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 - tripwire

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6
26
Dominion: Nocturne Previews / Re: Previews #2: Shepherd, Pooka, Cemetery
« on: October 24, 2017, 12:34:12 pm »
Ghost sounds really interesting to me. It looks like it'd create a lot of tension when it's a part of a traditional deck type. The fact that it's a throne makes me think it's an engine card, but it won't do anything if you draw your whole deck (unless you have some way to discard an action for it to find). The fact that it digs for an action to play makes me think it's a sloggy card, but any game it's in will always also include a trasher (Cemetery). As a result it might actually work best in those mythical "hybrid" decks.

Since the Night phase is after the Buy phase, you can still draw your whole deck, but you'll just have to buy another Action card during your Buy phase. This is really only an issue if you don't have multiple buys and you're greening, but that's probably not a draw-your-deck type anyhow.

Oh, good point. Forgot you'd have any actions you bought that turn. Man, night's weird for me to think about, although a lot of these details will probably clear up pretty quickly once I get a chance to try things out. Maybe I'll get a chance to try things tonight.

27
Dominion: Nocturne Previews / Re: Previews #2: Shepherd, Pooka, Cemetery
« on: October 24, 2017, 11:59:02 am »
Ghost sounds really interesting to me. It looks like it'd create a lot of tension when it's a part of a traditional deck type. The fact that it's a throne makes me think it's an engine card, but it won't do anything if you draw your whole deck (unless you have some way to discard an action for it to find). The fact that it digs for an action to play makes me think it's a sloggy card, but any game it's in will always also include a trasher (Cemetery). As a result it might actually work best in those mythical "hybrid" decks.

28
General Discussion / Re: Movies: Any movie buffs?
« on: October 14, 2017, 01:23:27 pm »
Right, well the way I see it is that there are two ways to approach a work of art

a) Historically, where one considers the context it was made in and the influence it had. This actually has little to do with the work itself, it's just about how it was perceived and what it meants to people at the time.
b) Artistically, where one considers it for itself, independent of its context.


As someone who studies literature, I  feel like I need to jump in and point out that these can't be so easily separated. Often, one needs to have an understanding of a work's context in order to understand or appreciate it "artistically".  Furthermore, I'd argue that your "historical" approach most often requires "artistic" evaluation and analysis. And finally, what is "artistically" valued changes over time, so it is inherently context-dependent.

Now, to be less pedantic:

The original Blade Runner is a great achievment in design and mood, in the service of a poor story with a checked-out actor playing an uninteresting actor, which is all the more evident when a much more interesting character comes in and gives a great monologue about how you'd have had a much better time watching the movie about him.

I love how your criticism here is one of my favorite things about the movie. The movie ends with the realization that we've been following and caring about the wrong characters, which I find to be a powerful moment that recolors the entire film on subsequent viewings (and enables the "Deckard is the villain" interpretation that I find really interesting).

I really really enjoyed 2049, and think it can be considered a better movie in a lot of ways, but one thing I felt like it was missing was this kind of unsettling ambiguity.

29
General Discussion / Re: TV shows
« on: October 03, 2017, 03:22:30 pm »
It only has 4% on Rotten Tomatoes. That seems a bit harsh. It wasn't great, but I didn't feel it was terrible.

But 4% on Rotten Tomatoes doesn't necessarily mean people think it's terrible, though, right? I think it just means 96% of people gave it a "negative" review (which for the community reviews means lower than a 7/10; the critic reviews are subjectively reviewed by Rotten Tomatoes staff, I believe). So, theoretically, regardless if 96% of reviewers consider something a 6/10 or a 1/10, it would still get a 4%.

Am I understanding that correctly?

30
Dominion General Discussion / Re: How would you play this board?
« on: October 03, 2017, 03:04:07 pm »
I'm a little surprised that people aren't opening militia, but buying it later. On a board where I want militia and getting five-costs is important, I have a hard time not opening with it in the hope that I can prevent my opponent from getting that early 5 (especially if I'm first player).

So is there something about this board that makes that not matter? Or am I overestimating how much of a set back a potential missed 5-cost would be? Is the extra cycling of something like Magpie just more important early game?

31
Dominion Articles / Re: Common Skill "Plateaus" in Mastering Dominion
« on: October 02, 2017, 09:35:22 pm »
Hey everybody, thanks for the great feedback. Just a heads up that revisions may take a little while, though. But I'm listening  :)

I know. What I was trying to say is that there are no more grand discoveries after you've discovered engines, there are just minor improvements. When the minor improvements pile up, you get a big difference in skill, but you can't point out any one thing that the lower skill player can learn to get on the better player's level.

