# Dominion Strategy Forum

• February 25, 2024, 02:50:19 am
• Welcome, Guest

### News:

DominionStrategy Wiki

Pages: [1] 2  All

### AuthorTopic: Notation  (Read 18251 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

#### Morgrim7

• Torturer
• Offline
• Posts: 1701
• Torturer chains? How primitive.
• Respect: +748
##### Notation
« on: March 08, 2013, 05:46:45 am »
0

Do you think we need a dominion notation? I have developed a Dominion notation, I just want to know your thoughts before I post it.
Logged
"Oh sweet merciful heavens.

I sit here, lost amongst the cloud, that which is the brain of the Morgrim Mod. Perhaps I will learn the inner workings of that storied mind. Perhaps I will simply go mad.

Dominion Notation: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=7265.msg206246#msg206246

#### Qvist

• Mountebank
• Offline
• Posts: 2400
• Respect: +4084
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #1 on: March 08, 2013, 06:11:02 am »
+2

http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=2551.0

I think a Dominion Notation would be pretty good. The problem is to find a balance between it being short and still readable.

#### Davio

• 2012 Dutch Champion
• Offline
• Posts: 4787
• Respect: +3412
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #2 on: March 08, 2013, 06:18:28 am »
+2

A replayer would be even better.
Logged

Mage Knight: Arythea

#### Morgrim7

• Torturer
• Offline
• Posts: 1701
• Torturer chains? How primitive.
• Respect: +748
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #3 on: March 08, 2013, 09:51:07 pm »
+2

Morgrim7’s Dominion Notation
Return: \X\
Opponent: #X#
Gain: xX
Draw: +X
Topdeck: *X*
Trash: /X/
Set aside: {X}
Pass: |X|
Reveal: !X!
Card’s Affect: (X)
Name Card: "X"
Card from previous turn’s affect (Duration/Possession): ^X^
Curse, Copper, Silver, Gold, Potion, Platinum, Estate, Duchy, Province, Colony are abbreviated with their first letter. (Province, Potion, Platinum are abbreviated PR, PO, PL. Curse and Copper are CU, C)
Also, does anyone have a good way to abbreviate cards that doesn’t suffer from ambiguity?

The basic gist is that you play a card, put its affect in parenthesis, and use the most basic terms for all cards. For example, when you play Island and Native Village, the term for “set aside” is used in both instances. Actions, Buys, +Cash, VP chips, cost reduction and such are implied.
Example 1: (In this turn, A JOAT is played, an estate is drawn, an estate is trashed, and a silver is bought.)
T1-turn 1 (CCCE JOAT)
JOAT(xS, -E, +E, /E/)CCC[ S ]

Example 2: (In this turn, many different things happen and many controversial and difficult cards played, such as Possession, Black Market; Tunnel is discarded, Watchtower is revealed and such)
T1 (Border Village, CCCC)
Border Village(+Scrying Pool)Scrying Pool(!+Black Market, Possession, Crossroads, Envoy, E!) Envoy(#-Tunnel#(xG)+E, E, E, Watchtower) Crossroads(+Island, CCC), Black Market(!Farming Village, Alchemist, Apprentice! CCCCCC[Apprentice]!Wathctower!(*Apprentice*), \Farming Village, Alchemist\)Island({C})Possession
^Possession^(CCCCC)
#CCCCC#xD
« Last Edit: March 09, 2013, 02:51:33 am by Morgrim7 »
Logged
"Oh sweet merciful heavens.

I sit here, lost amongst the cloud, that which is the brain of the Morgrim Mod. Perhaps I will learn the inner workings of that storied mind. Perhaps I will simply go mad.

