Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

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.

Messages - Tables

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 319
51
General Discussion / Re: Random Stuff Part IV
« on: October 05, 2019, 06:08:57 pm »
Experiment: Can I post here to make the Verification thing go away?

People do it all the time.

By which I mean, like, you're maybe the 5th in the several years these random stuff threads have been up. All the time.

52
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« on: September 24, 2019, 04:43:11 pm »
oops, left off the +$2 on Embargo.


Don't worry, we've all forgotten about Embargo's +$2 at one point or another...

53
Other Games / Re: Pandemic Legacy (probably will have spoilers)
« on: September 16, 2019, 05:42:39 pm »
Today my partner and I finished Season 1. Yes, we played after season 2. Here are some of our thoughts and results. Major gameplay and plot spoilers for both seasons - you have been warned:

A few notes that might be useful to know: We won with a record of 11-3 W-L, that being 10 early month wins, 1 late month win, and 1 month lost. Our final score was IIRC 637, but really it should have been low-mid 800's (see the complaints below about Team Bravo). Black was the CoDA colour, it ended up spreading to I think 15 or 16 cities in total - all black cities plus Khartoum, Moscow and I think 1-2 other blue edge cities. Riyadh was City Zero. The main characters we used throughout the game were Valerie the Scientist, Pikachu the Quarantine Specialist, Guy the Operations Expert (traitor), and later we added Shivali the Virologist. In the final game, Hank the Soldier made his first appearance, and though it was just one game he was so critical I'm listing him anyway. He close to single-handedly found the hidden CoDA stockpiles and blew them up, thanks to his equipment grabbing powers.

Firstly, the story and objectives feel much more forced in S1 compared to S2. Where S2 gave you exploration and freedom to do things in different orders, and lots of possible things to discover - or not - S1 is much more rigid in its structure. There's advantages to that in S1 I suppose, while you can't know exactly where a player will be at and have to account for all kinds of skill levels, you've got perfect knowledge of what tools they have available at any given point, and can introduce things based on that. I think this makes sense - S1 the designers were of course less experienced, but by S2 they'd done a whole game and gotten overwhelmingly positive feedback, they knew they could push the boat out a little bit.

I think the story in S1 has a better high point, in the betrayal and reveal of what's really going on. I knew that was coming but managed to keep it quiet, and it totally blindsided my partner as our best character, the Operations Expert, turned traitor and fled. S2 on the other hand I think has better world building thanks to all the different searches, the slow reveal of information and so on.

Probably my biggest gripe in S1 was the pacing towards the end, and the scoring mechanics feeling a bit... unfair in places. In particular, the searches. The first three searches, we nail game 1 as soon as they're available, we're all over this info and working towards our prize. October rolls around, the search for that month is to discard CoDA cards in City Zero (Black and Riyadh respectively in our case), +2 if it has a military base. Well, that's awkward - our Operations Expert just went traitor, and looking at our starting hands that seems tough. Our lack of drawing black quickly makes it clear we're not going to complete that objective this game, in fact I think the trail probably went cold before we could even draw the Riyadh card or get enough black cards between us to complete the search - meaning it was an impossible task in that game. But we win anyway by completing other objectives, deciding hey, completing three searches immediately and one just one month late is totally fine.

WRONG. We go into our next game, November, and immediately get hit with the "you failed, team Bravo picks up the scraps and does your job for you" card. Okay, that's a bit surprising, only one chance to do that search? Well, whatever, we press on with the game and things go okay. We win November and then December first try... and then we tally up final scoring. Okay, so Team Bravo helped us, I tell my partner I know that's like -40 points in scoring - which sucks but eh, it's a reasonable penalty in most cases. Nope. It's -200 points. The same penalty as losing 10 games, and twice the penalty of losing 4 times in a row, to give a bit of context. We drop down from what would have been about 830 points, putting us solidly in the top scoring bracket, into the third bracket. It felt very unfair, even if it's ultimately meaningless. Had we known in advance, not completing that search in October would be really bad for our points, we may have tried something different, but as it was, this really feels like a kick in the teeth on top of it throwing the pacing a bit off.