Okay, I agree with this, and I'll try to make the more incremental nature after that a little bit clearer. As well as the fact that these skills are developed in a more or less random order at that point. But I still think it's useful to describe things beyond the "engine" plateau.

Maybe the metaphor falls apart at that point, though, and I should arrange the rest some other way? What do people think?

Also, how does blaming bad luck for all losing come into play in all this? I feel like bad luck blaming is a hurdle inside ever plateau.

I can certainly see the case for this concern to be present at all levels, but does that mean it's something I should repeat each time, or just make clearer in the first plateau that you might always feel the urge to use luck as an excuse not to examine your own play? Or, do people think I should make another plateau that addresses this and similar concerns: like, improving your "mental" game?

A critical aspect of improving at Dominion that this article is missing is when players learn the value of trashing, particularly for action-heavy decks. When a player learns to aggressively trash their starting deck when trying to build engines, that's a major improvement.

I'm down with that. Do people think this is significant enough that it needs to be its own "plateau"? Or, is there a specific place people think I should highlight it?

32
Dominion Articles / Re: Common Skill "Plateaus" in Mastering Dominion
« on: October 02, 2017, 11:15:06 am »
I just quickly skimmed through the descriptions you wrote about each plateau, but I'm not really sure if there are any plateaus beyond engines. After that, you just get gradually better at the game. If you look at what various top players are doing, I don't think there's currently one standard that everyone is striving to achieve or one milestone that all the pros have reached, but rather, different individuals have different strengths.

If there is a concrete point at which you can say that you've finally reached the stage that's better than just engines, I don't think any of us are there yet or know what it is.

I didn't intend to suggest that once somebody moves past the "engine" plateau, that they don't play engines any more. Instead, they add to that understanding the various other considerations that make up strong dominion play. In general, each plateau doesn't obsolete the previous ones (except for maybe "sea level"), it adds to it. And I think people start playing with engines before they understand all the finer points of tactical play and deck control.

I'm also imagining some common mistakes for people at the "engine plateau" that top players are more aware of. For example, people at this stage often still try to follow some script of what an engine should be rather than try to determine what's best given the particular board state at any point in a game. For example, this is the point where people get too caught up in building their engine and fail to notice that piles are getting too low, or that their opponent has started greening early enough that they can come out ahead before their engine is fully "online."  That's why I don't think it's synonymous with high level play.

I feel like 10,000 could be understanding the intricacies of the current board - a skill that gets better with experience and much better with practice
Post 10k: You understand the intricacies of kingdoms, but are now aware of mistakes you or opponent are making despite recognizing those intricacies and able to be critical of your plays.

I agree with both of these statements. I wasn't exactly sure how to approach the 10,000 and beyond paragraph (I don't consider myself a "top" player). Generally, the idea I was thinking for this stage is that it's where you stop trying to follow particular "scripts" for play and focus more on the particular board and adapting to each particular moment throughout the game. Does that make sense? Do higher level players agree with that?

At the very least, I'll revise to include the importance of experience, practice, and self-critique at this stage.

33
General Discussion / Re: What the hell, English?
« on: September 30, 2017, 05:47:46 pm »
Just in case anyone is wondering: on average a person would have to eat about 28 pickles a day to literally eat one million pickles in a life time

34
Dominion Articles / Common Skill "Plateaus" in Mastering Dominion
« on: September 30, 2017, 05:18:30 pm »
I'm taking the plunge and posting a potential article. This is certainly a rough draft, so feel free to give any kinds of feedback you want.

In particular I'm concerned about these things at the moment:This article is a little different than the kinds of stuff that normally gets posted here, so I'm curious if anybody thinks stuff like this is worthwhile. Additionally, I'm curious if people think the different "plateaus" I've identified are distinct and useful? I know that many people's actual experience with Dominion may not match one-to-one with what's described here, but is this close enough to a general experience? And more importantly, do you think these tiers of Dominion mastery are useful to consider? Is this too long?

Ultimately, I'm writing this to encourage people to continue in their mastery of dominion regardless of their level and to give people a potential roadmap for that development. Do you think this does that?



Common Skill “Plateaus” in Mastering Dominion

Dominion is a deep game, but a lot of that depth isn’t always evident when you first start, or even as you start becoming better. This a great quality for a game, but it can also lead some people to never fully appreciate everything this game has to offer.

