Messages

When playing a recent game, I gained two curses when buying a port after the other player had played one swamp hag.  The card states that "when any other player buys a card, he gains a Curse".  Anyone else having issues with getting extra curses without buying a card?

Please, please write down the game number when something like this happens. I'm sorry to say this, but quite often people thinks something is a bug while it turns out to be a mistake of some kind later on.

If you do report the game number it becomes relatively easy to verify the bug, instead of near impossible.

Sorry people, we had server problems indeed. A reboot seems to have solved the problem. It looks like it was caused by a maintenance window from amazon that I failed to deal with properly, despite the fact that they announced it way in time. I will certainly investigate further.

It had nothing to do with a new release, and Adam, we have a test server and a group of people playing on it. How long releases stay on test depends a bit on the complexity / impact of the new code. Right now it has ratings, leaderboard and inheritance, and thus will stay there a bit longer then smaller releases would.

This is a weird bug to me, because it means that the game is not properly programmed so that the decision maker is the one being referenced (the "you") on the card - "when you gain this".

I guess that, instead of to "you", the decision is given to the active player. That's the weird part, because I can't think of any card that should reference the active player. "You" on cards is not the active player, "you" is any player. It's just that the active player has the power to play cards and buy cards/Events. (Any player can use a Reaction card for instance.)

It makes me wonder who will get to decide whether I gain a Duchess if I gain a Duchy when it's not my turn. Similar problems could exist with Inn, Border Village, Squire, Catacombs, Duplicate and Stash. They each can give decisions to a non-active player. Other cards that do this are of course the Reactions, but maybe they have been special-coded.

I indeed will have to check most of them, and have fixed some others before. There is a default that lets stuff happen to the active player, which probably shouldn't have been there at all. If I don't use the default but specify   manually there is no problem.

There could be an Edge Case where you want to discard to Arena for another reason than gaining tokens.

Example ... I discard a "Counting House" to Arena, buy a "Villa", play a "Hunting Party" to discard all coppers from my deck and draw the "Counting House" again via the "Hunting Party".

or you want to topdeck something with Inn / Herald / Scouting Party.
or you just want your Philosophers stone to be worth more.
or ...

well I thought about it but I'm afraid there are way too many edgecases.

3 month and we still waiting. Please: tell us something about app. When we may expect ios or android version (second quater 2017 or later?)

Sorry, but no. We have too many missing features, bugs and improvements to go on the current platform right now to be working on dedicated apps. We do try to make/keep the web version playable on mobile devices though.

Yes, I don't get Stef's reply here. The issue seems to have been that the Bridge Troll was in play on SaintO's side of the table, meaning that they had played it on their turn. The discount should indeed not be in effect on the Possession turn, since that was not SaintO's turn.

I think the problem is that I didn't understand the description of the situation in the bugreport. Especially with complicated things like this it's so much easier if people can provide the game number.

Reporting can be done through a PM to one of the moderators or administrators either here or on discord.
(until we get an in-game concept for that)

And sorry it's hard to find 3+ people matches now.

Rules question and a bug.

Rules question: If I get possessed and my possessor plays outpost, who gets the outpost turn?

If Alice posseses Bob, the extra turn that is generated is owned by Bob. The only difference with a normal turn by Bob is that Alice is making the decisions (and the when-would-gain and when-trash triggers). So whenever some other card is referring to "You", that's still Bob.

Whether or not Bob gets the outpost turn, depends on the previous turn. So if Alice just played one possession and then Outpost on Bobs turn, Bob takes another turn.
Instead, when Alice plays two possessions and during the second one she plays outpost, Bob doesn't get anything.

Bug: I got double possessed (or worse), and my possessor outposted during my turn (it was an ugly game for me), and the game asked me whether to outpost or possess again first, but there was no place to click which to choose. We had to resign the game, which, frankly, was a blessing. Either it's a card bug or an interface issue (i.e., I couldn't find the place to click "continue".

Thanks.

Squirezucco

The question is correct... you still have multiple extra turns awaiting, and have to choose which one goes first. If there was no button to answer this question that's strange and certainly a bug.

While I possessed another player, I bought an Ill Gotten Gains (via Black Market) on his turn. I gained both the IGG and the curse card. Maybe that's a bug, maybe not, but looking online it seems like the possessed player should have received the curse. Clarification appreciated.

Second issue is that while I possessed the player, I still got the bridge troll discount while it was in play back on my side of the table. Is that correct? That definitely seems like a bug, as I didn't think the possession turn was considered "on my turn."