We also lost 80 points for not destroying all military bases because, well, it just wasn't necessary. There were two left on the board at the end, one harmless in Chicago, the other was slightly annoying in Lagos, but it was easier to leave it and eat the +1 action cost for vaccinating in the two cities left it affected for us. I dunno if we could have actually won that final game while also destroying the military bases, mind - but we definitely could have done in late december if we decided to do so. Admittedly, we probably could have guessed that clearing military bases would be worth points so I'm not so upset about this one.

Anyway, ranting over, I feel like season 2 for the most part handled that better. Yeah, there's times where things felt slightly rushed in S2, but there were dozens of things throughout the game that you could do at any time there, and they needed deadlines for, and most of it felt quite fair. In S1, it's just these searches, and especially that one October search which you can not do.

To the best of my knowledge, we made just a single rules mistake, which was using Self-Sacrifice as a free action and not an actual action on two occasions. We decided that the overall benefit we got from this was probably small enough that we simply moved on.

I think the main issue that faces Season 2 compared to Season 1 is how volatile and varied it can be, and how much the game can swing one way or the other based on how you're doing - if you get some useful searches done and make good connections early, and use box 6 well, you stay on top of everything, and the game stays easy going forward. If you get a rough string of luck early you can fall behind, miss out on box 6 for a while, feel so pressured trying to survive that you don't even think to go over there, and can end up in a horrible situation. Season 1 isn't perfect in that way either - if you do well, you keep winning and stay at 0 events but the game can't become any harder from there, so the better you do, the fewer CoDA cities you'll have, the fewer riots to deal with, the more research stations and so on, making things easier and easier - no extra challenge. But if you're just doing okay, winning some and losing some, the game is pretty well balanced I feel, the extra events and upgrades balance out the losses in the world. In Season 2 it doesn't feel like it flows that way if you're doing badly - yes you get more upgrades, but it can't undo the major issues, and while you still get extra rationing, it makes less and less difference as your player deck bloats, and if you're not doing well you're probably not trimming it down frequently either. So basically the balance mechanisms in season 2 to me don't feel as effective.

Anyway, overall though, I very much enjoyed season 1, but of the two I prefer Season 2. Both were great games, and I'm really looking forward to Season 3. And I really hope the entire trilogy eventually gets a digital release.

54
Other Games / Re: Baba Is You
« on: August 13, 2019, 05:28:48 pm »
I ended up looking at a guide for that one. It was a pretty complex solution, for sure. I did the next few levels independently though, completed Depths and Got the 2nd Orb. I now have 2 Orbs - the one from the "Text is Hide" level in the default overworld, the one from completing the Depths. I've stopped playing again for now, Fire Emblem is too addicting.

55
Other Games / Re: Baba Is You
« on: August 11, 2019, 06:44:05 pm »
Hm, I see. Currently stumped by Depths-3: Crushers. Winning is of course trivial. But I have not found a way to make level into anything - and I'm not actually sure what useful things it could be made based on the keywords in the level, either. Probably it would be Text I suppose? Whatever that will do. I feel like the three blocks on the right, the two Is and a Push, must be relevant somehow - but there doesn't seem to be a way to make use of them at all. The only thing I can push over there is Text, and well Text is Push by default. And the only word I can get out is an is, but that feels like I'm missing something.

56
Other Games / Re: Baba Is You
« on: August 11, 2019, 06:11:22 pm »
I've been playing a little bit more recently, and managed to make some progress where I was stuck. Managed to get the area clear flower from all 10 sub areas (the puzzles just got cooler and cooler with stuff like All and Empty keywords), and cleared "A Way Out?", both Win and End, thus "finishing" the game.

But before I did, I managed to do levels 9 and 10 on the overworld, and... the Level keyword is even more ridiculous. I won the overworld and got to the ??? world. I also accessed the hidden level in the overworld and got the orb - are there more orbs I could have found by now? I kind of wonder. I also managed to get the flower from ABC, and accessed the Depths. I think I reached level 3 or 4 in the depths, which is where I'm currently at. I'm on 131 levels clear, 11 flowers, 1 orb. I think I've managed to find about 185 levels so far, give or take. Everything in these worlds is crazy and breaking my brain, but I'm slowly making progress.