Dominion Notation: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=7265.msg206246#msg206246

#### heron

• Saboteur
• Offline
• Posts: 1054
• Respect: +1182
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #4 on: March 08, 2013, 09:59:27 pm »
0

I like it. Very readable, and if it were commonly used the symbols would quickly become intuitive. Of course, with logs, notation isn't all that useful.
Logged

#### Morgrim7

• Torturer
• Offline
• Posts: 1701
• Torturer chains? How primitive.
• Respect: +748
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #5 on: March 08, 2013, 10:01:53 pm »
0

I like it. Very readable, and if it were commonly used the symbols would quickly become intuitive. Of course, with logs, notation isn't all that useful.
Yes, I'm thinking more along the lines of un-played games and puzzle solutions.
Logged
"Oh sweet merciful heavens.

I sit here, lost amongst the cloud, that which is the brain of the Morgrim Mod. Perhaps I will learn the inner workings of that storied mind. Perhaps I will simply go mad.

Dominion Notation: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=7265.msg206246#msg206246

#### heron

• Saboteur
• Offline
• Posts: 1054
• Respect: +1182
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #6 on: March 08, 2013, 10:04:34 pm »
0

Oooh, puzzle solutions! Why didn't I think of that!
Logged

#### RD

• Thief
• Offline
• Posts: 93
• Respect: +70
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #7 on: March 08, 2013, 11:54:46 pm »
0

Super cool.

It needs some provision for multiple-option cards, is the only oversight I can see outside of individual cards like Stash. The current notation is good enough to figure out what you did with a Count or Steward (insignificant edge cases aside), but cards like Pawn and Squire can lead to ambiguity.

Something like (+A) for +Actions could possibly work (although you might want to abbreviate some card name with A instead). But for the sake of generality, maybe you should do something like Pawn(1,3) to represent choosing the first and third Pawn options listed on the card, and then you're covered if there's a multiple choice card with off-the-wall options. I'm sure this could be omitted if you don't need it, as with Steward etc. It could also apply to optional effects; e.g. Scavenger(1, *C*) would mean that you opted to use Scavenger's first optional power (discarding your deck) before topdecking Copper.

Oh, also I suppose you have to cover "naming" a card (for Embargo, WW etc.  The "reveal" notation seems insufficient since WW also reveals a card; although I guess you could just skip showing what card was named and just show whether WW successfully draws a second card or not). How about quotation marks: "X" ?

I don't think abbreviating card names ought to be that hard. A lot of standard abbreviations have been established in the community already, and the limited number of cards available in a game makes it much less ambiguous (puzzles being different of course). If all else fails you can define abbreviations as you go. If it takes off I'm sure it'll standardize.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2013, 12:10:58 am by RD »
Logged

#### Morgrim7

• Torturer
• Offline
• Posts: 1701
• Torturer chains? How primitive.
• Respect: +748
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #8 on: March 09, 2013, 02:51:06 am »
0

Super cool.

It needs some provision for multiple-option cards, is the only oversight I can see outside of individual cards like Stash. The current notation is good enough to figure out what you did with a Count or Steward (insignificant edge cases aside), but cards like Pawn and Squire can lead to ambiguity.

Something like (+A) for +Actions could possibly work (although you might want to abbreviate some card name with A instead). But for the sake of generality, maybe you should do something like Pawn(1,3) to represent choosing the first and third Pawn options listed on the card, and then you're covered if there's a multiple choice card with off-the-wall options. I'm sure this could be omitted if you don't need it, as with Steward etc. It could also apply to optional effects; e.g. Scavenger(1, *C*) would mean that you opted to use Scavenger's first optional power (discarding your deck) before topdecking Copper.

Oh, also I suppose you have to cover "naming" a card (for Embargo, WW etc.  The "reveal" notation seems insufficient since WW also reveals a card; although I guess you could just skip showing what card was named and just show whether WW successfully draws a second card or not). How about quotation marks: "X" ?

I don't think abbreviating card names ought to be that hard. A lot of standard abbreviations have been established in the community already, and the limited number of cards available in a game makes it much less ambiguous (puzzles being different of course). If all else fails you can define abbreviations as you go. If it takes off I'm sure it'll standardize.

