BotW in terms of sheer awe-factor. I'm sure there are some people out there who are playing TotK without having played BotW and it would be really interesting to know how differently the game plays for them. But like, for the most part, I've been here before. It's just about seeing what's different this time around, so I feel motivated to check out the places where I expect a lot of new stuff happening (towns, stables, the sky islands, the depths), but I'm not feeling a real drive to scour every corner of the map to see what's there any more. I think the criticisms from before release that the game was going to be nothing more than $70 DLC are unfair, since there really is a ton going on in terms of story, side quests, etc., but it feels maybe more like BotW 1.5.

I don't play many video games outside the Zelda series--are there other examples of a sequel that's structured as a new story taking place in literally the same map as a previous entry in the series like this?

2

Forum Games / Re: Apparently this is where people talk when it's night

« on: May 25, 2023, 11:03:08 pm »

I was bored at looking through some of the older mafia games, which took place 10 years ago! Doesn't seem like it's been that long.

Good times

3

Forum Games / Re: Apparently this is where people talk when it's night

« on: February 04, 2023, 12:50:54 pm »

Is this forum dead now? I was just thinking I might actually have time to sign up for a game in a few months, but it seems, uh, there may not be any.

4

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Hinterlands Second Edition "leaked"

« on: June 08, 2022, 09:07:26 am »

I'm wondering why Dark Ages needs a second edition. That feels like a solid set with almost no duds. I'm struggling to think of a single card in the set that feels like it needs replacing actually, despite it being a very large set.

I agree that the set is very solid but there are two outliers: Rebuild and Cultist are ridiculously overpowered.

Urchin is also OP - a very stupid and unfun card, if you ask me. And does anyone actually like the Knights?

knights are great!

re: cornucopia i think tournament could use a nerfing

Re: Knights, I think this discussion is devolving into a kind of self-parody in which practically every card is deemed obviously problematic and worthy of removal.

5

General Discussion / Re: Maths thread.

« on: June 08, 2022, 09:03:59 am »

Interesting post possibly addressing some of the year-old discussion from above. Puts some of the ubiquitous informal notation from analysis/complexity theory on more rigorous footing via "partially specified objects."

https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2022/05/10/partially-specified-mathematical-objects-ambient-parameters-and-asymptotic-notation/

6

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Hinterlands Second Edition "leaked"

« on: June 05, 2022, 10:17:28 pm »

What on earth is the argument for getting rid of Develop?

7

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Seaside and Prospeirity 2nd Editions

« on: June 01, 2022, 05:53:46 pm »

Nothing is stopping you from using those cards in your own games, whether that's paper/irl, the TGG client, or the ShuffleIT client.

Coppersmith is on ShuffleIT?

8

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Prosperity 2E Preview 3

« on: June 01, 2022, 11:05:51 am »

All the new while in play and when gain changes are good, especially for Quarry and Mint, though I don't totally get the Hoard one--is there a reason this can't just be on-gain?

Utterly OP with Hunting Grounds and Sprawling Castle.

Isn’t it generally a bad idea to throw 8 stop cards into your deck all at once?

Well keep in mind when you trash the Hunting Grounds you free up a terminal slot.

9

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Prosperity 2E Preview 3

« on: June 01, 2022, 10:57:01 am »

All the new while in play and when gain changes are good, especially for Quarry and Mint, though I don't totally get the Hoard one--is there a reason this can't just be on-gain?

Utterly OP with Hunting Grounds and Sprawling Castle.

10

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Prosperity 2E Preview 2

« on: May 31, 2022, 12:06:53 pm »

I'm a bit disappointed that the card that secretly has Junk Dealer's stats is now at the same price point as Junk Dealer.

Crystal Ball can’t trash any junk that’s in your hand already though.

It's different in all the ways that it's different.

11

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Seaside 2E Preview 3

« on: May 18, 2022, 10:47:34 am »

Gotta say, getting rid of Ambassador is a real bummer, especially since the replacement doesn't preserve any remnants of its effect. If people really hate attacks they don't have to play with them.