One question I have now is, how close am I to another ending? I suspect I'm not too far, right?

57
Other Games / Re: Escape the Room
« on: July 05, 2019, 05:36:42 pm »
I had a weird one I did which, after we solved the final puzzle and "won" the room, there was a final "oops, I triggered the poisonous gas, you have 30 seconds to find the code to escape" puzzle. Turned out the answer was just in the video with the countdown timer, but none of us were watching that - because we were trying to look at the one thing in the room, by the door, that hadn't been used for anything else (which was just for flavour it turned out).

It counted as a win for the room, according to the host, but we all died. So kind of a half win?

58
Other Games / Re: CIVILIZATION VI
« on: June 19, 2019, 04:50:43 pm »
Speaking of Civ 6, the new update came out yesterday. Mostly affects Gathering Storm, but some stuff is added to base game. On the one hand it's surprising some of these things took as long to be added as they did (notifications not covering the screen at the start of each turn, hovering over unit portraits to see any special abilities the unit has) but many others are really nice additions that make the game more fun. The improvements to Lumber Mills are very nice, I'm still in my first game with them but suddenly I'm not wanting to chop every forest in my empire? Shame I have almost no Rainforest to test out the Rainforest Lumber Mills, but well I know what they're gonna do so... yeah.

  • The culture tree and policies is a really fun mechanic! I also like how city growth has changed, and the new culture victory is so much better than before with a focus on overall growth, not just three tall cities.
  • Districts make city building feel more organised, I especially like how much it helps and encourages you in city specification. Now it is a bit of a headache to plan all your districts out for adjacency and space and whatnot, but I'm still happy with it.

It's not just the culture victory that encourages growth now. Civ 6's mechanics in general make settling as many cities as possible usually the best move. Which is more fun than just having 2-4 really good cities, I agree, but it would be nice for the game to give a bit more incentive to building tall cities. Right now you can pretty happily let most cities stagnate at like 10 pop and be perfectly content. That gets you four districts and 10 good tiles worked, that's usually all you need for a city to be about as productive as it can be. But districts in general are great. I do wonder if and how they're gonna change them in Civ 7. Right now I feel like the district system is one of the biggest things pushing you to want more cities, but what if you could effectively get two Campuses in one city? Or something very similar at least. That would give an incentive to build taller.

59
General Discussion / Re: Maths thread.
« on: June 16, 2019, 04:19:38 pm »
In another side of Maths, today I tried to convert an annual inflation rate into a daily one by taking it's log base 365. I got chewed out pretty hard for that one.

60
Other Games / Re: Baba Is You
« on: April 30, 2019, 05:22:25 pm »
Hmmm... may look at that again tomorrow, this one is definitely a tough one despite its apparent simpleness.

Edit: I was lying in bed when an idea came to me on what could be done. Jumped out of bed, grabbed the switch and had the puzzle completed in about 2 minutes! God I hate this game. I love this game.

61
Other Games / Re: Baba Is You
« on: April 30, 2019, 04:33:53 pm »
It is Tiny Isle, yes. I'd actually more or less worked out all of those hints, but it's putting it together that's stumping me. Here's what I think is true:

1) I need to make the rule [Object] is You and Win, vertically
2) It is impossible to make a horizontal "is you" rule, because you can't move around the You rule.
3) You need two of the same object to move the vertical [Object is you] rule so you can push the "Is" and "You" at the same time.

It's where to go from there that's stumping me really. With only 5 blocks of space above the lake, I can't make "[Object] is you and open" to open the lake from above, and still be able to move the "Is You" part downwards without breaking that rule. Above is the only direction I can go because of having only the single Is. So clearly there is something clever to do here that I haven't yet worked out.



62
Other Games / Re: Baba Is You
« on: April 27, 2019, 05:51:18 pm »
So, I picked this up. Played through all the tutorial puzzles, and was like "wow this game is awesome, though the puzzles don't seem like they can get THAT hard".

