Print

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

[GendoIkari]

I don't see why the star ratings can't just be based on number of turns.  In general, the faster you end a game of Dominion on a win, the better you played it.

Because it depends as much on what your opponent does as on what you do. If you he mirrors you, going for the same VP cards, then the game will take roughly half as long as when you go for different VP card piles. Regardless of how well you play.

It'll reward mirroring your opponent's strategy for a faster end EVEN IF that strategy is suboptimal and you have a higher chance of winning by not mirroring it.

Except you are playing bots, so they know roughly in advance what the Bot is going to do and can adjust it accordingly.
Its part of the puzzle. Whats the Bot going for, how can I beat that strat in the fastest number of turns.

If the point of it is to be a puzzle based on Dominion, rather than the game of Dominion, then that's fine... but at that point there is no objective correct answer as to what is the best criteria for 3 stars. If it's a puzzle, it makes just as much sense to say "to get 3 stars on this level, you must win by less than 4 points, while having at least 10 Coppers in your deck." That could make for a perfectly good puzzle. You could also award 3 stars whether you win or not, as long as you end the game with more than 60 cards in your deck. Just look at the solo-challenges forum... any of those could make good 3-star qualifications, if what matters here is what's a good puzzle.

It takes just as much skill to accomplish those things as it does to win a game in less than 16 turns or to win by more than 18 points. Those are just different types of skills. And none of them are the same as the type of skill that it takes to be a good Dominion player.

[jsh357]

I don't see why the star ratings can't just be based on number of turns.  In general, the faster you end a game of Dominion on a win, the better you played it.

Because it depends as much on what your opponent does as on what you do. If you he mirrors you, going for the same VP cards, then the game will take roughly half as long as when you go for different VP card piles. Regardless of how well you play.

It'll reward mirroring your opponent's strategy for a faster end EVEN IF that strategy is suboptimal and you have a higher chance of winning by not mirroring it.

Yeah, after trying to formulate this, I think I'm more in the camp of 'Adventure ratings don't seem fun to me, do whatever you want with them, Goko, cause I'm not going for them anyway.'  I can't think of a good way to incorporate them at all.

[Donald X.]

I agree with GendoIkari that going for stars changes your strategy regardless of what the formula is, with GendoIkari that they are unlikely to take out the stars, and with ftl that how long the game lasts depends on your opponent.

The point of campaign levels is in fact to be puzzles based on Dominion. They vary starting decks and sometimes other things. An argument here is, that you can endlessly play Dominion vs. bots if you want. So it's not unreasonable to want the campaigns to be different from that.

The puzzle of "winning the level" is more compelling than the puzzle of "get 3 stars." You can ignore the stars puzzle if you want though.

It's true that the stars thing could be something much different from score/turns. It could be, for example, one star for winning, two stars for winning without buying any silver/gold, three for not buying a particular kingdom card. Whatever it is, it wants to be basically the same thing on every level, both so people can just learn what it is, and so I don't need to spend hours picking out star formulas.

[kn1tt3r]

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)?

[Donald X.]

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.

[Ozle]

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.

<Tony Montana Accent>
In this game, first you get the stars, then when you get the stars you get the gokocoins, then when you get the gokocoins you get the zaps. Then when you get the zaps you get the promo cards

[kn1tt3r]

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.

<Tony Montana Accent>
In this game, first you get the stars, then when you get the stars you get the gokocoins, then when you get the gokocoins you get the zaps. Then when you get the zaps you get the promo cards

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?

[Ozle]

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.

<Tony Montana Accent>
In this game, first you get the stars, then when you get the stars you get the gokocoins, then when you get the gokocoins you get the zaps. Then when you get the zaps you get the promo cards

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?

*sigh*
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!

[Donald X.]

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!

If I make the quotes more accurate they just aren't recognizable, I don't know what to tell you.

Anyway yeah. Just stop thinking the stars are possibly meaningful in any way whatsoever, right now. Unless, you know, you like stars. And who doesn't?

[Ozle]

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!

If I make the quotes more accurate they just aren't recognizable, I don't know what to tell you.

Anyway yeah. Just stop thinking the stars are possibly meaningful in any way whatsoever, right now. Unless, you know, you like stars. And who doesn't?

[Donald X.]

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.

[kn1tt3r]

Ok fine, I supposte that's settled. 

[DStu]

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!

Come on, come on. You almost got me. Catch me. Come on.

[Captain_Frisk]

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.

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.

[Donald X.]

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.

[Captain_Frisk]

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.

Thanks for clarifying.  Ozle is the best poster!

[Ozle]

Thats no moon...thats my ego!

[Tables]

A few days ago I saw Donald liked my post on BGG, and it made my day.

More importantly, it seems like a really easy thing to do that more stars = more VP chips. Like you could get +4 from an act for getting a two star rating (40/60 stars), and another +8 for a three star rating (60/60 stars).

[Ozle]

? You don't need no stinking stars.

Went to watch tv in bed  and lo and behold there was blazing saddles!

My joint favourite movie joke is in that film "but i shoot with this hand"!

[Piemaster]

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.

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.

[Donald X.]

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.

Making unique challenges for 3 stars on each level, okay I am not putting in the hours making that content, I have done my time here, and each level already is a unique challenge, a set of 10 kingdom cards and a set of starting hands and sometimes some other tweak, once that stuff is programmed. And at the same time, there are achievements, they are not in the game but they will show up someday, there are a ton of them, one for every kingdom card in fact, giving you some special challenge, and those challenges don't need to be specifically accomplished in campaign games, even better.

Possibly stars could be something that necessarily meant beating the level twice? Beat it again without buying any of the cards you bought last time. That seems too hard to track - obv. you don't want to be locked in by your first victory, so it would be like, track every set of cards I used to beat this level, and well not happening. I wouldn't want to just have a flag per card and make it, 3 stars if you've bought every card on this level over any number of victories, because then I just try to build a fairgrounds deck every time, I am winning okay quick buy up stuff.

It's harder to win if there are more players. It could be, if you want to go for 2 stars / 3 stars, we add a player / 2 players. Then either I go for that game one again every time and am now just waiting extra for bots to play (honestly not so much on very fast, but if they are all playing attacks or Bishops or whatever it adds up, and not everyone wants to play on very fast), or the game makes me beat it multiple times - win once for one star, now you can choose add a player and go for two, and well, I am not feeling it.

Anyway maybe there is some good idea out there; as it stands I don't see something better than score. At first I thought, mix score and turns, but really that is just saying "okay if you 3-pile it with one extra Estate you deserve the stars," and man, what was that about replayability and more challenges? If you beat it that way and want the stars, beat it the lots of Provinces way. The low score victory is still there for you if you just want to get to the next level. It's simpler just having the one system. I could see saying "some levels it's score, some it's turns" in order to deal with stuff like Goons, but mixing them is more complex, and people need to know what the threshold is.

Which is another thing, the screen should say what the threshold is.

[Insomniac]

I figured it out!!!

(Ok maybe I was bored... http://dominionlogs.goko.com/20121022/log.505ca69b0cf21ba04cfa2f17.1350947604334.txt)