Messages

You've been pretty polite in your responses, but--at the same time--dismissive of the concept of making changes that others want (and that you, personally, do not like). 

I am not dismissive of making changes that others want that I don't. For example I didn't want the VP counter. I am dismissing this particular feature. Do not conflate that with everything ever!

To move from this specific case to an abstract hypothetical . . . if there was some option that 90% of the players wanted, but you thought was silly/unwise, would you adopt that option?  What if 95% of the people wanted it?  Or 99.x% wanted it?

Again enough people wanted the VP counter that there it is.

At some point, if you are unwilling to adopt changes that the vast vast majority of players want; then they will say, "Why pay 25-33%, each year!!, for what it costs to buy real-life versions of the entire expansion + base set?  I'll just buy the games and play in real life with my friends."

Do not confuse "I veto identical starting hands" with anything else. It's not all things ever, it's one specific thing.

I admit to being complete bemused as to why you are so doggedly against having it as an option on this site.

I have been over how I believe this feature would make the game worse for the players not specifically interested in it.

\
Donald, grats on designing a very successful game. I certianly enjoy it most of the time.

I don't necessirly feel strongly about this feature, but i do feel very strongly about your reaction to VETO saiod feature only because you don't like it. it is a "variant" of the game, just as much as manually picking kingdom cards is a variant.  You are making a VERY stupid and frankyl offensive decision to entirely veto this feature.

I say this because not only could this feature be easily implemented but could also be easily implemented on premade tables when you have unimanimous consent to play with the feature (Which would be the same things is if we all actually had the cards in hand and were playing at a physical table together).

if the feature was created with these restrictions, you have no logical reason to VETO the feature. You may still have the right as you can hard ball shuffleit by threatening not to renew their licensing, but it sends a really bad message to the community. It sends the message that even when all the players consent to play a particular way, YOU are the person standing between them saying no, you can't play that way, I wont allow it.

awesome idea.

GIVE US A BLACK LIST!!!!! >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( I'm so sick of playing with assholes. its really annoying when you immediately get queued with the person again.