Now gotten up to about the fourth or fifth area and have been stuck on single puzzles for 30+ minutes at times. Bloody hell, this game gets crazy difficult and I kind of love it because the puzzles feel so satisfying when you finish them. The solutions are often pretty simple in many ways as well but require you to really understand the game mechanics and rules. Like "Broken Playground" was a really creative puzzle to solve.

I'm currently stuck on one of the bonus puzzles in I think the 2nd section. Small Pond or something it was called. I'm sure there's a creative answer here but damn, I just can't make that Win block into a rule. I'm pretty sure if I could turn all of Baba, Flag and Key into the same thing (any of the three, they're interchangeable) I could solve the puzzle, but that doesn't seem possible without breaking the "is You" part of the rules...

63
Other Games / Re: Pandemic Legacy (probably will have spoilers)
« on: April 08, 2019, 05:17:59 pm »
I think going into the first April or May game, I looked over the card with the co-ordinates on it and was like "we need to search Buenos Aries ASAP, there's a lab there. Don't know what that is but it must be important and good." I was right, so we got that fairly quickly. When we connected Africa we made a point of getting to Johannesburg ASAP to search that, think we did it using the "pick up card from discard to search" ability on someone so we got that done very quickly. Wellington was added in November game 1, seemed worthwhile. We ended up picking actually pretty bad characters for November game 1, bad planning on our part but managed to complete part of the plan at least, while doing the two remaining recons.

I ended up not making a spreadsheet for box 6 but did build two hand written tables. I don't have a (consistently working) laptop any more, so hand written seemed better. Tracked total player/infection cards, how many we had, notes on what had happened to them and notes on improvements.

Since I'm on the topic of box 6 though, I did build a few quick excel sheets to look at epidemic density vs. cards in deck - with that we decided to stay at 51 player cards. Looking at the numbers was interesting - yes, keeping it at just 6 or even 5 epidemics is WAY better epidemic density wise, but it requires some work to achieve. And if you miss out slightly and are just over the line instead, that's really bad. Not to mention trying to stay at e.g. 5 epidemics would require some planning around the box filling up. Maybe being at 6 epidemics would as well, but less so. The other advantage with thinning is you get to utilise your upgraded cards and companions far more often. With only 44 cards instead of 51, that's 7 less dud cards, which is a fairly reasonable improvement to how often you draw your good cards. With just 36 it's even better. A weird alternative that I saw some people try online is to do the opposite and completely ignore innoculating player cards. Not a fan personally - you need something like 80-85 player cards in the deck before the density ends up better than keeping it neat at 51, and that's pretty close to all of the player cards in the game I believe. So you suffer for a long time, to maybe get a benefit right at the end - and even then, with your really low density of those critical red cards, and card upgrades and companions being rare, I still have doubts about the strategies value.

We briefly considered aiming to cut down to 44, I do wonder if we should have aggressively pursued doing that, actually - we had several unused unrationed events and didn't rip up any produce supplies (though quite a few ended up at only one system wide production left) so cutting a few more cards out of the deck would probably have been helpful for us. We didn't actually innoculate infection cards as much as we probably should have. We cleared almost all of South America, which gave us a lot of breathing room, and then hit a few other sporadic cities, but I think by the time "It's wearing off" came into play we only had about 6-9 infection cards in box 6, while we probably should have put more like 20-25 into in by then. I think the best thing to do would have probably been to pick a few regions of the board - likely Africa after we saw it was infested and somewhere else like South America - and just dunked every infection card we came across from those areas. We didn't, and well we also didn't lose any of those midgame months so I guess I shouldn't criticise our performance too much.