For Stash, the position is implied. When you draw a Stash, its implied that that is where you placed it.
For Pawn and Squire, I think we should use the +a(Actions), b(Buys), \$(cash), ect, but only where there is ambiguity. In all other instances, it can be ignored.
Name = "X" added. This can also be helpful for Wishing Well, Mystique, and such.
For abbreviation, I was thinking the first four letters, and if there are two words, the first letter of each word?
Logged
"Oh sweet merciful heavens.

I sit here, lost amongst the cloud, that which is the brain of the Morgrim Mod. Perhaps I will learn the inner workings of that storied mind. Perhaps I will simply go mad.

Dominion Notation: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=7265.msg206246#msg206246

#### Qvist

• Mountebank
• Offline
• Posts: 2400
• Respect: +4084
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #9 on: March 09, 2013, 05:17:17 am »
0

This is similar to mine, Morgrim.

JOAT(xS, -E, +E, /E/)CCC[ S ]
would be
JT [+2>; {E>; {E); (E-] 111   |  +2>

The problem is that yours might be more readable, but it's ambiguos. -E says that you discarded an Estate, but from your hand or from the top of your deck?
This could be problematic for example with Hermit. How would you transcribe "Play Hermit, trash a Necropolis, gain a Hermit, trash the Hermit, gain a Madman." ?
Something like that?

So, the problem is now that you don't know if you trashed the Necropolis from hand or your discard pile. You might say that it doesn't really matter, but I think it does. A log or such a notation should have all infos that are needed to replay this scenario.

#### SirPeebles

• Cartographer
• Offline
• Posts: 3249
• Respect: +5458
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #10 on: March 09, 2013, 05:34:03 am »
+4

A little weird that CU is curse rather than Copper, but at least both letters are capitalized
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

#### Morgrim7

• Torturer
• Offline
• Posts: 1701
• Torturer chains? How primitive.
• Respect: +748
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #11 on: March 09, 2013, 06:52:45 am »
0

This is similar to mine, Morgrim.

JOAT(xS, -E, +E, /E/)CCC[ S ]
would be
JT [+2>; {E>; {E); (E-] 111   |  +2>

The problem is that yours might be more readable, but it's ambiguos. -E says that you discarded an Estate, but from your hand or from the top of your deck?
This could be problematic for example with Hermit. How would you transcribe "Play Hermit, trash a Necropolis, gain a Hermit, trash the Hermit, gain a Madman." ?
Something like that?

So, the problem is now that you don't know if you trashed the Necropolis from hand or your discard pile. You might say that it doesn't really matter, but I think it does. A log or such a notation should have all infos that are needed to replay this scenario.
JOAT doesn't let you discard from hand, so its implied that its from your deck.
About the Hermit issue, i think it would be something like this: HERM(/-NECR/...

A little weird that CU is curse rather than Copper, but at least both letters are capitalized
Why would CU be Copper?
Logged
"Oh sweet merciful heavens.

I sit here, lost amongst the cloud, that which is the brain of the Morgrim Mod. Perhaps I will learn the inner workings of that storied mind. Perhaps I will simply go mad.

Dominion Notation: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=7265.msg206246#msg206246

#### Qvist

• Mountebank
• Offline
• Posts: 2400
• Respect: +4084
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #12 on: March 09, 2013, 07:05:59 am »
0

Yeah, with JaoT it's implied, that's why I gave you the Hermit example.

The whole concept is that every action is a move from a card from one area to another.
These are the areas.
{Deck}
(Hand)
+Supply+
-Trash-
|Play|
#Mat#

The notation only has to show from where to where a card goes.
Playing a card is basically from hand into play, e.g. (JT| , but this is the most commonly used case, therefore I just write JT
Drawing is "from deck into hand", therefore {E) when you draw an Estate.
etc.

The good thing about this notation is IMO that you are well prepared for every possible card that might come up.
I've found another ambiguos case. Let's say I play Death Cart and I have another Death Cart in hand.
If you write /DEAT/ we wouldn't know if you didn't trash an Action card and therefore the Deatch Cart is trashed from play or if you trashed the second Death Cart from hand.
I would write it either |DC- or (DC- depending on what I've done.

