1
Support / Re: Cannot confirm my email
« on: 23 January 2020, 06:45:24 PM »
@Cascadeorca: Your email is aready confirmed. Are you trying to reconfirm because you have a problem?
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2
Support / Re: Goko expansions
« on: 22 January 2020, 09:05:05 AM »
Hi Berverly,
the reality is unfortunately that you won't get your expansions back for free now. All the 'old' subscribers got one free year when this new service started January 2017, but that time is long over.
Many 'latercomers' here feel/felt cheated and angry that they lost their permanent access to the cards they paid for, which I totally understand. I personally was OK with Goko and didn't know what to expect from this new service by a new company (Shuffle iT, which I now help out a bit, so I'm the first to admit I'm not unbiased).
It's not like the same people you paid money to did something new and wanted more money. The license from Rio Grande Games to make an online Dominion game was always time limited. It probably got extended for GoKO once or twice (I don't know anything about the contracts and forgot about the time span the game was on GoKo), but then at some point it wasn't.
So basically the poeple who sold you the the expansions "for life", when they knew they couldn't make sure that stays true, are the onea to blame (I guess that somewhere in their Terms of Service this was stated, but like you I didn't expect it to go away 'that soon').
Shuffle iT took over the license and started January 2017. Their business model sounds much worse for the player, you only "rent" the cards for a given time, then have to pay again. But it honestly acknowledges the reality that the license could go away, so it would be unfair to promise "for life". From what I understand, the license was last year extended to until end of 2021.
You can play the cards from the base game for free against a computer AI or other players. If you play against other players, the cards used are taken from what both players rented, so if the other player(s) have rented expansions, cards from them will come up in the generated kingdom.
If you have any more questions, feel free to ask, and I hope you'll give this implementation a chance.
the reality is unfortunately that you won't get your expansions back for free now. All the 'old' subscribers got one free year when this new service started January 2017, but that time is long over.
Many 'latercomers' here feel/felt cheated and angry that they lost their permanent access to the cards they paid for, which I totally understand. I personally was OK with Goko and didn't know what to expect from this new service by a new company (Shuffle iT, which I now help out a bit, so I'm the first to admit I'm not unbiased).
It's not like the same people you paid money to did something new and wanted more money. The license from Rio Grande Games to make an online Dominion game was always time limited. It probably got extended for GoKO once or twice (I don't know anything about the contracts and forgot about the time span the game was on GoKo), but then at some point it wasn't.
So basically the poeple who sold you the the expansions "for life", when they knew they couldn't make sure that stays true, are the onea to blame (I guess that somewhere in their Terms of Service this was stated, but like you I didn't expect it to go away 'that soon').
Shuffle iT took over the license and started January 2017. Their business model sounds much worse for the player, you only "rent" the cards for a given time, then have to pay again. But it honestly acknowledges the reality that the license could go away, so it would be unfair to promise "for life". From what I understand, the license was last year extended to until end of 2021.
You can play the cards from the base game for free against a computer AI or other players. If you play against other players, the cards used are taken from what both players rented, so if the other player(s) have rented expansions, cards from them will come up in the generated kingdom.
If you have any more questions, feel free to ask, and I hope you'll give this implementation a chance.
4
Support / Re: screen blanks out every 5 minutes
« on: 20 January 2020, 06:45:35 PM »
Thanks for the report, Paul!
That sounds very strange, no similar reports have been made yet.
The 5 min interval sounds like some screensaving/batterysaving is going on. Does the bahvior only affect the dominion.games site, or other internet pages as well?
That sounds very strange, no similar reports have been made yet.
The 5 min interval sounds like some screensaving/batterysaving is going on. Does the bahvior only affect the dominion.games site, or other internet pages as well?
5
Card Bugs / Re: Throne Room + Knight trashing
« on: 18 January 2020, 08:56:17 AM »
High nibbit,
thanks for the report!
However, what you witnessed is actually correct behavior. Being trashed, or set aside or otherwise moved from play does not prevent a card from being replayed by Throne Room and its cousins!