The purpose of this article is to describe common skill “plateaus” that people often progress through as they become more skilled at Dominion. I’m calling them plateaus because it seems like many players’ progression is marked by a number of significant breakthroughs and then a period of time where they fixate on that breakthrough, before moving on. I think this is common, natural, and even useful for learning the game.

To be clear, I don’t see this progression of plateaus as a bad thing. In some ways, I actually think it’s a necessary experience. By moving through these plateaus, players tend to develop knowledge and techniques important for strong Dominion play in isolation, before moving onto new elements. That being said, not everyone’s experience is going to be exactly the same as what I present here, nor does it have to be. Ultimately, I just want to give players (mostly beginning to intermediate players) a sense of what they might know or be good at and where they might go next in their mastery of Dominion.

One potential downside of this plateau-like progression is that sometimes players reach a plateau and assume, “Well, I guess I got this all figured out. I’ve solved Dominion!” For example, there’s countless stories of people who felt this way when they discovered “big money.” This happens because each breakthrough can lead to you crushing your peers who have yet to make that same breakthrough, and the next breakthrough might take you a while to recognize. As a result, I hope this article can help those who think they’ve “solved” Dominion. If that describes you, hopefully this can show you how there’s still more to consider before you’ve “mastered” this game. Or, if that describes someone you know, I hope this can help you encourage them to stick with the game. I think very few games can continue to be as rewarding to play for as long as Dominion.

Sea Level – Just buying stuff

We all got to start somewhere, and I think the best (only?) way to learn Dominion is to just buy stuff and see how it works. At this point, people just buy cool cards, often the most expensive cards they can afford and aim to have the most points when the provinces run out. I don’t think many people stay at this level for too long (very quickly people run into problems with having more actions in hand than you can play (terminal collision), or getting stuck with small amounts of money, and learn that they need some semblance of a plan) but some people will already give up on the game here. At this stage, the game can feel really luck based. And sure, there always will be some luck in Dominion, but the first hurdle to overcome is to start trying to figure out how to minimize that luck. In other words, to steal Adam Horton’s phrase, you need to start to “make your own shuffle luck.”
One other thing I want to note is that just because people often start at this point, don’t assume that new players who do this aren’t having any fun. Try to keep in mind how much you enjoyed the game even when you were at this point. Buying stuff is fun. Playing that stuff is fun. Seeing what’s going to happen is fun. Take solace in this fact, and don’t force people to climb these plateaus faster than they want to.

1000 ft – Big Money

One of the easiest ways to mitigate terminal collision or lack of money is to just buy lots of treasure. Trying this leads to the discovery of what many call “big money.” This strategy involves buying mostly treasure, non-terminal actions, and only a couple terminal actions. It’s not usually the best strategy, but it is a strategy. In other words, it will crush those playing at “sea-level.” This level is especially dangerous because even though it can be fun to start winning more, it means many games will play out in the same way (you buy silver, then gold, then provinces). The good news is that this level can start giving people a taste of plateaus to come. For example, greening too early can make a big money deck fall apart, so it can serve as the basis of considerations of tempo.

Although some people find big money boring, there’s 3 things I want to note. First, as you get better, big money will rarely be the best strategy on the board. In other words, you eventually won’t be playing big money that often. Second, as you begin to understand finer strategic and tactical considerations, you start to recognize that even big money games often require important decisions. And it can feel really good when you recognize those rare moments where big money is the best strategy. Finally, just because you might find big money boring, some people still find it fun. For example, one of my nephews loves nothing more than buying and playing Golds and Platinums; and I have a suspicion that Tom Vassal is a big money lover (check out his favorite Dominion cards for evidence).

3000 ft – Knowing the Power Cards and Combos

Eventually people will start to realize that some cards are just stronger than others, whether that’s always the case or only in specific situations. I think it’s at this point that many people discover dominionstrategy.com, whether that’s through the wiki, the many single card articles, or Qvist’s annual power rankings. People start thinking, “If Mountebank is on the board I need to get one as soon as possible,” “I should open Chapel and trash all my starting cards as quickly as possible,” “Wait, Pirate ship isn’t amazing?” etc.

I think this is one of the most important stages for people’s Dominion development. It’s when people start learning the ins-and-outs of each card, common card archetypes, and how some card synergies can end up being crazy. But it also carries its own dangers. People might think that the game just comes down to memorizing various combos or card power levels, and following the right script every time those cards show up. But like big money, even though these rules-of-thumb will beat people below “3000 ft,” these strategies will often flounder against players thinking on a higher plateau. [thinking about putting a link to the game where Counting House beat Mountebank, anybody have a link?]