One final thought: I had noticed the rulebook space for replacing step 2 of epidemics and wondered what it was. Initially I expected something like Virulent Strains to replace our epidemics, but what we got was very cool and I immediately realised this is a mechanic that heavily reduces the luck element of epidemics, and therefore this is an element we can control and exploit to make epidemics less of a threat. With our box 6 emptying quickly at this point, we then made a point to put just single cities cards in (or cards for cities we stocked up a bit), and suddenly add in Jade and Epidemics went from "oh crap, what now" to "lol remove one of Cairo's 4 cubes thanks"


I do agree that 4 player is very likely harder. I think that's because firstly, the reason you just said that you have to spread bonuses across more characters (although we did end up with four moderately well upgraded characters in the end anyway) - I actually don't think this is a massive deal, you get a lot of production units to spend even if you win a lot. I think the bigger deal is gameplay itself. With four players exposure becomes a considerably bigger risk. As a really simplified explanation: Twice as many pawns on the board = twice as many places where unexpected exposure could appear. It doesn't quite work like that in reality, of course - but I think the idea is still there. By the end of the campaign I think we took a grand total of 3 exposure across all of our characters, excluding that from the carrier. Only two scars were ever placed, and on different characters. Do you remember roughly how much exposure your group had across your team? I suspect it's a lot more than just three, playing with four people!

There were so many really cool and fun mechanics. A lot of them I think are not obvious in how you can exploit them, but a smart group can find some really clever ways to do so. I'm pretty sure the designers knew them and heck, I'd go so far as to say most or even all were intended - why else would the Monitor action be so heavily limited, if they weren't aware you could use it to start avoiding epidemics consistently? Speaking of which we got lots of mileage out of ours, scratching off the final box to dodge an epidemic in the final game, pretty much perfect resource management if I do say so myself. If you're the kind of person who enjoys optimising and thinking of cool ideas to try in your games while not playing the games, you'll love many aspects of Pandemic Legacy Season 2.

64
Other Games / Re: Pandemic Legacy (probably will have spoilers)
« on: April 07, 2019, 05:14:17 pm »
Me and my partner just finished Pandemic Legacy: Season 2. We never played Season 1. Non-spoiler thoughts first, then some minor spoiler thoughts, then full major spoiler thoughts:

Non-spoiler: The game is really fun. As one would expect with legacy games, it does a great job twisting things around at various points and throwing curveballs that shake up how you play and what you want to do. We played two player, and I think that makes things a fair bit easier - with two people you can co-ordinate cards more easily, focus on just building up a small number of characters and thus saving production units, and it's easier to avoid exposure. But regardless, we won! The game was moderately challenging and I can definitely see poor or good luck making the game far harder or easier than intended, although over a campaign of 12 to 24 games it's likely to balance out at least a bit.

The game weaves its story and gameplay together pretty well, we thought. The way the narrative is often used to give clues about what might be worth doing was pretty cool, as well as explain a few subtle questions that cropped up. We didn't always pick up on these hints, and sometimes we just couldn't do what they were suggesting due to poor card draw.

Minor spoilers (talking about mostly non-specific things, might give a little bit of information if you haven't played. Won't spoil story or exact new rules):
We finished with a score of 806 IIRC, which put us in the 2nd highest score band (highest is 850+). We won 8 months on game 1, 3 months on game 2 and lost only 1 month completely. We had a rough time somewhere in the early game, due to a combination of not paying enough attention to hints and bad card draws. We got to 3 losses in a row before finally pulling off a win, and then won back to back for a while again.

The game really picks up in pacing and story during the second half. The first half of the game is mostly exploring the nearby area, making your grid as some story starts being set up for you. The second half of the game is much more intense, focusing the story more directly on the goal.

I feel like the game heavily utilises a design philosophy that goes something like this:
Step 1: create a new "problem". For example, adding cities to the grid means more places you need cubes.
Step 2: Let players struggle against this problem for 1-3 months (or until performing specific tasks). For example, throughout the first 2-3 months you'll likely add 2-3 new cities per month, give or take, quickly increasing the size of the grid and places needing cubes
Step 3: Give players a new tool that heavily mitigates or solves problems. For example, box 6 - which if you haven't played, is a really cool new mechanic and very interesting to plan around. It also helps solve the above problem as well as other problems in a really cool, neat way.

