Login  |  Register

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
91
Excellent suggestion!!!
92
Yesterday I was playing a league match and my opponent requested an Undo. The last thing in the log was that they had just played a Hunting Party. I asked for clarification in chat, he said he wasn't trying to undo the Hunting Party, I granted the Undo, and he continued with his turn. Technically I still have don't know what he undid, but I would guess something like he hit "End Actions" by mistake.

When an Undo request is made, the decisions to be taken back should be clear. In my particular case, if the log had said something like "opponent ends the Action phase," I would have had all the info I needed. A more general solution that would work for cases where multiple steps are undone would be to list all the decisions that will be undone.

For example:

Quote
Requesting 2 undo steps:
* End Actions
* Play Nomad Camp

I'm not sure if it would be better to show the decisions with the latest at top, or bottom; at the bottom matches the order they happen and may be more intuitive. Either way, they could also include the decision number to make the chronology unambiguous:

Quote
Requesting 2 undo steps:
Decision 246 - Play Nomad Camp
Decision 247 - End Actions

Then it's clear that they want to undo to the point before they played the Nomad Camp.
93
I've had a few games lately where the other player has disconnected during my last turn or at some point where it was obvious that they would lose. Currently, I am waiting for my opponent to time out because I had to play a militia to get 8 to buy the last province, and they disconnected.

These don't appear to be malicious players, I think that they're thinking that they are quitting, but in reality, they are forcing their other player to wait for 5 minutes to force them to resign.

A little javascript can pop up a window when the user closes their browser window that asks them if they meant to resign, which would prevent this from happening accidentally.
94
General Discussion / Re: Offensive Language in Chat
« Last post by sudhish86 on 28 April 2018, 03:00:26 AM »
Honestly, I would be concerned if there were more than just a blacklist, since that could be abused very easily. I have been banned or kicked in other games simply because I happened to be doing well in one single round. If they had checked any other data about me (win/loss% kill/death ratio, etc), it would have been very obvious I was not cheating. But, someone reported me and I either loss stats of a legitimate game, or I had to jump through hoops to have my account reinstated.

I am fine with the blacklist. I don't want an abused system.
95
Feature Requests / Re: Features I'd like to see
« Last post by fisherman on 27 April 2018, 06:27:56 PM »

But Donald X got some percentage of my money at the old site, and he obviously had the ability (when negotiating his deal with Shuffle) to insist that "legacy" lifetime subscriptions be honored.  He chose not to do this, and that was entirely within his rights.  But a lot of us felt some resentment about this decision, and it is--of course--entirely within our rights to remind people of this.  I got the free year, and that is certainly not nothing.  But it was definitely not (IMO) a "fair" offer. 


It seems that DXV actually got almost no money from the old site because you weren't the only one being scammed by the people running it. http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=15162.msg588309#msg588309
96
Feature Requests / Re: Features I'd like to see
« Last post by Cave-O-Sapien on 27 April 2018, 05:34:42 AM »
My opinion is informed by me buying the "lifetime" subscription at the old site just a (relatively) short while before the old site went out of business.  If I had bought this subscription several years earlier, then I'd probably feel I got fair value for my money.  But I didn't, so I don't...if that makes any sense.  :)

Thanks for the respectful counter-response. Sadly a rarity these days when people disagree. I can certainly appreciate that sentiment. I'd like to think that Goko/whoever selling people a "lifetime subscription" to a service they didn't have "lifetime rights" to was done in good faith, but I kind of doubt it. They were either con artists or inept or some combination of both.

Maybe someone could track down this guy and ask him how the business model was supposed to work.
97
Feature Requests / Re: Features I'd like to see
« Last post by josh bornstein on 26 April 2018, 11:54:01 PM »
Cave,
I certainly respect your different perspective, and I'd never try to convince someone "Hey, you should feel aggrieved about something you're currently happy about!"   ;D

I totally agree with you that, if one wanted to ensure that Dominion online continues for many years, having an ongoing revenue stream makes this much more likely.

My opinion is informed by me buying the "lifetime" subscription at the old site just a (relatively) short while before the old site went out of business.  If I had bought this subscription several years earlier, then I'd probably feel I got fair value for my money.  But I didn't, so I don't...if that makes any sense.  :)

Obviously, I feel like this site is a decent value, or I would not continue to give it my money.  But Donald X got some percentage of my money at the old site, and he obviously had the ability (when negotiating his deal with Shuffle) to insist that "legacy" lifetime subscriptions be honored.  He chose not to do this, and that was entirely within his rights.  But a lot of us felt some resentment about this decision, and it is--of course--entirely within our rights to remind people of this.  I got the free year, and that is certainly not nothing.  But it was definitely not (IMO) a "fair" offer. 

I strongly support your right to argue that I'm wrong to feel this way, or to point out other factors that I've overlooked or failed to mention.  Having an open forum, where people are free to vigorously (but politely) disagree is a sign of health, and will not--I hope--be seen as a sign of weakness in our new Dominion home.  I'm quite positive about how this site has implemented the game, and I'm pleased that they are making some efforts (albeit at a glacial pace, often) to address bugs or suggested changes).

I do not claim to speak for the majority of older players...I have no idea what each individual person is thinking or feeling, of course.  But I doubt I am the only person who has some lingering resentment about how the move to the new site was handled.  It's not a big deal for me.  It's not even a small deal for me.  But it's not "no problem at all" for me, either.  :-)
98
Support / Re: Bug: Revealing a Plunder for Wishing Well
« Last post by Ingix on 26 April 2018, 09:35:20 AM »
I guess besides all the well known flaws where features simply don't exist, most of the errors with existing features are on the fringe, because if they happened every time an interaction between 2 cards was flawed, it would maybe not happen to a given player very often, but overall it would happen quite often and be reported.

So I totally believe that something happened, but if we can't recreate it its hard to fix.
99
General Discussion / Re: Dominion Online Store down?
« Last post by Dux89 on 26 April 2018, 03:35:51 AM »
Anyone else getting this message? I guess I need to renew my subscription today, but can't, as I'm getting a message saying "The store service is currently down. Sorry for the inconvenience."

Anyone have any more info about this, or when it will be back up?

It's back up now. And again, sorry for the inconvenience.

No problem! Just re-upped. Thanks!
100
Feature Requests / Re: Features I'd like to see
« Last post by Cave-O-Sapien on 26 April 2018, 12:44:19 AM »
Permanent ownership of sets

Almost no one on this site will disagree with you.  It's a bit of a ripoff as it is.  But it's the only game in town, so they are able to take advantage of that situation.  Ah well.  I am surprised that they decided to not have two tiers...here's the cost for one year of use of Expansion X.  And for twice that cost, you have a lifetime of access to that expansion--AS LONG AS we own the online rights to the game, of course.

I certainly disagree with this.

I like being able to play Dominion online. I like it enough that I'm willing to pay to keep the lights on and to see new cards added and new features developed.
I don't know if the current business model is the best one, but it seems more sustainable than one without a consistent revenue stream.
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]