12

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Prosperity 2E

« on: May 05, 2022, 12:17:50 am »

nine new types of Kingdom cards

seems like a lot of new types

13

Introductions / 10 years

« on: March 11, 2022, 10:05:45 am »

Just realized I forgot to do one of these when I joined. Sup.

14

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Allies is online

« on: March 09, 2022, 11:22:58 am »

For some reason I really like the "Repeat as desired" wording on Desert Guides. Trying to imagine when else that phrase could possibly be used.

15

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Allies Preview 5: More Cards

« on: March 04, 2022, 09:46:11 am »

The artwork for Gang of Pickpockets is…interesting.

Our Gang of Pickpockets

16

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Allies Preview 4: Recursion

« on: March 03, 2022, 10:30:40 am »

Just played a game with Wizards. They're fun, but it seems quite problematic that Student is a trasher that you can lock other players out of getting once you have it. If there is no other trashing, it's basically a mandatory opener, even on 5/2.

Not locked out; they can always just buy their way through the pile ;-)

17

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Semi-Interesting Dominion Moments Thread

« on: February 16, 2022, 10:15:28 am »

One of those extremely dumb games against Lord Rattington where I'm messing around trying to make something vaguely interesting happen and realize I'm actually losing badly to straight BM. But then manage to turn it around like a barge after 33 turns for the win.

Cuzz:
6 Golds, 5 Estates, 6 Duchies, 2 Provinces, a Steward, Dame Anna, Dame Josephine, Dame Natalie, Sir Bailey, Sir Destry, Sir Martin, Sir Michael, Sir Vander, 3 Soothsayers, 9 Hirelings, 6 Werewolves, 10 Border Guards, 10 Patrons and 8 Hunting Lodges

Lord Rattington:
5 Curses, 5 Coppers, 6 Estates and 6 Provinces

I'm counting 37 points for both of you. Did Lord Rattingdon end the game? Seems unlikely given the state of his deck and the Provice pile being empty. Were you just so happy with the tie that you mistook it for a win or am I missing something?

Miserable

18

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Semi-Interesting Dominion Moments Thread

« on: February 15, 2022, 10:33:17 pm »

One of those extremely dumb games against Lord Rattington where I'm messing around trying to make something vaguely interesting happen and realize I'm actually losing badly to straight BM. But then manage to turn it around like a barge after 33 turns for the win.

Cuzz:
6 Golds, 5 Estates, 6 Duchies, 2 Provinces, a Steward, Dame Anna, Dame Josephine, Dame Natalie, Sir Bailey, Sir Destry, Sir Martin, Sir Michael, Sir Vander, 3 Soothsayers, 9 Hirelings, 6 Werewolves, 10 Border Guards, 10 Patrons and 8 Hunting Lodges

Lord Rattington:
5 Curses, 5 Coppers, 6 Estates and 6 Provinces

19

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Seaside 2E Announced

« on: January 28, 2022, 04:33:53 pm »

Navigator is weak powerwise and sifting isn’t something that other cards don’t do.

Trash at the risk of blowing up good stuff isn’t something any other card does (well, Junk Dealer and Upgrade technically do but then you are actively gambling, having no junk in hand and only hoping to draw into junk) so Lookout is unique to some degree.

Coppersmith also did something no other card does 

20

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.

« on: January 27, 2022, 02:42:00 pm »

Is there a place where I can read your opinions on electoral reforms? I watched the youtube video and I'd love to hear/read more!

There is a place here where I crossposted a speech about my best voting reform. http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=14544.msg655961#msg655961

This does seem really interesting. I think the one issue I notice is that in places without mandatory voting, you'll have very different election turnouts in different districts. A candidate who is a huge polling frontrunner in one district, for example, might suppress turnout for their whole election, and therefore have reduced power in the legislature. In another district, a close race between two candidates could inflate turnout and give both "winners" more voting power than the candidate in the first district, despite being less popular. The dynamics that result in total number of votes for a candidate are not necessarily comparable between representatives who didn't run directly against each other. It reminds me a little of why looking at total VP across multiple games is a bad tiebreaker in Dominion tournaments.