Sometimes, these problems come simultaneously and are solved separately, or come separately and are solved together, or just stagger a bit with each other. Normally you have a few such problems at once, because they're what makes the game fun. If you had nothing causing you problems, you'd have no tension and no challenge. But if you had too many problems you'd get stretched too thin with things to do, and the game could become overwhelming both to process and to win. So this is a neat way of keeping things balanced - once a mechanic has been challenging for a bit, give the player a way to solve it and start introducing new challenges to deal with. And this is done in a non-explicit way as well, which is really neat. You don't get told "Hey, the grid is bloated and you're stretched too thin", but you feel it as you play and quickly start dealing with it once you gain the new tools to do so.

If you've finished season 2, have a think back through the game and see how many times this kind of mechanic comes up. You'll probably be surprised at how many you can count.


Major spoilers (specific objectives, months, cards etc. talked about here - not recommended to read until you finish the campaign)
I think the game was at its most fun around July to October. Reconning into Central Asia is where the game really starts picking up and throwing new, cool twists at you and they keep coming for a while. Incidentally, this is another example of the design philosophy I mentioned above - Hollow Men get added after reconning Central Asia, and they're an unstoppable nusiance. Get placed in a key city? Sorry but you're taking exposure, nothing you can do about it. They can really make things tricky, especially if your grid is not well connected. But then after reconning East Asia you get Shelters, a tool to solve that problem. And in October you gain the ability to move them at Radio Towers which another tool that solves the problem, plus some character abilities, and suddenly the unavoidable surge of incoming Hollow Men is not an unstoppable problem you have to manoeuvre around but a speed bump you can tackle.

November and December were fun, but I feel like a little bit of the tension and excitement had gone by that point since we had unlocked almost everything there was. Now there were only a few things left to find and to discover. That said, the final objective was really cool. The idea of injecting 1000x the safe dose of a vaccine into someone to smuggle it is more than a little questionable, I feel (I'm sure they could think of a better way, like wearing a Hollow Man backpack maybe), but then the mechanics from then on were pretty cool. We were pretty lucky with the hand my partner had, plus the cards she had - I had made a path from Johannesburg to Dar Es Salaam and then New Mumbai earlier this game when we saw we'd need to transport the cure there, along with building the supply centre, and that meant the shortest path we had needed 3 red, 2 black, 1 yellow and 1 blue. She had almost all of those in hand already, and had the ability to swap any card for another in the discard pile, meaning she could get back in just two turns. But I can imagine in a 4 player game this could be a really tense and exciting finish, with a heroic sacrifice in the final moments to win - or a costly failure if you don't.

The early-mid game was very enjoyable for different reasons. Exploring new regions and getting new powers and things from them was really cool, and some of the rewards were very enjoyable and helped with that make problem/solve problem thing I mentioned above. Shuttle Flight and Towers made collecting cards much easier, along with getting to distant parts of the grid. Box 6, the innoculation mechanics were SUPER fun to play around with. There's a lot of strategic and tactical choices you can make with that, especially later in the game when you add the It's Wearing Off stickers to Epidemics. Removing infection cards to clean up total areas, removing player cards to basically do brinkmanship with the epidemic count (we kept ourselves almost constantly at exactly 51 player cards in the deck. Connect a new city with 2 cards? We made it a priority to box two city cards. I kind of wonder what other people did player card wise.

Our two strongest characters ended up being the Opal lab character (when you make supplies you can make them from the reserve), Alejandro, who we gave the one free drive/ferry per turn, deliver supplies to adjacent regions, and discard a card to deliver a supply there. He ended up being hugely valuable for many different things - he could treat cities with Hollow Men without exposure, bought lots of extra supplies into the game - when we found the east Indian Haven we didn't even really need the +15, at least at that point since we could get so many onto the board already. In fact it wasn't unusual for us to empty the reserve. The other, perhaps surprisingly, was the Scientist from Jade, Zoe. She has the once per turn destroy an infection card for your city for free ability. I was going to completely ignore her - we had a few other decently built characters at this point but my partner convinced me she would be worth it, and we tried her out and boy was she right. We probably destroyed 10-15 infection cards with her, making several cities completely safe and thus making far more places we could save on cubes and avoid needing to visit again. She also had the abilities to recon with one less card (added in November, used once, worth it), swap a player card for another and spend a card to destroy a hollow man in that colour, which I think we used like twice ever. She was our very fitting heroine who delivered the cure safely back to her own lab, before passing on.