#### Rabid

• Jester
• Offline
• Posts: 840
• Respect: +643
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #13 on: March 09, 2013, 07:49:13 am »
+1

A little weird that CU is curse rather than Copper, but at least both letters are capitalized
Why would CU be Copper?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper
Logged
Twitch
1 Day Cup #1:Ednever

#### Morgrim7

• Torturer
• Offline
• Posts: 1701
• Torturer chains? How primitive.
• Respect: +748
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #14 on: March 09, 2013, 10:10:08 am »
0

A little weird that CU is curse rather than Copper, but at least both letters are capitalized
Why would CU be Copper?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper
heh…never was really good at Chemistry…although im disappointed in myself for not catching that
Logged
"Oh sweet merciful heavens.

I sit here, lost amongst the cloud, that which is the brain of the Morgrim Mod. Perhaps I will learn the inner workings of that storied mind. Perhaps I will simply go mad.

Dominion Notation: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=7265.msg206246#msg206246

#### Morgrim7

• Torturer
• Offline
• Posts: 1701
• Torturer chains? How primitive.
• Respect: +748
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #15 on: March 09, 2013, 10:16:39 am »
0

Oh, and about Death Cart, if having the extra DC actually comes into play it will be assumed that you trashed it from play.
Logged
"Oh sweet merciful heavens.

I sit here, lost amongst the cloud, that which is the brain of the Morgrim Mod. Perhaps I will learn the inner workings of that storied mind. Perhaps I will simply go mad.

Dominion Notation: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=7265.msg206246#msg206246

#### AJD

• Cartographer
• Offline
• Posts: 3289
• Respect: +4426
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #16 on: March 09, 2013, 10:23:12 am »
0

The whole concept is that every action is a move from a card from one area to another.
These are the areas.
{Deck}
(Hand)
+Supply+
-Trash-
|Play|
#Mat#

The notation only has to show from where to where a card goes.

There's still an ambiguity—does <Inn} mean you top-decked the Inn, or that you shuffled it into your deck?
Logged

#### Morgrim7

• Torturer
• Offline
• Posts: 1701
• Torturer chains? How primitive.
• Respect: +748
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #17 on: March 09, 2013, 10:26:21 am »
0

Also, if I was to gain a Curse but reveal Trader, how would that look?
Logged
"Oh sweet merciful heavens.

I sit here, lost amongst the cloud, that which is the brain of the Morgrim Mod. Perhaps I will learn the inner workings of that storied mind. Perhaps I will simply go mad.

Dominion Notation: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=7265.msg206246#msg206246

#### Powerman

• Jester
• Offline
• Posts: 766
• Respect: +604
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #18 on: March 09, 2013, 10:30:32 am »
0

The whole concept is that every action is a move from a card from one area to another.
These are the areas.
{Deck}
(Hand)
+Supply+
-Trash-
|Play|
#Mat#

The notation only has to show from where to where a card goes.

There's still an ambiguity—does <Inn} mean you top-decked the Inn, or that you shuffled it into your deck?

Is it even possible to top-deck an Inn?
Logged
A man on a mission.

#### Morgrim7

• Torturer
• Offline
• Posts: 1701
• Torturer chains? How primitive.
• Respect: +748
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #19 on: March 09, 2013, 10:32:58 am »
0

The whole concept is that every action is a move from a card from one area to another.
These are the areas.
{Deck}
(Hand)
+Supply+
-Trash-
|Play|
#Mat#

The notation only has to show from where to where a card goes.

There's still an ambiguity—does <Inn} mean you top-decked the Inn, or that you shuffled it into your deck?

Is it even possible to top-deck an Inn?
Watchtower, Royal Seal.
Logged
"Oh sweet merciful heavens.

