Messages

Seems like a technicality that's correct by letter only. I can live with it. Thnx for the clarification!

http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Outpost

If you buy Mission on the same turn you play Outpost, you can choose whether the Mission turn or the Outpost turn happens first; whichever one does will start with a 3 card hand, while the other will start with a 5 card hand.

Can't check the log now. Fairly sure both Mission and Outpost were 5 card turns.

Also, what it says in the wiki directly contradicts what the card says, which is a 3 card hand.

Game #45967006, unrated. On turn 11, the following happens, which seems like a sure bug to me. On his turn 11, he buys Mission and plays Outpost in the same hand. I understand that he's allowed to take both Mission and Outpost turns, because "the previous turn wasn't yours" part is true. So no bug there and he takes Mission first.

QUESTION: Is he allowed to decide which to take first, whether Mission or Outpost, or is there a default order?

Anyway, he takes a Mission with 5 cards (edited to add 5 cards, of which I'm fairly sure), no bug there.

BUT, on his subsequent Outpost turn, he draws 5 cards?! That's gotta be a bug.

Please clarify regarding my question, and hopefully fix the bug for the 5-card Outpost turn. Thank you.

I'm pretty sure I remember a similar instance with this account name.

My guess is both Disciple and Throne Room calls the same function in the back end, so as to not write two different lines of code. Maybe they can tweak the display language a bit. Not sure.

Your observation is right.

Glicko-2, the rating system used, is still based on a ratings period (of one day for Dominion) and all the games during that rating period are processed "at the same time" (meaning it doesn't matter for your next rating in which order you played your rated games in the ratings period).

Before the ratings update, what was shown in the game client was your calculated rating during the last update, so basically your rating from last European midnight.

After the ratings update, what is shown in the client is the answer to the question: "If you don't play any more rated games during this ratings period, what will your rating be at the next update?"

That explains your observation. You play some games on day X and the client will show you what your rating will be at the ratings update between day X and day X+1. For me some days ago that was 49.51, so I got a "50" in the list.

Then, during that ratings update between day X and day X+1, my rating to be used for day X+1 was calculated as 49.51. But when I looked at my rating the next morning, it was 49.49. That's because I hadn't played a games that day yet, and the client told me what my rating would be if I didn't play any rated games this day. Naturally, it would decrease a bit.

I understand that players want to know "What is my rating right now?" Unfortunaetly, that concept doesn't exist for Glicko-2. You only have ratings at the end of ratings periods. Before the ratings update, that was what was shown, your rating at the last update. Now, what is shown is your rating at the next update, as predicted under the assumption that you don't play more games until that time.

I'm slightly confused by the above. The ratings are updating after every game it seems. So there's an additional daily update on top of the post-every-game updates?

Thank you guys for your thoughts! I think however you look at it can be justified. If I were on the other side as the opponent, I would not expect a win to be handed to me via resign nor would I hold a grudge. I'd definitely appreciate a resign, but I think it's fair to be "forced to win". Not justifying my actions, that's how I'd honestly feel.

I think situations like these make Dominion interesting because such niche scenarios arise often unexpectedly, keeping the gameplay fresh.

Just played a Wall game without trashing. After we exhausted all Duchies there was 1 Province left. I was down 7 points, so basically I couldn't win realistically. Instead of resigning, I was forcing my opponent to get $8 and buy the last province. After like 5 turns of not even getting $6, he/she started buying cards again... I was standing pat every turn still. After the score diff got down to 4 (I had to wait for a potential win as I started first, so can't tie), I happened to buy the last Province next turn and win...

Would you have resigned or forced your opponent to win there? A win's a win for me but that felt like a lousy win.

What's the mods official stance on a-holes being reported? Do mods actually do anything about them (I'd assume it'd be only after repeated offenses and confirmations would mods ever do anything)? Or do mods always just recommend blacklist and forget?