5000 ft – Engines

The next step is to start putting all the pieces together to build what people call an engine. Engines often use multiple different cards that serve different roles to eventually be able to draw one’s whole deck (or lots of it anyway) and produce high buying and gaining power. At this plateau players don’t look at cards individually, but rather as card archetypes or card categories (e.g. village, trasher, +buy, draw, payload, etc.) Then they fit these different archetypes together. These decks often start buying victory cards much later than big money decks, but buy them much more quickly once they do. Furthermore, they can often gain multiple cards, so they can force a three pile ending much more easily, giving them great endgame control. As a result, engines are the best deck to be built for most Dominion kingdoms.

This is the level where I find that Dominion really shines. Unlike big money, each engine plays out a little differently, can use a wide range of cards, and can produce really powerful interactions. That being said, this plateau offers its own dangers as well. Building a strong engine is hard, so players can become discouraged. I also see players who can get too caught up in this stage. When you first start playing engines it often makes sense to build a lot longer than you normally would, but sometimes players build for too long so that by the time they start buying victory cards they can’t catch up quickly enough. Additionally, even though engines are often the best thing to do on a board, they aren’t always. Try to start recognizing the times when a big money deck or something else is actually the better choice.

7000 ft – Tactical Awareness

Dominion is sometimes criticized as being a multiplayer solitaire game. In other words, people think each player is just playing by themselves until the game ends. But even when there are no cards with explicit player interaction (attacks, council room, etc.), good players always need to pay attention to what other players are doing. Over time, players start becoming aware of little tactical considerations such as winning splits, PPR, endgame control, shuffle control, deck tracking, deck tempo. Each of these considerations has the potential to increase a player’s win-rate.

This “plateau” isn’t as monolithic as the others. In my experience, people tend to pick these different principles up here and there as they are learning the game, but it’s these fine-tunings can make the difference at higher levels of play. I also wanted to highlight this “plateau” to challenge those who do think of the game as multiplayer solitaire. At higher levels of play, that’s should never be the case.

10000 ft & counting – The Holistic Perspective (or “it depends on the board”)

The final stage of one’s dominion development is to bring all of these things together and to recognize that each subsequent “plateau” is not always better than another one. Sometimes, big money will be best, sometimes an engine, sometimes you’ll find a new synergy that you have never experienced, and often the best strategy on a board will not fit into any neat category or deck type. Every principle or rule of thumb in Dominion can prove to be wrong depending on the cards on the board. There’s always an edgecase. As a result, allow yourself some flexibility, continue updating your assumptions about dominion strategy, and always ask yourself what could I have done differently? This doesn’t mean throw everything you learned in previous “plateaus” out the window, but open up some space for creativity, for experimentation, for having some fun.

35
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Any new thoughts on IRL handicapping?
« on: September 30, 2017, 01:02:55 pm »
I don't know how I missed this thread when it first came around. I want to echo both of these:

I tend to pick a strategy in a kingdom that I think is relatively simple and not optimal, then play it cleanly. It gives my friends a chance to see some robust deck construction without it being complicated or overpowering.

A better way would be to let others know what you're doing ahead of time so they could either better match or beat your strategy

Both of these are good because it allows you to still play something to the best of your ability, and it also gives your opponents opportunities to improve. Here's some other strategies I've played around with:

1) Letting my opponents pick a card or two that I can't buy. I find this helps encourage players to evaluate the board before they play and recognize powerful cards, while allowing me to play as optimally as I can with a 9 or 8 card kingdom.

2) Telling players a couple vague strategies and having them decide which one I should take. E.g. "mostly money or an engine," "a gardens rush or a minion stack." This helps people recognize a bunch of strategies and weigh them against each other, and helps them recognize what different kinds of decks are common. It also can let them avoid playing against decks they don't like; if they don't like playing against someone who draws their whole deck, they will nix that option.

I've had some good success with these strategies, although admittedly they only work for people who have some understanding of the game already. That being said, you can secretly ban cards for yourself to create an extra layer of challenge that others are unaware of. The danger with that (and all versions of deliberately playing badly) is that many might assume that what you're doing is an optimal strategy and you inadvertently prevent them from improving at the game.

36
Dominion Articles / Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« on: September 19, 2017, 02:56:02 pm »
Getting back on topic about the article, what do you most hope readers will take away from this article? Do you want discussions like the one you had with FemurLemur? Something else?

