Messages

If I've correctly understood the requirement, the solution is to use matching after first setting its advanced options to permit practice games but not rated games so that the familiar cards' list will be honoured.  I think currently grackel13 is making a table but then finding that no one joins the table.

If I had to take a guess as to what is causing it, it would be that the code treats contraband differently than cards such as mystic and doctor because it is your opponent that names the card and not you.

I think that's a fair guess.  I'd go further.  I would guess that when Contraband was coded, the assumption was made that it must be possible to click on a pile to name the card whose purchase was to be banned, but that assumption overlooked that with Black Market the card to be purchased is not coming from a pile.

I'm not sure if you're aware, you can get out of that buy phase with no loss of coin tokens by moving the slider of the 'coin token converter' to the left and then click the '0 token' button.

I wasn't aware of that.  I knew that after selecting any other number of tokens (other than the full amount) one was given the opportunity to select tokens again.  I hadn't realised that '0' was taken as a definitive answer.

See game 6137525, decision 70.

This bug seems to be an odd corner case of a Buy phase with zero buys but with coins available to spend.

I had just bought a Villa so had been returned to my Action phase.  As I did not have any use for the $1, the actions or the buy from Villa, I didn't play it.  Instead I clicked on 'End Actions'.  I now found myself in the Buy phase with zero buys.  The 'End Turn' option was not available and the Buy phase did not immediately end.  I have two reasons to believe that that was because there were coins available to spend:

• When I spent them, the phase and the turn did end.
• If I reload the game at decision 69 and spend all the coins before buying Villa, the turn does end when I then click on 'End Actions'.

If my experience is anything to by - nearly 300 games of which only one was affected by a bug - I suspect most players would prefer to see Nocturne implemented before the remaining bugs are fixed.  I suspect that most of the remaining bugs are difficult to track down because they are not obviously related to the implementation of a particular card.  In particular I suspect that it's significant that several bug reports relate to games that cannot be reloaded because of an internal error.

I don't like Undo option very much. When playing Dominion in real life with cards it never happened someone asked to go back some step. Everybody are just aware that they should play carefully and not make hasty moves.

My experience is completely the opposite.  In real life we attempt to play briskly and accept that from time to time someone will back out a move that hasn't caused any information to be revealed.  We prefer that to having slower games in which no one makes any mistakes because they spend an eternity planning each move.

I think it has already been stated that undoes to decisions from which no new information has been gained will at some point be automatic,

I certainly recall having read that too.  No doubt implementing it in the general case would be quite time-consuming because of the need to evaluate correctly whether new information has been gained.  There are, however, some simple cases where it could be implemented very quickly and probably should be, simply because it's an undo of something that the opponent doesn't even know has happened.  Consider the following scenario that happened to me yesterday:

• I played an Action that drew a card and gave me an action point.
• I clicked on 'End Actions'.
• I realised that I'd meant to play another Action card first.
• I clicked on 'Undo'.
• The undo request was denied.

A first I was surprised that my opponent had denied the undo request, but I almost immediately realised that to him it seemed that I was trying to undo the play of the Action that drew a card: there would have been nothing in his log to indicate that I had chosen to end my Action phase and that it was that that I was wanting to undo.

I could, I suppose, have tried explaining the nature of the undo request via chat, but I had no idea whether my opponent spoke English, so I just accepted the consequences of my carelessness and got on with the game.

In the absence of this feature, try the following:

• Go to http://dominion.lauxnet.com/scavenger/
• Enter your username and the number of results you want to see
• Click on 'Get last results'
• Click on any game to see its game number

Edit: Though this will only show you your rated games.

Failing having them visible (it might well be that the reason we've been waiting so long is that making them visible would require a major revamp of the display), it would be useful if a pop-up appeared at the start of one's turn that said things like (I'm sure there's a better phrasing for most of these):

• First action played will be a cantrip (Enchantress)
• First draw will be null (-1 card token)
• First coin earned will be nullified (-1 coin token)
• For each card bought you will gain N Curses (Swamp Hag(s))
• Cards in hand at end of turn will be top-decked if you have bought a card (Haunted Woods)

so that the effects of the invisible duration attacks etc were brought to one's attention.

You're doing the right thing when you use the number without the '#'.  Unfortunately some games generate the 'Internal error' when one attempts to load them.  To the best of my knowledge no one knows why.

Despite having played several games involving Inn, it was only yesterday that I noticed that the description that appears in the log when an Inn is bought is incorrect: it states that the selected Action cards are placed on the deck, whereas it should state that they are shuffled into the deck.

The recent change to ratings has had the effect of reducing the difference in ratings between a newcomer and the top of the leaderboard from about 45 to about 28.  That suggests to me that being matched against opponents now with a rating range of ±10 is equivalent to be matched against opponents previously with a rating range of about ±15, so I've adjusted my personal settings to match only against opponents with a rating range of ±8 (maybe ±7 would be more appropriate) in an attempt to be matched against roughly the same subset of potential players as before the change.

Does anyone see a flaw in my logic?

[In-game Clarity (Card movement, sound effects, reducing log dependency)]

In-game Clarity (Card movement, sound effects, reducing log dependency), by far.

I hate having to look at the log to see what was trashed with Swindler, what someone trashes when they trash cards, what they reveal with Courtier, what cards I skip over when playing Golem and Hunting Party, etc. It's the only reason I haven't bought the expansions yet.

Merely to document the fact that some players have different views on this, I'll mention that I find that the 'live action' distracts me from paying attention to the log, which is what I find more useful for following the game.  This matches my approach in a ftf game: I don't watch what the other players are doing, I listen to what they say they are doing.

I suppose the bottom line is that in an ideal world both the live action and the log would be improved so that players could choose just one to follow.

I'm not sure what to do, but to be also frank: I don't think an entry in the log would have helped in this case.

An entry in the log would have helped me, and I struggle to see how putting a line in whenever someone spends coin tokens doesn't help someone. If it really doesn't help you at all, OK let's say I believe you. Ask ten people who use this software if they would rather have that line appear in the log than not and if two or more of them say the log would be better off without it, I will eat my hat.

I think you have misunderstood the point that Ingix was making.  If you look back earlier in the thread, you'll see that he is of the opinion that the log should contain a line stating that X coins have been converted, so his comment "I don't think an entry in the log would have helped in this case" is certainly not suggesting that he thinks that such a line in the log is unnecessary.  Rather I believe he is of the opinion that in this case the player in question wouldn't have noticed the entry in the log and hence would still have been confused.

Yesterday I had another instance during a game of having to restart my browser because it had hung.  This time, unlike the previous two occasions but like ealier occasions, I was successfully reconnected to my game.  I notice that Version 1.2.10 mentions fixing reconnecting from new browser/computer.  I'm going to guess that the fixed bug also affected anyone (e.g. me) who had their browser set up to accept only session cookies.  I'm also going to guess that the bug was introduced as part of the improvements to reconnect in Version 1.2.9.