Messages

Game 27781136, Turn 21
Game had Swindler and no defenders.  Swindler worked properly earlier in the game (ie, log shows opponent showing card from its deck, and I am given a choice of which replacement card I want to give Lord Rat).

But on turn 21, this did not happen.  I played Swindler, but was immediately taken to my Buy phase (see attached photo).  I should have been asked, "What 5-value (or 3-value, or 8 value, etc.) card do you want to select for Lord Rat?" and if I look at the game log, it should tell me which card Lord Rat had to trash due to the Swindler effect.

But on this turn (and in this game, ONLY on this particular turn), Swindler skipped the Attack portion.

Bug? Some other reason???

Sand,
For future posts; don't forget to give us the game number(s), which will allow really experienced players to try and reproduce any problems you might be having.

Other player played HW.  HW says that if I buy a card I put my remaining hand on my deck, in any order I want.  This always seems to work fine in all previous games.

But today I happened to have a hand that contained Hovel.  The language on Hovel allows me to trash Hovel on turns where I buy a Victory card.

I bought a Prov, and was allowed to trash the Hovel.  My question: Why was this allowed?  I would have thought that the rule for HW (immediately arrange remaining cards in any order you want and then place these on your deck) would take precedence over the ability to trash the Hovel.)

In past HW games, I can't think of any other time where I was given the choice to do anything with the cards in my hand once I bought a Victory card--other than arranging my desired order, of course.

The is the very definition of an edge case...it will come up almost never and--frankly--has almost zero impact on any game.  I'm just wondering about the rule and why it is allowing Hovel to be trashed in this situation.

Ingix,
When you just tried this, did you play the KC first or second when it came up via Golem?  If you decided to place (and play) it second, then sure...it should work as intended with an action card still in your hand.

But if you played Golem and then put the KC first, then I could see a problem.  Golem might be saying, "Hmm... for this Golem, I have to play KC and [for example] Militia. Normally, I play these 2 action cards right after each other.  But now, I am supposed to play an intervening action card (ie, via KC) from the player's hand.  My programming does not allow me to do this."

That's just a guess on my part, of course.  And I presume that any such problem with KC is also present with Golem + Throne Room, yes?  If this is true, then KC is indeed being played, but it has no effect of course on Militia, since it was not an action card in the player's hand.

Ingix,
Ah, interesting.  I did not know that about playing actions in the buy phase (re lowering Peddler's cost).  Thanks for that info.

Ingex.  I think that if Peddler is also in the kingdom, one should have the ability to play Crown(s) before Villagers, yes?

Never mind...after many hours, problem resolved itself (just before midnight, PST)

I get timed out after x minutes after each attempt.  Tried rebooting computer as well.  (Desktop PC, most recent Firefox browser)

Anyone else with difficulties logging in?

Does someone have a link to a description of the Trickster?  I have never seen this card in any of my games (I have all expansions for the online game + the promos).  And a quick Google did not yield anything helpful, which was a surprise to me.

Thanks...I had not remembered asking it before.  At least I am consistent (a kinder way of saying 'repetitive,' I guess).  :-)

Can someone give me a few examples of situations where it takes more than 2 minutes to make a decision?  I am not saying they do not exist...I'm only saying that I can't think of them.  (Of course, I am excluding the very beginning of games when players may take a few minutes to look at unfamiliar cards, ask their opponent a question in chat about a new card with confusing text, etc.  Taking several minutes makes total sense in those cases, but do not take place once the game starts moving along.)

I am trying to think back about games that I have played.  Near the end, there are sometimes complicated situations where I need to stop and think.  But that seems, to me, to take about 30 seconds at most.  So, doubling that to 60 seconds has been way more than sufficient for my own game situations. 

Of course, it's possible that my personal game approach--which is to have fun, and not to be super-competitive--takes less time than a really serious player needs.  I'm not sure about this.  I guess one way to check this is to look at games from the most recent tournament, to see how long the top players took in complicated situations.  (Assuming there is a built-in game clock in the log.)

If I were designing the game from the ground up, knowing in advance about these slow-playing scumbags, I think I'd develop something like:
1.  Before each person's first move, you have 2 or 3 minutes, which is enough time to look at any unfamiliar cards.
2.  From then on, you have 30 seconds to move.  Each time you move more quickly, you get to 'bank' 10 seconds from the time you did not spend.  So, within a few turns, almost everyone would have a reserve of 30-60 seconds, which could be added to the 30 seconds you already have.
3  This reserve would be capped.  Maybe at 3 minutes?  Maybe at 5 minutes??  Not sure.  That would be to avoid someone about to lose in a long game saying, "I have banked 10 minutes, I'm gonna use them all now, just to be a jerk."
4.  Not sure what to do in cases of requests for an Undo.  Probably just some set "penalty" to avoid situations where you ask me for an Undo, and I wait a super-long time to agree, just to unfairly exhaust your already-banked time.  Maybe lose 30 seconds from the bank for each Undo request that is granted?  Maybe lose half the time in your bank for each request that is granted?

Grind,
If you don't ask for an Undo with Hamlet, I humbly suggest you're being self-destructive, rather than polite.  This is a card that is well-known for having a confusing interface.  There are absolutely no experienced players who will begrudge you an Undo.  Or even a few of them in a game.

Don't be shy.  If you "misplay" Hamlet, you have not received any new information, and there is no reason to feel embarrassed about asking for that Undo.

Game  25488204, Turn 12.

I played KC and then B of M.  B/M of course asked for an action card (value 4 or less) to emulate. I first picked Envoy.  My thought was to get the 4 cards from Envoy, then the game would play B of M a second time, so I'd be prompted to pick another 4< card for B/M.  And then, after that, I'd pick a 3rd card for B/M (I knew, of course, that I could pick Envoy for the 2nd and/or 3rd parts of KC, if I so wanted).

But the game did not give me this opportunity.  It just picked-and-played Envoy, so after playing it once, I got the 12 cards via Envoy/KC's three parts.

But as I look at the language for KC and for B/M, this does not seem to be correct.  Is this a bug?  Or is there some rule that would explain why this happened?  (I did not set up a Kingdom with Throne Room + Band of Misfits, but I'm assuming that would yield the same issue, yes?)

I have won many many games where my opponent got that lucky 5-2 break.  I've also lost my share of games where I was the lucky one re getting that opening draw.  I do not at all mind that element of lucky...it of course evens out over the long haul.  And I enjoy playing a game where, sometimes, the 'lesser' player still wins.  But I have no problem with people who hate the 'lucky draw' element in regards to the first two hands.  (Of course there is still the element of lucky draws for the rest of the game.)  I would not mind seeing "Draw identical hands the first two rounds" as an option for the game.  But DVX has been pretty clear that it's not an option he wants for the online game..

Entire game-playing site seems to be down (approx 5:30 pm, PST).  Happening to anyone else???