To the great annoyance to those of us with a little OCD, Catacombs, Cultist, Feodum, Fortress, Squire and Overgrown Estate read "When you trash this", while Hunting Grounds, Rats and Sir Vander read "When this is trashed". It'd be nice if Guilds gave a reason for this seemingly unnecessary difference in wording.?
I don't think either turns or points is a good way to do stars because the value and achievement on both is entirely board dependent, and creating a formula that takes into account all the cards and combos of cards to determine what constitutes a 2* or 3* performance would be nearly impossible.Well the formula gives you an estimate, and then after a bunch of people have played it, you can tweak it based on how much they actually scored (I guess without changing scores for people who played already, since people wouldn't like losing stars this way). Currently I don't think they factor anything in, although I'm not sure.
Therefore what I would suggest would be a bespoke system of achievement for each individual level. On some levels it would be turn based, on others it would be points based, on others it could be winning while buying a certain number of a certain card. You could even have really quirky stuff for getting 3 stars on some levels like "win without buying a silver" on a predominantly BM board. While it will be a slight PITA going through all the levels and finding a suitable challenge, it would make the adventure mode a lot more fun and a lot more replayable as a result.I was initially fond of my suggestion that two stars be "didn't buy silver/gold" and three be not buying some particular other card. Then I realized that I personally would just never buy the indicated card - why beat this level twice when I can beat it once? It wouldn't be creating a new challenge so much as it would be only playing with nine cards. And of course you'd have to indicate the card, not doing so would suck.
When you trash Rats, X is still in limbo, being looked at, and isn't in your deck. So, you draw the next card in your deck, and then discard X.This is correct.
This seems like a really good opportunity to link a blog post that may or may not have been written by a regular poster in these forums.For a few of my games flavor comes first. I started with flavor and then worked out the rest of it. For most of my games flavor comes second - mechanics, flavor, data. The mechanic is the good idea that the rest of the game is hung on; I pick flavor to fit the mechanics, then pick data to fit the flavor. For Dominion, flavor comes third - data, mechanics, flavor.
http://theanalyticalcouchpotato.org/wp/return-to-ravnica-and-the-marriage-of-mechanics-and-flavor/
I just wish it mentioned Lighthouse specifically, since Lighthouse has that "while this card is in play" clause.Lighthouse will not be in play and so you won't get that benefit.
Is this directed at Ozle - or all of us (plural you)? Ozle's far from someone who needs to be called names on the forum.Annie says it to Alvy. We were quoting movies or something; hey there you are quoting a quote about people not getting that. Ozle is like the best poster.
I always felt that this system should be applied to those Judges who ruled that Poker is a game of Luck rather than skill.There is no dichotomy there. Poker is high luck high skill (and so is Dominion).
Pit said judge against a table full of pro's and play lots of games, see how that luck pans out for them
Sometimes I forget how anal everyone here is (including me! haha), its a joke that enabled me to quote scarface, that was all that needed to be taken away from that post!"Anal" is a polite word for what you are.
But you don't get, say, more of those VP thingies (to buy promos) after a campaign's final if you've gained more stars beforehand, do you?These aren't the stars you're looking for. Stars? You don't need no stinking stars. The stars! They do nothing!
What's the point of those stars anyway? Do you have an actual benefit from them, is it just for fame and glory (i.e. affects some ranking), or is it merely for your personal wellbeing (i.e. affects nothing, but makes you feel like a superstar because you've gained the maximum stars possible)?Fame and glory I think.
Just started playing Adventure Mode to check it out before my beta access goes away. It was fun for awhile, but now that I'm getting into "triple silver+double duchy versus triple curse" territory, I want to punch a baby. This isn't dominion, this is nonsense. The board cards are totally irrelevant; the AI can click buttons at random and win. And it's making me lose all the appreciation for base-set-only-play that I had acquired from reading the wonderful Gerimoo article.Again this is all being fixed, but I don't know when.