That ruling goes back to the 1st edition interaction of Throne Room and Feast, nowadays the easiest example is Throne Room and
Mining Village
+1 Card. +2 Actions. You may trash this for +$2.
If you play Mining Village as the card for Throne Room, you put Mining Village into play, and do what it says. You draw 1 card, get +2 Actions (to be used later) and now you decide to trash the Mining Village to get $2. Mining Village is in the trash now, but Throne Room isn't finished yet.
It plays the Mining Village again, and doesn't care that it isn't in play!
So you draw 1 card again, get again +2 Actions, so you drew 2 cards and got +4 Actions in total up unto now. The Mining Village says
You may trash this for +$2.
The "for" is they key here, it means that trashing the Mining Village is a prerequisite for getting what is printed after. Since the Mining Village is already in the trash, you can't trash it again, so you don't get the +$2 a second time (further study of more rules reveals that if the Mining Village is anywhere but in play, it can't be trashed).
So there are two main things to remember:
1) Throne Room and similar cards don't care where the card is they want to play a second (or further) time.
2) Some wordings are meant to limit that power, by requiring some effect to be actually completed in order for a further effect to happen. Key words here are "for", as in Mining Village and "If you did", like in
Wish
+1 Action
Return this to its pile. If you did, gain a card to your hand costing up to $6.
Normally there is no problem returning the Wish to its pile. But when you Throne Room it, the second time you play it, the Wish is already in its pile, so you can't move it again, so you don't get the card to your hand.
To come back to your example, then Knights don't have any of that "for" or "if you did" language. They reveal 2 cards from their opponent's deck without problem, even if the Knight is no longer in play. One of that will be trashed. If opponent chooses to trash a Knight, then both Knights will be trashed. That can be done for the revealed Knight, and can't be done for the played Knight (its already in the trash in your example). But nothing of the further effects of the Knigths depend on that, so it has no consequences.
thanks for the report!
However, what you witnessed is actually correct behavior. Being trashed, or set aside or otherwise moved from play does not prevent a card from being replayed by Throne Room and its cousins!
That ruling goes back to the 1st edition interaction of Throne Room and Feast, nowadays the easiest example is Throne Room and
Mining Village
+1 Card. +2 Actions. You may trash this for +$2.
If you play Mining Village as the card for Throne Room, you put Mining Village into play, and do what it says. You draw 1 card, get +2 Actions (to be used later) and now you decide to trash the Mining Village to get $2. Mining Village is in the trash now, but Throne Room isn't finished yet.
It plays the Mining Village again, and doesn't care that it isn't in play!
So you draw 1 card again, get again +2 Actions, so you drew 2 cards and got +4 Actions in total up unto now. The Mining Village says
You may trash this for +$2.
The "for" is they key here, it means that trashing the Mining Village is a prerequisite for getting what is printed after. Since the Mining Village is already in the trash, you can't trash it again, so you don't get the +$2 a second time (further study of more rules reveals that if the Mining Village is anywhere but in play, it can't be trashed).
So there are two main things to remember:
1) Throne Room and similar cards don't care where the card is they want to play a second (or further) time.
2) Some wordings are meant to limit that power, by requiring some effect to be actually completed in order for a further effect to happen. Key words here are "for", as in Mining Village and "If you did", like in
Wish
+1 Action
Return this to its pile. If you did, gain a card to your hand costing up to $6.
Normally there is no problem returning the Wish to its pile. But when you Throne Room it, the second time you play it, the Wish is already in its pile, so you can't move it again, so you don't get the card to your hand.
To come back to your example, then Knights don't have any of that "for" or "if you did" language. They reveal 2 cards from their opponent's deck without problem, even if the Knight is no longer in play. One of that will be trashed. If opponent chooses to trash a Knight, then both Knights will be trashed. That can be done for the revealed Knight, and can't be done for the played Knight (its already in the trash in your example). But nothing of the further effects of the Knigths depend on that, so it has no consequences.
6
General Discussion / Re: How many players are there?