I sit here, lost amongst the cloud, that which is the brain of the Morgrim Mod. Perhaps I will learn the inner workings of that storied mind. Perhaps I will simply go mad.

Dominion Notation: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=7265.msg206246#msg206246

#### Powerman

• Jester
• Offline
• Posts: 766
• Respect: +604
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #20 on: March 09, 2013, 10:50:12 am »
0

The whole concept is that every action is a move from a card from one area to another.
These are the areas.
{Deck}
(Hand)
+Supply+
-Trash-
|Play|
#Mat#

The notation only has to show from where to where a card goes.

There's still an ambiguity—does <Inn} mean you top-decked the Inn, or that you shuffled it into your deck?

Is it even possible to top-deck an Inn?
Watchtower, Royal Seal.

I just tried to topdeck an Inn with Watchtower on iso and it put it on top and the still shuffled the deck.
Logged
A man on a mission.

#### AJD

• Cartographer
• Offline
• Posts: 3289
• Respect: +4426
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #21 on: March 09, 2013, 11:05:55 am »
0

The whole concept is that every action is a move from a card from one area to another.
These are the areas.
{Deck}
(Hand)
+Supply+
-Trash-
|Play|
#Mat#

The notation only has to show from where to where a card goes.

There's still an ambiguity—does <Inn} mean you top-decked the Inn, or that you shuffled it into your deck?

Is it even possible to top-deck an Inn?
Watchtower, Royal Seal.

I just tried to topdeck an Inn with Watchtower on iso and it put it on top and the still shuffled the deck.

You're supposed to be able to shuffle the deck first and then top-deck the Inn.
Logged

#### Qvist

• Mountebank
• Offline
• Posts: 2400
• Respect: +4084
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #22 on: March 09, 2013, 11:12:40 am »
0

The whole concept is that every action is a move from a card from one area to another.
These are the areas.
{Deck}
(Hand)
+Supply+
-Trash-
|Play|
#Mat#

The notation only has to show from where to where a card goes.

There's still an ambiguity—does <Inn} mean you top-decked the Inn, or that you shuffled it into your deck?

There are more symbols. & means shuffling and ° revealing.
First it would be +IN} because you gain the card from the supply.
So topdecking would be +IN} assuming a Royal Seal is in play and shuffling in would be +IN}&
With Watchtower it would be something like +IN[°WT]}

#### Qvist

• Mountebank
• Offline
• Posts: 2400
• Respect: +4084
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #23 on: March 09, 2013, 11:19:20 am »
0

Also, if I was to gain a Curse but reveal Trader, how would that look?

Curse is X in my notation. I never tried the "instead clause" but I guess it would be
+X[°TD]+, +2>
I gain a Curse from the supply, reveal a Trader and then put it back to the supply and then gain a Silver from the supply in my discard pile.

#### AJD

• Cartographer
• Offline
• Posts: 3289
• Respect: +4426
##### Re: Notation
« Reply #24 on: March 09, 2013, 01:01:07 pm »
0

The whole concept is that every action is a move from a card from one area to another.
These are the areas.
{Deck}
(Hand)
+Supply+
-Trash-
|Play|
#Mat#

The notation only has to show from where to where a card goes.

There's still an ambiguity—does <Inn} mean you top-decked the Inn, or that you shuffled it into your deck?

There are more symbols. & means shuffling and ° revealing.
First it would be +IN} because you gain the card from the supply.

It's only +IN} if you gain the Inn via Develop. Otherwise it's +IN> and then <IN}

Quote
So topdecking would be +IN} assuming a Royal Seal is in play and shuffling in would be +IN}&

Well so let's see. Royal Seal is in play, you buy an Inn, shuffle a Militia into your deck, and top-deck the Inn with Royal seal. So that's this?:

+IN><MI}&<In}

Does & distinguish between whether you're reshuffling your deck with Inn and reshuffling your discard because your deck is exhausted? Maybe it doesn't matter because it's unambiguous in context.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  All

Page created in 0.052 seconds with 21 queries.