I certainly didn't write the article in order to have discussions like the one I had with FemurLemur, I wrote it so that I wouldn't need to have them. Basically I wrote it so that the reader can learn to stop focusing on the superficial things that don't really matter, and start focusing on the underlying principles — such as the obstacles.

Okay, here's my suggestions for revision to make that more likely, then. (Although, I think your revisions since the last time I read the whole article, have already helped some with this issue.) Obviously, though, if you feel like any of these suggestions misrepresents your position or eliminates important info, then take it with a grain of salt.

1. I already mentioned changing the title to focus more on the "obstacles" rather than "deck types," but if you don't like that, what about changing it to put the focus on moving beyond the "deck type definition" debate (as you say, the more superficial elements)? I mean, is an "infinite number of deck types" any different than deck types no longer being that useful? Maybe modify your "Beyond the five types" subtitle to be the title for the whole article?

2. I would more explicitly suggest that this perspective encourages redefining how we think of the archetypal deck types. Rather than seeing them as determined by the number of actions, or level of synergy, or whatever other thing people use, your perspective demonstrates how it's useful to think of the deck types as common answers to the obstacles. This way if people have incompatible ideas of "engine" or "slog," they clearly know that's not what you are talking about.

3. I would remove references to terminology and your disagreements with it, unless it's absolutely necessary (e.g. your issues with "combo"). I think you could still show how the obstacles suggest other common strategies such as the "golden deck" or "stockpile" without as many criticisms of "combo." Maybe you need to keep it in the "beyond the five types" part, but does it need to be in the intro, too?

4. I would tone down the language about the stupidity of engine/bm hybrids. I think "stupid" will just generate resistance and cause some people to try to come up with "hybrid" examples to refute you, even though that completely misses your point. (why is stupid better than "ineffective" or "unfocused"?) Also, I'd take more opportunities to tie this back to the objectives (right now, the only reference is implicit in the word "solutions").


37
Dominion Articles / Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« on: September 19, 2017, 10:38:32 am »
Getting back on topic about the article, what do you most hope readers will take away from this article? Do you want discussions like the one you had with FemurLemur? Something else?

I already mentioned that I think the "obstacles" are the most valuable part and worry that other aspects of the article might distract from that, but I figured I should see what you think is the most valuable before I give any specific suggestions.

38
Dominion Articles / Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« on: September 19, 2017, 08:42:46 am »
And yet it matches with the only experience I have with you. It's fair to say that you and I are both biased. So if everyone else says you're like this, what makes you think I'm going to take your word for it that you're not?

The reason why a newbie is arguing with me right now and veterans aren't isn't that newbies always argue with me and veterans never do. If I was wrong, you could count on a lot of veterans to jump in and point out why I'm wrong.

Either way, if you have any comments or feedback about my character, you can feel free to send them to me via PM. This thread is not the correct platform for that.

Haha, Awaclus, you do realize that arguing with you is always so unproductive that it's pretty much a meme, right?

Also, I think it's more likely that people aren't arguing with you about terminology because they think it doesn't matter, not because they agree with you.

39
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Playing with Black Market for Real
« on: September 19, 2017, 08:36:30 am »
How would split piles work, if you're using the blue backs?

Good point, I obviously haven't had a BM game irl since Empies came out. I'd probably just make it the top card. Or even let them pick. I wouldn't lose sleep over it.

40
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Playing with Black Market for Real
« on: September 18, 2017, 07:43:34 pm »
i don't own it, but why don't you use the blue-backs, and then as you pull a card, grab one of the standard backs for that card?
then you only have to grab the cards you use.

Yeah, this is what I do. It works just fine.  It's never seemed that complicated

Same here. These threads always seem odd to me. I've never thought BM was onerous to set up.

Also, we usually just play with the entire randomizer deck for maximum craziness.

41
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Official Dominion Strategy Podcast
« on: September 17, 2017, 12:59:18 pm »
While normal videos should certainly aim to be short, the audience for podcasts typically wants something lengthy, as they listen to them during long commutes or work.

I agree, but then I think YouTube is a bad delivery service. Not everyone has mobile data or has WiFi on their commutes, so I think it's important that it's easy to be able to download the podcast and listen to it offline

It is easy to be able to download YouTube videos (or just the audio if you want that).

I did download the podcast to listen to it, but I shouldn't have to go to another site or use other software to make a podcast listenable for me. Also, if it's so easy, then my suggestion to make the podcast also available in a downloadable audio format should be easy for BA or Seprix to implement, too. And this isn't even considering the extra level of convenience that would come with integration into iTunes, Google Play, or other similar services. That might be a bit more difficult, though; I don't know.