« on: 17 January 2020, 03:39:20 PM »
Good question. AFAIK inactive accounts are not removed, after all, the game is playable without paying and players have been known to come back after a "long" time (think 1-2 years, for example when you have a kid).
But, the level a player has reach (on which the ranking is based) deterioates slowly over time when no new ranked games are played. For example, I didn't play rated games for a period of around 2 month (middle of October 2019 to slightly after the middle of December) and I lost roughly 1 level in that time (and most probably also lots of ranking positions). But that is usually 'regained' rather quickly when you start to play rated games again. Details can be found here in this forum.
But ultmately, I can't say how many players with rated games there are, how many of them just played 5 games and never returned, or how many players played rated games last year, or anything similar.
A better way to compare yourself is the level. New players start slightly below 40. If they play a bit, even if they win/loose half of the time, they'll raise up to around level 40 (because the game sees how they play and reduces the uncertainty about them). The absolute top players are around level 65, level 60 are still excellent players. Players above level 50 are said to understand mostly what the game is about on a strategic level, though they may lack in the execution of their plans or misjudge a kingdom.
But, the level a player has reach (on which the ranking is based) deterioates slowly over time when no new ranked games are played. For example, I didn't play rated games for a period of around 2 month (middle of October 2019 to slightly after the middle of December) and I lost roughly 1 level in that time (and most probably also lots of ranking positions). But that is usually 'regained' rather quickly when you start to play rated games again. Details can be found here in this forum.
But ultmately, I can't say how many players with rated games there are, how many of them just played 5 games and never returned, or how many players played rated games last year, or anything similar.
A better way to compare yourself is the level. New players start slightly below 40. If they play a bit, even if they win/loose half of the time, they'll raise up to around level 40 (because the game sees how they play and reduces the uncertainty about them). The absolute top players are around level 65, level 60 are still excellent players. Players above level 50 are said to understand mostly what the game is about on a strategic level, though they may lack in the execution of their plans or misjudge a kingdom.
7
Card Bugs / Re: Inheritance: Estates artwork not showing inherited card
« on: 15 January 2020, 08:05:37 AM »
It's not a bug, though non-optimal at the moment.
Inheritance and some other cards were changed by errata in September 2019. You can read the full announcement post and the following discussion here: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=19892.0
For Inheritance, the new wording is
Inheritance: Event, $7
Once per game: Set aside a non-Command Action card from the Supply costing up to $4. Move your Estate token to it. (During your turns, Estates are also Actions with "Play the card with your Estate token, leaving it there.")
That means that unlike before, Estates don't take on abilities of the card they inherit, they "only" become Action cards and gain the ability to play the set aside card (and, similar to Capitalism your Inheritance now affects all Estates, but only during your turns).
Since the changing picture was a used to mark "shapeshifters", and those no longer exist, Estate doesn't show it either. It just turns into a card with the usual layout of artwork on top and textbox below.
When it's not an Action (on your opponent's turns who hasn't bought Inheritance yet), that's all it is, on your turns it will become an Action, say so in the type line and get the familiar Green/White border.
If you want to find out what card you inherited, you need to hover your mouse over your status bar (on the lower left wehre it shows your name, VP etc.). It will show all cards that are set aside, often with an "explainig card" on top, like a Gear card if the cards are set aside with Gear. The inherited card will be alone, because the "explaining card" would be the Inheritance, which has a different aspect ratio and wouldn't fit in the given space. So I left that out when I programmed the "explaining cards"
Inheritance and some other cards were changed by errata in September 2019. You can read the full announcement post and the following discussion here: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=19892.0
For Inheritance, the new wording is
Inheritance: Event, $7
Once per game: Set aside a non-Command Action card from the Supply costing up to $4. Move your Estate token to it. (During your turns, Estates are also Actions with "Play the card with your Estate token, leaving it there.")
That means that unlike before, Estates don't take on abilities of the card they inherit, they "only" become Action cards and gain the ability to play the set aside card (and, similar to Capitalism your Inheritance now affects all Estates, but only during your turns).