On the other hand, you might expect voter behavior to change based on a widespread understanding of how the new system works, and so maybe turnout would be pretty high overall.

21

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Best Uninteresting Moments in Dominion

« on: October 03, 2021, 03:24:15 pm »

C plays a Mastermind.
C draws 5 Coppers.

22

General Discussion / Re: Maths thread.

« on: September 01, 2021, 12:18:17 pm »

Some good math tweets:

https://twitter.com/ImogenBits/status/1428056037815431172?s=20

https://twitter.com/RadishHarmers/status/1427822902179770368?s=20

23

Dominion Articles / Re: Dominion is getting worse with each expansion

« on: August 18, 2021, 02:10:46 pm »

Speaking as an old person, Dominion is more fun now than it was a decade ago, although it's less addictive.

By remarkable coincidence, Dominion suddenly became less addictive exactly around the birth of my first child.

Mafia remained exactly the same amount of addictive which is why I can never play it again.

24

Dominion Articles / Re: Dominion is getting worse with each expansion

« on: August 18, 2021, 10:51:48 am »

Speaking as an old person, Dominion is more fun now than it was a decade ago, although it's less addictive.

By remarkable coincidence, Dominion suddenly became less addictive exactly around the birth of my first child.

25

Dominion Articles / Re: Dominion is getting worse with each expansion

« on: August 12, 2021, 04:22:05 pm »

There is no such thing as a "bad" kingdom, and in fact:

Theorem: All kingdoms are interesting.

Proof:

Suppose there exists an uninteresting kingdom.
Order the countably many kingdoms by the minimal number of decisions it takes to empty the supply in a two player game with perfect shuffle luck.
There then exists at least one minimal uninteresting kingdom with respect to this ordering.
But this property makes these kingdoms interesting.
This is a contradiction.

I see what you did there https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interesting_number_paradox

But the reasoning doesn't quite work in this case, as there are plenty of kingdoms in which it is impossible to ever empty the supply - specifically, in any kingdom without +buy and without gainers, the 3-pile rule ends the game long before you could empty the supply. Your argument only proves that any kingdom in which you can empty the supply is interesting - but if the uninteresting kingdoms are a subset of the kingdoms in which you cannot empty the supply, there is no ordering and no "minimal number" exists ...

Just ignore the 3 pile rule to make it well-defined.

There is no such thing as a "bad" kingdom, and in fact:

Theorem: All kingdoms are interesting.

Proof:

Suppose there exists an uninteresting kingdom.
Order the countably many kingdoms by the minimal number of decisions it takes to empty the supply in a two player game with perfect shuffle luck.
There then exists at least one minimal uninteresting kingdom with respect to this ordering.
But this property makes these kingdoms interesting.
This is a contradiction.

I see what you did there https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interesting_number_paradox

But the reasoning doesn't quite work in this case, as there are plenty of kingdoms in which it is impossible to ever empty the supply - specifically, in any kingdom without +buy and without gainers, the 3-pile rule ends the game long before you could empty the supply. Your argument only proves that any kingdom in which you can empty the supply is interesting - but if the uninteresting kingdoms are a subset of the kingdoms in which you cannot empty the supply, there is no ordering and no "minimal number" exists ...

It also fails on another level. The set of "minimal uninteresting kingdoms" could be very large; indeed, it is possible that the number of decisions is exactly the same for each uninteresting kingdom. Then being minimal with respect to the ordering gives no additional information, and hence no justification for making the kingdoms interesting.

The interesting number paradox sort of requires a unique minimal element, and that is not given here.

I don't think it's required. I'm claiming that the minimality property makes all such kingdoms interesting. Generically there will be some moderate number of minimal kingdoms and it will be fair to call these interesting, and on the other hand special cases like you mention where e.g. the number of decisions is exactly the same for each uninteresting kingdom are even more interesting.