Print

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

[WanderingWinder]

I'm not sure where to put this - if one of the admins wants to move it to an appropriate place, that'd be great.

I have had an idea for a couple months of having a long-running game, which will consist of two parts. First part is that one of the players will propose a kingdom of 10 cards (or eleven with a bane), which he hopes is not very easy to figure out in terms of the optimal strategy. Then other players (can't be the proposer) try to figure out what the optimal way to play *is*. Bonus points to proposer for tactical complexity, for needing to be reactionary to the opponent, for having different *types* of deck be viable, and most of all for having more strategies than 2 that appear viable. But basically the proposer gets points for the longer it takes to solve the kingdom, and the solvers get points the quicker they're able to do it.

If we're actually going to try to keep track of some running score, we'd need some particular point values for things, time limits, etc. But I figure we'd probably just be doing this for the fun of it, and possibly to try to figure out what kind of sets make for interesting ones, getting better as players, etc. etc. etc.

Anyway, the idea would be that once one set is done, by some consensus being established, we'd move on to the next person to get a chance to solve it. Oh, and we should give the proposer a chance to 'defend' his set by showing that the apparent consensus is wrong. And we'd be looking for evidence here of some sort - usually this is going to mean test games, which probably means you'll need collaboration between multiple solvers. Well, these are all details that can be worked out.

Let me know what you guys think, if you're interested, what ideas you have, etc.

[Robz888]

I am interested! Would love to propose a set. (Might get started on coming up with one right now)

I assume you are just talking about two-player games. (Though three and four player games offer a lot more variance in a given board's optimal strategy, they also offer a lot more luck, and it may be really hard to prove which strategy was the best, because it's very often true that strategy A is best given seat position 1, strategy B is best given seat position 3, etc. Of course this can happen in two player, too, but it's a lot less pronounced.)

[Qvist]

Interesting idea. I would participate. I'm not sure about the scoring part, but let's just try it out.

[Polk5440]

Interesting idea. I would possibly participate.

[theory]

My only question is ... does this mean WanderingWinder has officially joined the f.ds Forum Games community?   

[sudgy]

That sounds interesting.  When I designed a kingdom for the kingdom design contest, I only had the base game and intrigue, so I just used geronimoo's simulator and found a bunch of strategies that beat each other.  One card got thrown in that I would take out, but I could post it.

[werothegreat]

I am interested.

[Powerman]

/Yes.

[Wingnut]

I may not have any idea how to solve these things, but I'm in and heck I can probably come up with a kingdom or two (or more, coming up with Kingdoms for the Design challenge has been one of my favorite Dominion related things, even more so than playing often times)

[Piemaster]

I think it sounds fun although, like Qvist, I'm not sure the scoring part will work.

[philosophyguy]

I love the idea, but not a fan of the scoring. Honestly, I think this community will be more than happy to try even without the scoring - as long as we're not flooded with Kingdoms.

Possible ideas (both are independent but could go together):

1) Have the community vote on which Kingdom they want to work on at present.
2) Instead of trying to solve the Kingdom in secret, have community members establish a thread for each kingdom and keep proposing solutions, backed by game logs, sim data, etc. Collaborate to find the best strategies/tactical tweaks.

[WanderingWinder]

I apparently oversold the keeping score thing. Like I say in the third paragraph, I really figure we'd just be doing this for the fun of it. The reason I talk about 'bonus points' and such is that I would like to lay out goals, things to aim for.

And to answer Robz888, yeah, I was thinking 2 player. You could do it with more, but you'd want to do that separately.

[WanderingWinder]

Okay, the big question now becomes how do we decide which kingdoms get to get attacked first. My best idea, and I don't think it's a great one, is whoever submits one first gets to have it tested, and it stands until it's been solved - nobody can submit another one until then. The problem with just having people submit them left and right is twofold: people won't actually try to solve them so much, and you get lost in a sea of challenges, which makes each of them far less popular than if there were a steady stream.

Anyway, let me know if you guys have better ideas - I'm sure they're out there.

[enfynet]

Why not start off with a couple of the "recommended sets of 10" and after a couple of those, let the person(s) who solved them submit new kingdoms.

[WanderingWinder]

Why not start off with a couple of the "recommended sets of 10" and after a couple of those, let the person(s) who solved them submit new kingdoms.

I expect that generally, it's going to take more than one person to solve a kingdom - you're going to have to test it with someone, at least.