Since the changing picture was a used to mark "shapeshifters", and those no longer exist, Estate doesn't show it either. It just turns into a card with the usual layout of artwork on top and textbox below.
When it's not an Action (on your opponent's turns who hasn't bought Inheritance yet), that's all it is, on your turns it will become an Action, say so in the type line and get the familiar Green/White border.
If you want to find out what card you inherited, you need to hover your mouse over your status bar (on the lower left wehre it shows your name, VP etc.). It will show all cards that are set aside, often with an "explainig card" on top, like a Gear card if the cards are set aside with Gear. The inherited card will be alone, because the "explaining card" would be the Inheritance, which has a different aspect ratio and wouldn't fit in the given space. So I left that out when I programmed the "explaining cards"
8
Support / Re: Cannot confirm my email
« on: 13 January 2020, 10:54:28 AM »
Confirmé!
Votre premier essai était en fait correct, avez-vous cherché dans le dossier SPAM le mail de confirmation?
---
Confirmed!
Your first try was actually correct, have you looked in the SPAM folder for the confirmation mail?
Votre premier essai était en fait correct, avez-vous cherché dans le dossier SPAM le mail de confirmation?
---
Confirmed!
Your first try was actually correct, have you looked in the SPAM folder for the confirmation mail?
9
General Discussion / Re: Rated games with specified kingdom
« on: 13 January 2020, 10:10:13 AM »
It seems pretty clear to me that the leaderboard is made less legitimate by the fact that people can choose their opponents or choose the kingdoms they play.
I still don't understand that argument for chosing opponents. Of course people deliberately playing against sockpuppets is a problem, but that is obviously cheating. When I'm automatched against someone and play 2 or 3 more games with them on the table, is this also a problem?
If this was happening 200 years ago with the physical cards then of course players would play only in their phyiscal neighborhood, and then level 50 in New York would mean something else than level 50 in Tokyo, but that is not what's happening, IMO.
So to me it is not at all clear that choosing an opponent will have an effect on ladder rankings.
For the kingdom, I can of course see that players that favour certain strategies could preselect the kingdom that favours that strategy. Again, this has AFAIK happened in the past and I think those games were made unrated.
But by the same argument, base-only games between players with no current subscription are also heavily different from games where cards are selected only from the expansions in the Silver or Gold expansions. Should rated games from the beginning of the service (so pre Nocturne and Renaissance) be made unrated because they don't represent the current "full game"?
I can kinda sorta see an argument for letting you choose your opponents, but allowing kingdom cards to be required seems way over the line -- especially considering that there was a new feature released (liked/disliked/banned card lists) that appeared to be the result of a discussion where what was OK to do in a rated game was talked about. Why go to all the trouble of making that feature if you can just specify a kingdom yourself?
The main difference is what you see when you click "Ready" and what you don't see. If you click "Ready" when the table rules are 'empty', but then the table host adds required cards to the Kingdom, you get unreadied, and can see the changes and decline to play or discuss with the host.
So the general idea behind this seems to me to give players maximum freedom to customize their tables, where all players can see those customizations and must agree to them.
OTOH, features with 'hidden' effects, like the banned and disliked cards, are restricted to not allow too much influence, so they can only contain 'a few' cards. This is unlike familiar cards, which can be heavily restricted to (in the extreme case) just 10 cards.
10
General Discussion / Re: Rated games with specified kingdom
« on: 13 January 2020, 12:51:29 AM »
Why should those things not be possible, provided that both players are aware of the fact that this is a rated game? Making players aware of the fact that a given game is rated is apparently not working well enough.
People were banned because they "played" dozens of games against sockpuppet accounts that lastet 1 turn, if even that.
While I can at least in some part understand that completely or almost completely pre-formed kingdoms are considered fishy, I cannot understand why the non-random opponent is considered a problem as well.
I played a league match a few days ago, my opponent was indifferent to rated/non-rated, and since I just started to play rated games again I asked if rated was OK, and so the 6 games were rated. Why would you consider that a problem?
As for "unrating" those games, I assume its the 3 games against WanderingWinder?