Looking forward to season 3, and she's looking forward to season 1!

65
Other Games / Re: Baba Is You
« on: March 31, 2019, 06:03:50 am »
Woah, it's out? Note to self, buy this soon

66
[Misery] is the top-ranked Hex in the stats by a comfortable margin.

I think this is enough to make me question how useful these "stats" are. Unlike the other hexes, it's trivial to know whether Misery caused you to lose. I've only had one game where that has happened, and I play online a lot.

I disagree. I assume when you say it's trivial it's because you're thinking, you can just look at how often you got Miserable/Twice Miserable and compare to how often you lost by less than 2/4 points respectively? But that isn't the case. The goal in Dominion is not to have the most points when the game ends but rather, to end the game when you have the most points. That's probably my most famous quote I've ever made on this site, and I think it applies here - while sometimes, yes you will lose DIRECTLY because of Misery losing you the 2/4 points to be behind your opponent, there will also be times you lose INDIRECTLY, because you could have ended the game ahead without it, but now can't because those -2/-4 points prevent you from taking the lead. And then maybe your opponent goes on to lead by more than 2/4 points and it looks like Miserable didn't factor in, when really it did. Similarly, if a game is less engine based (e.g. only one buy/gain per turn), how far ahead/behind you are can affect how you optimise which victory point cards you buy. 5 points behind? Getting the ante-penultimate Province is probably a good move, as you will be ahead with just 2 provinces left, your opponent is risking a direct loss picking up the penultimate Province. But 7 points behind because of Misery? Buying that province might be a bigger risk, your opponent can pick up the penultimate Province and maintain a dangerous lead. This small difference in points can lead to big strategy swings that aren't necessarily reflected in a close final score.

How often is that a factor? I don't know. Probably not hugely often, but I don't think it's trivial to check either. And I think it might be slightly more than you give credit for. Then again, I've never played this expansion so I don't know for certain - I'm just arguing what I know to be the case from Dominion in general.

67
General Discussion / Re: Random Stuff Part IV
« on: March 01, 2019, 02:33:36 pm »
Recently I went to a talk about the Flat Earth phenomenon and what's causing such an easily disproven myth to gain traction. It was pretty interesting. I'll just share a few highlight points in case anyone here ends up talking with one of these kind of people.

1) Often they are not flat earthers because of a complete lack of scientific knowledge, but because of being misled by poorly executed science and experiments. Often on Youtube - people doing flawed experiments or reaching the wrong conclusion from the experiments they have done (such as seeing if a spirit level remains flat while on a plane and similar).

2) Flat earthers often - very often - link in with many other conspiracy theories. This can range from "the Moon landing is fake" - which makes sense if you think space is fake - right up to much more sinister things such as Holocaust denial and similar. Be careful.

3) Perhaps most important (which is why I buried it as number 3, go me) there isn't just a single "flat earth" model that's agreed on. Talk to 10 different flat earthers* and you'll get 10 different ideas on what the Flat Earth is, how it works and why it works. In fact there are schisms in the community, with some sides basically claiming the other are government shills designed to mislead people and discredit the theory. Yup, it's an, uh, interesting community.

4) When interacting with this kind of people, it is very easy and tempting to act smug and conceited since you know you're right and they're wrong. And of course, you are - but bear in mind from their point of view, they're right and have realised something you've not, and so this attitude often only further serves to reinforce. Don't take an aggressive or superior approach.

