Print

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

[Big Tuna]

So I recently gave Geronimoo are hard time about not helping an opponent correctly(IMO) playing Bank and I had this game come to my mind.

In this case my noob (ok not a noob, I believe level 15 at the time) ripped me apart with multiple Golem and Possession. Playing a few Possessions per turn and surely enjoying every minute of it. I was panicked and resigned to defeat but I wondered early on in the game if I had developed enough of an early VP chip lead that he might not be able to make it up. But alas, it was strong enough for most games but not for what was ensuing in this one. I would go down in blazing defeat, but I kept checking my VP chip total until I realized what was happening. And he clearly was unaware.

http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20120413-170443-f0b37732.html

At the end of the he spouted some profanity and left.
Should I have made him aware of what was happening? He had to have been enjoying himself thoroughly up till the tallying of the score.

[Fabian]

So you're saying you gave Geronimoo a hard time for his Bank game, and then let this game happen?

Heh yeeeeeeah ok then buddy.

[Big Tuna]

So you're saying you gave Geronimoo a hard time for his Bank game, and then let this game happen?

This game was before he posted about his game. FWIW

[Fabian]

Fair enough, not sure that helps though. Unless your point in posting this was to publicly apologize or something, but I didn't get that from your post.

[Big Tuna]

Nope, this was the point of my post.

Should I have made him aware of what was happening? He had to have been enjoying himself thoroughly up till the tallying of the score.

[Fabian]

Right, and I think it's hilarious that you give Geronimoo crap for the Bank situation and don't have a very clear answer to that question.

[ftl]

Yeah... whatever the right answer is, it's pretty obviously the same in the bank case and in the bishop/possession case...

[Big Tuna]

I guess I see the gray in the fact the my opponent seemed to be more familiar than having just played with the base set. I had never had someone use my Bishop to trash my cards and gaining VP for me. I had wrongly assumed, that he was gaining those points but obviously that just an assumption that comes due to my personal lack of enlightenment about Possession.

Honestly, I thought I built the stronger deck. And from the moment I realized he was digging his own grave I would have won before he could have gotten his deck back under control. He might not have even believed he was helping me if I told him.

[Fabian]

I'm counting four terrible/hilarious/awesome rationalizations in that post. Anyone got more?

[Big Tuna]

I was just looking for peoples opinions on this situation. I'm not really sure if I your view is that I should have told him what was happening or if level 40's are above reproach, especially if the scrutiny is by someone as low as myself.

[olneyce]

Yes, obviously you should tell them.  Sheesh.

I mean, I thought it was pretty obvious in the Bank case, too.  But Bank is at least a (relatively) simple card and the problem was immediately apparent (where did all my money go?).  Possession is NOT a simple card, and the problem (wait, I'm not the one getting those VP?) is not immediately obvious.

If you are of the ilk who believe that it's a competitive game and you should never do anything to help your opponent then you don't say anything here.  If you are someone who believes that there is ever a circumstance to help out your opposition to prevent obvious mistakes, this is one of those times.

[Fabian]

I was just looking for peoples opinions on this situation. I'm not really sure if I your view is that I should have told him what was happening or if level 40's are above reproach, especially if the scrutiny is by someone as low as myself.

My view is that it's deliciously awesome to read your comments on decency and sportsmanship in Geronimoo's thread followed by your awful rationalizations on why this situation, which is clearly like 10 times worse on paper (see olneyce's post), somehow would be ok.

As for what I personally think you/Geronimoo should do, or what I would have done, isn't too interesting to me.

[Forge!!!]

My god, we really need this app to come out soon...we need something to talk about.......

[dondon151]

I'm counting four terrible/hilarious/awesome rationalizations in that post. Anyone got more?

If Big Tuna wasn't acutely aware that trashing cards with Bishop while possessed gives him the VP chips, then I don't see how that is a terrible or (sardonically) awesome rationalization. You can't be expected to correct your opponent's mistakes if you yourself are not aware of the mistake.

[Fabian]

Definitely, and that wasn't one of the four.

* My opponent seemed to be more familiar than having just played with the base set.
* I thought I built the stronger deck.
* From the moment I realized he was digging his own grave I would have won before he could have gotten his deck back under control.
* He might not have even believed he was helping me if I told him.

[timchen]

Interesting, i thought this situation is a bit more subtle.

The point is, in the bank situation, the opponent is just making, sort of a, syntax error if we make analogy to programming. I will fully expect in his mind the bank should make the money when he plays it right.