I may have been too harsh on YouTube podcasts in my original comment, but I think it's a reasonable suggestion that they should consider multiple formats.

42
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Official Dominion Strategy Podcast
« on: September 17, 2017, 11:22:57 am »
While normal videos should certainly aim to be short, the audience for podcasts typically wants something lengthy, as they listen to them during long commutes or work.

I agree, but then I think YouTube is a bad delivery service. Not everyone has mobile data or has WiFi on their commutes, so I think it's important that it's easy to be able to download the podcast and listen to it offline

43
Dominion Articles / Re: The Infinite Number of Fundamental Deck Types
« on: September 14, 2017, 01:56:41 pm »
I think this is a useful article, but I think the title puts the focus in the wrong place. In my opinion, the valuable insight here is thinking about the "obstacles" and the need to determine a strategy that can address each one. I worry that your current title just encourages the latest argument about deck types and how we define them, rather than the value of your perspective

44
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Dominion Strategy Blog Returns!
« on: September 13, 2017, 08:12:43 pm »
Since people are posting ideas here. Here's a few I thought of that are geared a little more toward retention of players/getting people to invest in learning more strategy:

1: Something describing the common skill plateaus people reach (going from buying random stuff, to big money, to engines, to finer considerations such as shuffle control, PPR, etc.) Something like this could be helpful to show the strategic depth of the game, and get people to see that it's a worthwhile investment with enjoyment at each level.

2: How to hook new players. (useful starting kingdoms, dos and don'ts, etc.)

3: Suggestions for if you start leaving your IRL Dominion friends in the dust.

45
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Dominion Strategy Blog Returns!
« on: September 12, 2017, 03:33:07 pm »
Hey everyone! I just wanted to let everyone know that I am now managing the Dominion Strategy blog. Now that the blog is under new management, I am looking for new articles to post up. So, if you have an idea for an article, feel free to post it on the forum. I am especially interested in beginner strategy articles for our Dominion 101 series. If anyone has any comments or suggestions, please feel free to reach out to me, or post them below. I am open to hearing everyone's feedback.

Great news! Could you please give a little more information on what qualities you are expecting for the beginner strategy articles? Do individual card articles count? Should it be geared toward base only players? Should it just be about general principles (e.g. the deck type articles)? Is anything fine as long as it doesn't get too caught up in edge-case minutiae?

Finally, if we have article ideas, but aren't likely to write them ourselves, where should we share those ideas? Here? Should I make a "articles ideas" thread in the articles section?

Thanks!

46
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Which Removed Cards Do You Use IRL?
« on: September 11, 2017, 09:37:51 pm »
I love alt vp and find great hall innocuous, so I've kept it in. I enjoy the surprise and risk factor of tribute so I've kept it. I still have coppersmith, but I honestly don't know why. And I still keep thief around because my nephews are obsessed with it. Also, I pretty much never play competitively irl, so weak cards get used more often.

The card I'm most happy is gone is spy. It was just unbearable to sit and watch people play it over and over only for it to have almost no effect on anything.

47
Dominion Articles / Re: On Lurker
« on: September 08, 2017, 11:43:15 am »

Procession stays in play.  See wiki:
Quote
When you use a Throne Room variant on a Duration, it stays in play, even if multiplying the Duration's effect is not meaningful, such as Throning a Tactician, or Throning an Archive with 3 or fewer cards remaining in your deck. With Procession specifically, Procession remains out even though the Duration has been trashed, and remains in play until the Duration would have been discarded (if at all).

Check the next line on the procession specific wiki page:

Quote
This has since been overruled

 ;)


48
Yea with all respect to Theory I'm not sure derailing your post with drama about the potential logistics of the blog was a turn for the better.. at the very least perhaps it should have been/should be split off to another thread?

No it was fine. A lot was learned and it was a good thing overall. Because of this the blog will be active with good content.

I personally agree with Seprix here, especially since things are actually happening now. I mean, 3 new articles were posted yesterday alone; awesome

49
I always mix up Talisman and Quarry. They're both four cost treasures from prosperity that provide one coin when played, and have text under their line with coin symbols in them.

50
For those who are worried about Adam, what's the danger with initially letting him be part of the administrating team and then seeing what happens? Presumably if all your fears come true, but wero, BA, etc. is really in charge, they would just remove him. Then we're dealing with what actually happens, rather than a bunch of what-ifs.

Or am I missing something here?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6

Page created in 0.231 seconds with 18 queries.