Donald, do you get a cut from the Online sales? I hope so all this effort you are putting in!Thanks, I'm there for you guys. I do get a cut. Early on I would remind myself of this when I was putting in hours making lists of 10 cards. Eventually I realized, yes but if this were a job offer I would turn it down. It's just, here's this stuff that could be better, hey I could do this work myself. There is still a bunch to do.
Oh, well in that case awesome. Does it always give you a 5/2, or did I just get lucky?You just got lucky. They've talked about providing the option to rig starting hands for campaign levels, but haven't done it and I don't think it's worth doing.
Maybe isotropic is a bit off in its implementation then?Yes. There should be no chance to reveal Watchtower prior to actually gaining Nomad Camp; it will already be on your deck when you reveal Watchtower.
The 5th part of the Dark Ages adventure mode.It's supposed to be a cute thing that was easy to do; it's not intended as a handicap.
I think having 3 hovels instead of the standard array of shelters is supposed to be a handicap (no free village). But, on a 5/2, having 3 Hovels is awesome! You can trash them all by buying one Estate. It seems like maybe someone didn't quite think that one through.
With Nomad Camp, doesn't it move itself as an on-gain effect? Since it reads: "When you gain this, put it on top of your deck." I thought that was the point you were making in your previous post.No, it never visits the discard pile, it goes straight to the top of your deck.
Interesting, and isotropic implements it like this. If you buy a Nomad Camp with a Watchtower in hand, it asks which effect to resolve. If you choose to put the Nomad Camp on your deck, you no longer have the option to reveal Watchtower (although you maybe should be allowed to reveal it, I assume it would do nothing since it has lost track of the Nomad Camp, right?).Actually Watchtower can find cards that were gained directly to other locations, just not ones that were gained to a certain location and then moved.
But - I don't expect this to be used - because it discourages zapping.I don't imagine they will make the system flat-out discourage zap use, although I wouldn't rule it out, they might if it sounded good enough. But I think they have come around to my argument that they are not going to make money from zaps and should stop trying in favor of making the campaigns fun; the dominion coins product will be campaigns themselves rather than zaps.
This implies that the when someone tries to trash a Fortress, the Fortress visits the trash before being returned to hand. It also implies that a card that is trashed on a Possession turn visits the trash before being set aside.This just comes down to what that text on Possession would say if it were longer. It's not longer because, too many words. Would it say "when one of their cards would be trashed, instead..." or would it say "when one of their cards is trashed, ..." And my answer has to fit the actual text and FAQ as well as possible.
This doesn't seem consistent with other rules (e.g. anything that modifies where a card is gained) that generally say that the card whose destination is changed does not visit the location it would otherwise have gone before going to its new destination. I would instead have expected the last line
Any tips on what strategy I should try to beat her?Wait until this level is both different and easier. I don't know how long that will take but it will happen. Which is to say, I made new levels for the base set campaigns and they will replace the existing ones at some point.
Thanks. I considered the whole "you choose the order" thing, but thought that it didn't makes sense. Turns out I was wrong.The real ruling was inside you all along.
What happens when you trash a Fortress on a Possession turn? Possession wants to set Fortress aside, but Fortress wants to be put into your hand. Which one takes priority?When you need to do two things at the same time, you choose an order to do them in. If you are being possessed, then the possessing player makes decisions for you, so they decide.
I guess this might be important: in the text of Possession, what does "are trashed" mean?It means "when one of that player's cards is trashed, blah blah blah." It's timed the same as the various Dark Ages cards.
When are the trashed cards set aside?Directly after being trashed, provided nothing else happens first (such as a when-trashed trigger that the possessing player decides to resolve first).
I'm again just confirming behavior for the Goko Beta. When you play a procession on an island I'm assuming that the island is set aside on the mat and is therefore not trashed by the procession. This would come under the lose track rule. However there's nothing specific to say that the procession can't trash a card that is on the island mat.Procession can't trash the card it played unless it's still in play.
Goko currently trashes the island.