[immediaetly]

I did, and it worked as it should, (game 42802580), but:

With Way of the Turtle and Prince there is a way to shoot yourself in the foot that I didn't think about before:

Each time you play the Princed card, the game asks you if you want to Turtle the card. And since you Turtled the Prince, the first time you play the Princed card is immediaetly after you set it aside (maybe there are other "At start of turn" effects, like other Turtled cards, then you can can choose the order).

So possibly you where asked how you want to play the Turtled Prince, this turn you decided to actually play it, you selected the Market Square to set aside, then where immediately asked how you want to play the Market Square (normal or using Turtle), which may have been a suprise and you clicked "Turtle" for whatever reason.

If you Turtle a Princed card, Prince will loose track of it, and Prince will not play it again. Maybe that is what happened, at least it seems plausible.

Appreciate your looking into this. I'll keep an eye out next time.

I tried it in a game (Turtled Prince, then next turn Princed a Druid), and Druid did its effect the next two turns (then I stopped checking).

I can only imagine that what happened was what Josh described (you set aside a duration card) or you set aside a card that trashes itself (say Embargo), or otherwise moves itself elsewhere (Hores/Experiment).

@josh: When you do set aside a Duration card with Prince, "only" the Prince is "wasted". The Duration card will be discarded as normal for a Duration card (when it's future effects are all done), and so get back into your deck. The Prince will have lost track of it at that time, so its effect is "wasted".

Hmm that's strange. Would you be able to try Turtle Prince then Prince Market Square just to confirm? FWIW, we Turtled more than one turn before playing Prince for real. Maybe that made a difference? Thank you!

What card did you set aside with Prince?  If you set aside a Duration card, then I think it disappears after one turn and would look sort of like the effect you're talking about.  I've done that a few times and it's maddening...you spent a ton to buy Prince, waited till it matched up with the card you wanted, only to find out that it was worse than useless . . . because now that 4-or-lower card is gone from your deck for the rest of the game, and the Prince is useless as well.

;D yea I definitely knew how Prince works. Both me and my opponent set aside Market Square iirc. It always started the turn as if we set aside nothing.

After you play Way of the Turtle with Prince, when you do play Prince for real, and set a side a card, everything seems fine. BUT at the start of the next turn, the Prince effects don't seem to occur (as if you never set aside any cards). It's been several days so I don't have a game # anymore.

There's maybe 5% of the population who NEVER grants undos and maybe another 5% that says "no more" after like 1 undo. It seems you aren't of the former and inconclusive about being in the latter, so I'll assume you're of the 90%. Even within the 90%, how players grant undo varies a lot.

Myself, I 100% request and grant this undo. My rule, like many others have mentioned, is whether new info is revealed in the form of cards drawn. Even then, I would grant undo to drawn cards most of the time if they say they forgot to play a village first. To me, at the end of the day it's ONE game, and as far as things that annoy me about the game, undos are towards the bottom of the list.

Bottom line is, there is NO right answer. You're 100% within reason/ethics/or morals lol to do whatever. Just have fun!

@Adam, thank you for your feedback. As mentioned earlier, I'm too old to even be seen as "engaging" on the internet, so I'll just provide my opinion tactfully and hopefully end there. I don't believe developing a habit of running up the score will compensate for or mitigate the risk of missing a landmark or not winning when you thought you won. We're already going off topic a bit here, as my OP was about when you've already won (hopefully unless we're playing tired, which I'm sure we all have :) we know when we've won), but you could perceivably run into the Wall or be hitting multiple Embargo curses as you run up the score for its pure sake. So I don't think running it up ensures winning necessarily (which again is a pretty basic thing to ensure with the VP counter in the first place). I may have misread your post, and my apologies if so. Also, totally agree, as mentioned, I usually just resign long before "running it up" happens. And fwiw, I've yet to blacklist anyone iirc.

@Josh, thank you for your kind words, yea I think it's this quarantine thing that got me doing non-productive things like posting about some trivial complaint on the web lol... totally agree, people that play Dominion or post here tend to be awesome human beings.