On the other hand, in this kind of game, he may have built his deck in the hope of getting the VP tokens from possession. At the point when his deck is finally clicking, sometimes it can be a hard thing to swallow that his initial assumption was wrong.

That being said, I think I will tell my opponent that he will not get the points if the game is still close; if not, I'll probably try to finish as soon as possible and point it out afterwards.

I think, conceptually I'll avoid giving out strategical recommendations unless my opponent asks me about it (this is also the situation I think which you can accidentally sound presumptuous and make your opponent unhappy) but will correct the technical issues.

(Admittedly there are not that many technical issues in Dominion, Bank, Outpost, Tactician, Possession are about the only ones that I can think of right now.)

[olneyce]

Sure, I mean my default is that if it's a strategic question I'm far more willing to just let it go.  That is, if there is any chance they might simply disagree (even if it's incredibly obvious from my perspective that they are wrong), it's far more likely to be presumptuous to interfere.

If your opponent buys a copper with every +buy for no good reason, it's far less incumbent on you to let them know.  Or if they buy like 7 copies of Thief in a game where I'm going for Festival/Library and am happy to be rid of all my coins.  The actual thing they're doing is usually a bad move but that doesn't make it intrinsically wrong.

Using Bishop to trash valuable cards from my opponent's hand while Possessing them is intrinsically a mistake.  It's not a strategic misstep; it's a misunderstanding of the rules.  I mean, if you desperately need the $1 and there's nothing else to trash, maybe.  But that's about it.

[ecq]

In general, it seems obvious that you should inform your opponent of the rule if he's doing this.  If you were playing with physical cards, you'd have to.  You'd need to know who to give the VP tokens to.  I've informed opponents every time it came up.

However, in this specific case, if Big Tuna was also unaware of the rule, I kind of like the outcome.  They started on equal ground.  One player noticed something weird was happening and figured out what it was, while his opponent didn't.  Big Tuna didn't win because he knew the rules better but because he was paying closer attention to the state of the game.

I probably still wouldn't have done the same, but it's not 100% black and white in my mind.  The fact that he was way behind and enduring multiple Possession plays per turn makes me cut a little more slack as well.

[Davio]

Why is this Good Guy Greg not yet in the other thread?

Possesses you
[ Smiley Stoned Dude Face ]
Bishops a Colony .....
And plays Goons


Anyway, when I see my opponent make a mistake because of a rule he doesn't understand, I alert him.
I also help my opponents with Isotropic bugs or features. When an opponent plays every Copper (in a non GM game) I tell him he can just press the +$X button. A lot of the times, the problem solves itself, because my opponent will figure out what he did wrong and will do it right the next time.

When my opponent makes a lot of strategically unsound choices, I don't say anything during the game, but rather I hang around to see if he's willing to go over the game with me. If he just gg's, I gg back and we both head back to the lobby.

[Big Tuna]

In general, it seems obvious that you should inform your opponent of the rule if he's doing this.  If you were playing with physical cards, you'd have to.  You'd need to know who to give the VP tokens to.  I've informed opponents every time it came up.

However, in this specific case, if Big Tuna was also unaware of the rule, I kind of like the outcome.  They started on equal ground.  One player noticed something weird was happening and figured out what it was, while his opponent didn't.  Big Tuna didn't win because he knew the rules better but because he was paying closer attention to the state of the game.

I probably still wouldn't have done the same, but it's not 100% black and white in my mind.  The fact that he was way behind and enduring multiple Possession plays per turn makes me cut a little more slack as well.

You are awfully generous in your view of my action. If I had been playing this IRL we would have likely played that entire game wrong. My opponent would have take the VP chips because I would have thought they were his. That is likely due to the fact that the Amazon Bix Box pushed me over the edge to buy the game and actually every expansion available at the time. Why does this matter? While I did released each expansion slowly to those with which I game, it was still far faster than the rate the expansions actually came out. And if there is one expansion we breezed past the quickest it was Alchemy. I have never seen a person use Possession IRL that I can recall, let alone with Bishop or I suppose Monument. So I never really scoured forums to find out answers to handle various Possession questions (Granted- most Dominion questions can be answered with, 'read the card' and Possession is no exception). To me Possession just means 'attack!' and I always have view it effects on the possessed and negative. IRL, I would have rolled my eyes as my opponent used my deck to beat me thoroughly.