5) Similar to the above, but how often do you interact with Flat Earthers and hear their arguments? Probably never, right. They interact with us every day, and hear the same arguments constantly. They have answers to them. If you come out all guns blazing and argue points, they will usually have an answer to you because they already thought of it, and unless you are a serious expert at physics (usually) there's a high chance you'll get caught out in being unable to answer them eventually - you're dropping down to their level and they beat you through experience. Instead you're generally better off talking with them and getting them to try and explain their views. You don't have to lie and pretend to agree, just try and follow their line of thought, as though it might hold some merit - and ask them to clarify and explain points that you feel are incompatible with what you've seen/know from reality, rather than directly challenging them. This won't get you an instant "win" but that's because you stop it feeling like you vs. them. Instead you can act almost like a guide to them, making them question it for themselves. Remember what I said - a lot of these people aren't completely ignorant of science, they've just been deceived by bad science. If you can guide them into doing things right, there's a good chance they'll work out their mistakes.

68
General Discussion / Re: Random Stuff Part IV
« on: February 24, 2019, 03:07:02 pm »
One of the Maths teachers I work with doesn't like teaching BIDMAS (aka PEDMAS) because of exactly that confusion. Instead he mentions that BIDMAS is a way some people remember it but then explains better ways, namely how the more powerful things happen first with brackets forcing priority. Obviously he explains it better than I'm doing in 2 lines of text but whatever. I feel like BIDMAS ends up confusing some people because it feels like an arbitrary rule, few people really have any idea of WHY it's there.

69
Other Games / Re: CIVILIZATION VI
« on: February 16, 2019, 02:01:50 pm »
I ended up getting Civ 6 on PC and also got Gathering Storm. It's very fun. Unfortunately my first game ended just as I was about to hit the Future Era, which is a shame but not super unexpected.

I still feel like the way AI is handled, along with the relative lack of good catch up mechanics, is the game's biggest weakness. Once you get to a point where you're decently strong compared to the AI, that's it, you've won. The remaining ~100 turns are just you fulfilling the victory condition.

70
Other Games / Re: CIVILIZATION VI
« on: January 31, 2019, 02:17:36 pm »
Today seems to have been the day that those with preview copies of the expansion can start posting videos. Several LPs have just started today - I've seen PotatoMcWhiskey is doing a Maori playthrough, Quill18 is doing a Canada playthrough and several others.

71
General Discussion / Re: Random Stuff Part IV
« on: January 24, 2019, 04:53:28 pm »
Yeah, TC is an acronym for topic creator.

72
General Discussion / Re: Random Stuff Part IV
« on: January 24, 2019, 02:03:56 am »
That's going to the correct thread. I don't know who the TC was, he's a user I've not seen before.

73
General Discussion / Re: Random Stuff Part IV
« on: January 23, 2019, 05:24:06 pm »
This is perhaps one of the strangest and most petty attempts at humble bragging about a false achievement that I've ever seen. Every post TC makes sounds more and more desperate to convince people it's true and that it's a big deal.

74
Other Games / Re: CIVILIZATION VI
« on: January 14, 2019, 02:18:08 am »
I have played some more and gotten better at the game. I wish I'd kept a save on turn 1 from my game as Rome on Emperor (difficulty 6) as I kinda want to give it another go. But alas, it's gone now. I have won a game on Emperor as England, cultural victory. And more recently I won one on Immortal (difficulty 7) as Scythia, science victory - though considering I conquered a lot of territory it may have been quicker to win conquest.

75
General Discussion / Re: Random Stuff Part IV
« on: January 12, 2019, 05:29:57 am »
Of course, you can also just get an actual d100.

I'm generally not fond of the d100, but that's because I'm impatient. I'm happier with rolling two dice without waiting for dice to stop.

But I cannot argue its fairness. It is technically the simplest way to roll 1-100. It's just not my favorite.

Someone asked me if rolling d10000 would blow my theory out of the water. After evaluating the dice, it looks like it still works—provided the smallest die goes from 1 to 10 while the others go rom 0* to 9*. So you get 10k by adding 9000+900+90+10.

But I don't play any games that require a d10000. Not sure I'd want something with that degree of granularity, but I could be persuaded.

I've never heard of any game that requires a d10000, and I doubt I could be persuaded that that degree of granularity could be good.

May I introduce you to the world's greatest RPG, FATAL?

I don't remember the details, but I know during setup you are instructed to roll a d1,000,000 among other things.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 319

Page created in 0.813 seconds with 19 queries.