Thanks for your continued efforts on the new platform. Very much appreciated!

Both are correct.

Possession sets up an effect "Any cards he would gain on that turn, you gain instead". This first applies to the IGG, and a bit later also to the curse.

The Bridge Troll effect applies to the entire table, not just one side of it. (Unless you mean it was still going on when it was you regular turn again, that would be a bug)

My understanding of Vassal.
You get 2 coins.  Top card is examined (online, automatically by the software).  Next, it's automatically discarded.  But, if it happens to be an action card, we are supposed to have the option to play it.

But this is not working.  I played a 'bot game. (212414)  My first game with Vassal.  So, I bought Vassal just to try it out.  Played it.  Log showed, "Hunting Party discarded by [me]."  But no way--that I could see--for me to choose to play it.

This also happened later, with the game discarding my Hamlet...again, I saw no way to play the Hamlet.

In my opinion, the interface should be some pop-up message, "Vassal has uncovered Militia [or whatever action card].  Do you wish to play it? Yes/No"

There is a button "Play action" that you can click. It would be nice if that button actually mentioned the Militia/Hamlet/thing but it doesn't. You can also ignore the button and just go on with your turn.

While this optional-button is probably not a great idea for Vassal (you almost always want to play it, so having to explicitly decline when you don't should be ok), there isn't really a bug either.

(unless this button is really hidden on your screen, in that case a screenshot would really help)

I have tried to replicate the situation in a game against 5 bots and it happened in game #2118958 on turn 11 of "Bad Advisor": After having discarded 4 cards to 2 previous Torturers in that 'round', I was faced with another Torturer and exactly one card in hand.

The game worked as it should: After I had clicked on my card in hand, it continued the game. So either this was fixed very recently, or SomeBunnyNewt1 was mistaken in his original situation.

There was no fix, SomeBunnyNewt1 was just confused/wrong about the Dominion rules. (S)he apparently thought you were allowed to keep your one card in hand on a Torturer attack without taking a curse, but you're not. You have to either discard that card or take a curse.

If there is to be a reputation system, surely it has to be something subjective.
For example:

* Some people consider resignations very unsportsmanlike, others dislike it when you don't resign when a game is already decided.
* Some people love taking their time thinking stuff through, others hate it when they have to wait
* Some people really dislike the option to ask for undo after information was revealed, others would not want to play without it.

Ideally whatever this reputation system is to be would only match us with people that have playing preferences like our own, while still allowing the rest of the world to have their own kind of fun. It clearly can't be a single number for each player, I certainly never tried to suggest that.

Sorry for your bad experience Jeebus. I would not enjoy playing a game with anyone displaying the shady ethics you describe here.

However, I don't think the solution is the interface disabling certain requests (undo or any other). No matter what we do, you'll never have a good time playing this person. The solution is coming up with some kind of a reputation system which should result in the two of you not being matched in the first place.

--

I already planned to add a new undo mode, which will auto-grant requests when you don't have new information. It does require going through every step of the gameserver though, adding the new-info-boolean to everything that happens. It's not something I consider worth doing just for its own merit, but will be added to the next time I revisit the gameserver anyway.

These priorities are almost completely unrelated to language support. Language support is simply already there, the thing that is happening now is translators finishing up their work, and us adding that bundle to the live version. I don't actually speak any Russian or Japanese, and I wouldn't want the client to contain any of my written German.

My two cents, for what it's worth:

This sort of "advanced logic" should be an optional setting. For frequent users, minimizing decisions is important, but for new or casual players, it's much more important to consistently and clearly show each step.

In general I can see that point being valid, but I don't think any novice player is going to be helped by a "Please select in which order you want to topdeck these three Treasuries" kind of question.

Asking pointless questions with only 1 answer, or with all the answers having the same effect, can also lead to a puzzling sensation for a novice player ("what on earth is the game asking of me now").

Hi folks. I was also on Making Fun. I received your email but didn't get around to trying to activate it until today. It didn't work. When I clicked the link and tried to log on with my name or my usual handle (Nerman8r), it said the name was reserved. So I created the Nerman9r profile, but I didn't get any credit.

Did you actually click the transfer link? It looks like you went to the regular login at https://dominion.games

The name nerman8r is indeed reserved - for you. Look for the link in the email that points to something like https://dominion.games/index.html?importAccount=blablablablabla
It will ask you to create a new account (based on your old one). It will credit you with 9 sets.