Messages

I don't want to get to the quarterfinals of the tournament, then find out that I'm forced to have my match open to spectators, streamed with no delay by an unknown "third party" who could be anyone, commentated upon by people who have said inappropriate things to/about me in the past, or removed from the tournament because I'm unwilling to play a match at 3AM or something.

Luckily, there is an easy solution to avoid all this: just don't play in the tournament at all.

I will play for fun and I trust in the organizers to do their best, so I accept all their rulings in advance.
(Maybe that's actually something which could be added to the rules: "All decisions of organizers are final and cannot be appealed.")

In

If it was turn 5, your opponent had an enchantress in play, so your Rebuild was converted into saying only "+1 card, + 1 action".

I suppose this is caused by the server breakdown...

Game #3782003 on Frankfurt:
After playing a Villa, a Conspirator and a Shanty town, I bought the last Province and then a Tunnel ... and then drew 5 new cards, and the center box said: 1 action 1 buy 0 coin - You may buy cards.

I was actually thinking of a slow-rolling bot who would be paired with them, pretending he is one of them by sending suitable chat messages. That would be really fun.  8)

Actually, according to one of the stranger rulings from DXV, the on-buy effect of the inherited action card *is* triggered when you buy an estate. So the estate is already yours at that time and it is an action card, too. For reference, see the wiki: http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Inheritance and/or http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Colonnade.

Inheritance doesn't change the name of the card. So you don't get Colonnade VP for buying a Market Square if you have an Estate in play (but no Market Square) and vice versa.

Update: just beat a slow-roller.  Took me over 2 hours.  Said they were slow rolling because I got lucky drawing chapel with estates.  Do we really expect someone that deranged to know that what they're doing is against the rules when it's not explicitly said so?  And the game makes no effort to prevent it?

Do you remember their username? Was that an unrated game? Or was it your second game against that player?

The pragmatic way is blacklisting intentionally slowplaying sociopaths. It's even better when they are eventually banned completely, but that might take some time, so I'm very happy to have the option to simply blacklist them until then.

Stef said:

Slowplaying is about intentionally delaying your plays, waiting minutes between playing coppers, in the hopes that your opponent resigns or gets annoyed. This I consider a mental illness, and we will simply not tolerate it. As soon as I'm convinced you're doing this, you're banned.

For me, this means that slowplaying is not within the rules of the game, similar as insults in the chat. You seem to use a different definition.

Your suggested time limit might be perfect for your personal preferred playing speed but not for all players. I'd rather have an option to select "fast"/"medium"/"slow" than an enforced "average" speed for all automatched games.

On the contrary.  Games in a league or part of a tournament setting should not be rated for the same reasons I already stated.  I disagree that this a completely stupid idea.  Take a look at any other widely popular game with a rating system.  Starcraft for example, has a rating system that matches you with opponents of near equal rating.  Any custom games (including tournaments) are not rated.  I don't think this makes Blizzard completely stupid, quite the opposite.

I have no idea about Starcraft. It's quite possible that there are enough idiots playing Starcraft who would "game the leaderboard" if it was possible so it is actually necessary to limit the Starcraft ranking to random opponents. I was talking about Dominion. And I stand by my opionion that it would be completely stupid to remove the games between the absolute best players from the ratings just because they played multiple subsequent games in one league match. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. :)

It's probably just a visual problem. The Villa is on your discard pile for a short time, and after it goes to your hand, you see a different card on the top of the trash. I have noticed as well that sometimes you seem to see multiple cards one after each other there, also when you discard in the cleanup phase. This flickering is not actually a new card. You can check the log to see what actually happened.

Games for the Dominion League (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?board=60.0) are very certainly some of the most legitimate around, and those include a lot of rematches. It would be completely stupid to exclude them from the rankings.
Currently, there seems to be no bad apple in the top 20, so your theory of inevitability has not yet manifested at least. Or such accounts have actually been removed...? :)

If on-buy effects as Swamp Hag and Haunted Woods were shown similarly as at MF (i.e. purple/orange background for the "+"), maybe 2 buys and debt could be shown similary, e.g. by copper color for "you will gain debt" respectively a different color (or different symbol) for "you have multiple buys" (both only if autobuy is active, of course)?
[Sorry for somehow hijacking this thread, but opponents' duration attack effects really should be made immediately visible.]

Luckily, the log tells you that they gained a curse if they did so. If it doesn't, Royal Carriage is not recommended. 8)
But I agree: the log should explicitly mention the bane reveal (or Lighthouse or Champion).