People were banned because they "played" dozens of games against sockpuppet accounts that lastet 1 turn, if even that.
While I can at least in some part understand that completely or almost completely pre-formed kingdoms are considered fishy, I cannot understand why the non-random opponent is considered a problem as well.
I played a league match a few days ago, my opponent was indifferent to rated/non-rated, and since I just started to play rated games again I asked if rated was OK, and so the 6 games were rated. Why would you consider that a problem?
As for "unrating" those games, I assume its the 3 games against WanderingWinder?
11
Support / Re: wurde mein Dominion-online-Konto gehackt?
« on: 13 January 2020, 12:31:46 AM »
Hallo Eli1962,
ich habe Dir eine ausführliche Antwort an Deine Email-Adresse geschrieben. Wenn da nichts angekommen ist (auch im SPAM-Ordner nicht), dann melde Dich bitte nochmal.
Gruß,
Ingix
ich habe Dir eine ausführliche Antwort an Deine Email-Adresse geschrieben. Wenn da nichts angekommen ist (auch im SPAM-Ordner nicht), dann melde Dich bitte nochmal.
Gruß,
Ingix
12
General Discussion / Re: Can you do something about InYaFaceDonk?
« on: 12 January 2020, 03:40:57 PM »
The nature of free accounts is that they are free, and since email addresses are also easy to come by, the way it currently stands is that it is hard to prevent the same player just making a new free account.
They can be banned from that account as well, and that has happened in the past, several times in a row. We can be relatively sure that it was the same person, as the new names were not very creative. OTOH, the same player has used many differnt IP addresses, so its hard to know before hand if a new account belongs to an old offender.
They can be banned from that account as well, and that has happened in the past, several times in a row. We can be relatively sure that it was the same person, as the new names were not very creative. OTOH, the same player has used many differnt IP addresses, so its hard to know before hand if a new account belongs to an old offender.
13
General Discussion / Re: Can you do something about InYaFaceDonk?
« on: 12 January 2020, 08:27:37 AM »
InYaFaceDonk banned!
For a bit of background,
1) I don't think they have your IP. Everything is server based in the game, we can't have client A directly communicate with client B, because that makes it possible for client A to lie, when hacked: "Yes, I totally draw 3 Platinum with my Smithy! And why are you worried that this happened the 10th time in a row?" Even the chat goes to the server, because when spectating there are options to remove spectator chat from what the players see.
But I didn't make the game, so there could be something that exposes your IP to an opponent.
2) Even if they have the IP, they would need access to your ISP's logs to find out who you are. The ability for the FBI in crime shows to instantly pin down where you live when they get your IP is most likely highly fictional. Your opponent does not even have those resources.
That's a simple threat made by bullies to make you feel uncomfortable, because there is just enough credibility that someone might think it possible. All the cases of SWATing I've read about involve the SWATer getting personal information from the victim via chat first (if somebody has your name and home town, the threat to find out where you live is much more real).
For a bit of background,
1) I don't think they have your IP. Everything is server based in the game, we can't have client A directly communicate with client B, because that makes it possible for client A to lie, when hacked: "Yes, I totally draw 3 Platinum with my Smithy! And why are you worried that this happened the 10th time in a row?" Even the chat goes to the server, because when spectating there are options to remove spectator chat from what the players see.
But I didn't make the game, so there could be something that exposes your IP to an opponent.
2) Even if they have the IP, they would need access to your ISP's logs to find out who you are. The ability for the FBI in crime shows to instantly pin down where you live when they get your IP is most likely highly fictional. Your opponent does not even have those resources.
That's a simple threat made by bullies to make you feel uncomfortable, because there is just enough credibility that someone might think it possible. All the cases of SWATing I've read about involve the SWATer getting personal information from the victim via chat first (if somebody has your name and home town, the threat to find out where you live is much more real).
14
Support / Re: Scepter and Lord Rattington
« on: 10 January 2020, 10:56:52 PM »
Thanks for the report, ubk!
Yes, this is a known bug, unfortunately not fixed yet.
Yes, this is a known bug, unfortunately not fixed yet.