Why do you feel that being a card game makes this highly unlikely?
As a counterexample, I feel that the amount of people who play Solitaire on the computer greatly surpasses the amount of people who play it IRL.
But if Solitaire wasn't installed by default on everyone's computer, that would likely not be the case. You have to think about, how will people find out about this product, channels of distribution, and what will lead them to adopt it. Unless Goko is planning on doing some intense advertising, (which I highly doubt) in an already crowded market (there are so many online games out there its ridiculous, why should I pay to play Dominion online when I could, I dunno, play Kongregate for free, as an example?) I doubt that people will hear about the online version before hearing about the card game. Also, the card game has the jump on the website in that its been out for a while. Anyways, this is kind of off topic.
Yes, but one could make the argument "Gimme a flat average shouldn't give me something where Prosperity is favored 250%!" Maybe some studly programmer could write an AI that can take a morass of contradictory human desires and figure out what the human *really* wants, but I'm not that good.
Ah, but if the user asked for 5 cards from prosperity (or, 50% prosperity to put it another way), then the user does not want a flat average. Any user input specifying anything should be prioritized beyond anything else you are coding, unless the input is garbage.
(Theoretically, the UI should prevent garbage from being inputted in the first place, but if you have API calls, then it doesn't hurt to include handlers for garbage, so that johnny power user using the API can get still get a result, even if its not exactly what they expected but hey, if they are a power user they are used to getting problems like that and its their fault for over customizing, but joe normal user gets what they expect because they are prevented from getting anything else) I too, am a programmer lol.
Again "5 Prosperity" isn't a "should." We just pick 5 from Prosperity and 5 not, it's not something we leave up to chance.
The Donald has spoken lol
How do you run away with the game with Possession? I'm pretty sure the general dislike of Possession has little to do with it being a run-away game-killer and more to do with it being a I-feel-like-you-stole-my-good-hand card.
Well, considering its the first game or second game (I introduce the game to a lot of people), the early intro of possession makes them think the game is complicated and mean. I actually love possession, here's a fun example of
possession/hoard/KC, I just don't like taking the time to explain it to new people. Also, the one guy that figures out how good it is will dominate over the people that thought it was confusing and avoided it because it scares them and/or they thought it was mean.
(1) The set of 10 cards should have 5 Prosperity.
(2) The set of 10 cards should be "fun".
(3) Each card that isn't already part of the 9 should have an equal chance of getting picked.
Logic should be: Pick 5 prosperity that are fun.
Pick 5 more cards that are fun, taking the 5 prosperity into consideration.
If it is not possible to find 5 more that are fun, pick randomly.
If it's always pulling up Margrave its flawed somehow.
Random should always be the default if the program doesn't know what to do, but if the user has specified anything they are, in a sense saying, "this is what I define to be fun". Another point, if people have limited sets, your generator may 'choke' and not use the full amount of cards they have available right?
I'm thinking though, if implemented maybe your generator should just be an option "Onigame's fun set" without letting people specify further. Maybe allow proportions from sets, I think that would be the number one thing people would want to specify if they specify anything.
(another note, I don't think its a good idea to allow generation of sets through an API call to Goko, that allows clever people to hack the sets by manipulating the call.) I think the issue is, you designed this to be "a" weighted "fun" random generator, something that people could try, for fun, if they wanted. It was implemented as "the" random generator, and now we're asking your generator to do things that it wasn't designed to do, but that "the" random generator should have, aka, being able to pull directly from sets in pre-specified amounts, weigh towards different strategies etc.
I really like the concept of there being a randomizer that evaulates sets based on potential strategies and then tries to balance those strategies on the board.
If I can get some free time I may think about coding that. I code for enterprise solution stuff so my java is really rusty.
