Messages

Better to PM Stef with your information and have him help you directly.

At some point, an off-line version will be released with AI only play.  At that point you can chose to convert your Goko/MF purchases to the off-line version, which do not expire.  Until then you can play the on-line version with your purchased cards.  There is an AI, which you get by choosing Bot Match on the home screen.  The AI sin not very good at this point but is improving.

I think that this kind of public "Name and Shame" system is not the correct way to address this issue.  The problem is that it is subjective and furthermore, open to abuse from players who get annoyed at play most of us would consider legitimate and post false information to damage the reputation of their opponent unfairly.  Furthermore, using automatch would still allow someone to be matched with a person they want to avoid no matter what they say in the forum.  Eventually, we will hopefully have the blacklist function to address this issue.  The best thing you can do now (and in the future) is reports this behavior to the developers and they can take disciplinary action against the offenders. 

"Thanks for the Game" seems neutral enough, though many people do not stay long enough to see it, but that's ok too.

I exclusively use Good match and never have this problem.  It is also rare that I cannot be matched fairly quickly.

I'm just flat out against an official reputation system, or for that matter creating too many preference based conditions for matching.  One problem is that every time you create a new set of preferences to determine who you are playing with, the pool of players the computer will match you with shrinks.  Already, we restrict who gets matched by card familiarity under good match.  This is necessary, of course, so people with subscriptions get to see all their cards, but adding preference restrictions based on play styles quickly shrinks the set of available players and will lead to long waits to start games.

The solution as I see it is to implement the personal blacklist.  Then each person can self-select for who they want to play against.

I think the spinning castle screen means that you were matched with an opponent and the game was trying to start.  If there was a sizable delay, that is a connection issue, not waiting for an opponent.

I agree that a public reputation system is not a good idea, at least if it depends on player ratings.  Such a system is too open for abuse, and I can see that some players would give others a bad reputation out of spite for losing a game, or for actions that that individual finds objectionable, which other players would not.  For example, in one game I played, there were several times I paused to consider my actions, and my opponent sent a message asking me to play faster.  In that case, he might well have dinged my reputation, which would affect my ability to get games with others who would not object to my pace of play. 

How about leaving the bright green side as is and label it "Face Down" and but the Boot symbol on the Grey "Face Up" side?  Does that satisfy both sides?  Or, make the colored "Face Down" side correspond in color to the player's color, thus it will match the other tokens that can go on kingdom cards.

Called it!   ;D

I think he was referring to the shady ethics of Jeebus' opponent.  There is a fine line to draw in deciding legitimate vs questionable undo requests.  In a recent game, my opponent played a fortress then requested an undo.  I denied it on the basis of new information (one card drawn) but I suspect that it may have been a legitimate request, since I cannot really think why he would want to undo based on the card drawn in that situation.  That being said, I could conceive of a situation where he plays fortress with another cantrip in hand and draws a TfB card that he would want to use on fortress, so anytime new information is revealed, there is possibility for abuse.

My basic attitude is that no player is ever obligated to grant an undo request but it is nice when one player lets another undo a misclick.  One thing that should happen is that the requesting player should send a chat explaining why they want an undo upfront, then it can be discussed proactively.

There will still be players that take offense when undo's are not granted, but that is their problem, not yours.

How about leaving the bright green side as is and label it "Face Down" and but the Boot symbol on the Grey "Face Up" side?  Does that satisfy both sides?  Or, make the colored "Face Down" side correspond in color to the player's color, thus it will match the other tokens that can go on kingdom cards.

The way I was envisioning it is that the text box overlays the gameboard (like the current box giving the status of play), so you have a message as to what just happened (the game ended) rather than just being jerked out of the game screen to the end screen.  It's more psychological than anything else.  The way I see it, part of the problem is that the game ends abruptly and pulls you to a different screen.  Even if the information is there in the post game screen, I have not caught up mentally, so the game feels somehow incomplete.  But maybe its just me.

Adam, you make a good point.  Ultimately, I am not interested in timed games as an exercise in speed dominion.  What I want is to prevent abuse.  However, blacklisting and enforcement from the developers may be a more productive way forward.

The discussion of the ethics of resigning is one that we may never completely agree on, and from a developer perspective is irrelevant since I don't see any way they remove the resign button in response to those who don't like it.

What we can profitably discuss is the mechanics of how resign works.  I see three options:
1.  As currently implemented
2.  Resign only allowed during your turn
3.  Resign any time, but put up a text box saying "Game Ends:  Player ___ Resigns" and you click "Ok" before going to the score screen. 

I favor 3.  That way as the non-resigning player, you know why the game ended, and can have some closure. 

In fact, having the same box pop up for all game ending events seems like a good idea.  For instance, "Game Ends:   Province pile empty" or "Game Ends:  Three piles empty"

For the PC:
- A sound when I need to make a decision (e.g. start my turn, discard to Militia, grant an undo, etc.)

Also something visual, like changing the color of the border of the box in the center  that says "Waiting for..."  I do not play with sound, and often don't realize that I am called on to react to the opponent's play.