Messages

Reorder works but not comfortable Mobile Firefox:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQyckSXJHKA

Notice how you cannot move the bottom card... you can put the other two cards on the bottom, but cannot move the bottom itself. Same for me on Firefox mobile.

Kind regards,
HD

Ah, good point. You're right. The method I wrote about wouldn't do anything.

Let me take another stab at it...

When a deck needs to be shuffled, note the number of cards to be drawn after shuffling. We'll call that n. Shuffle the deck and look at the top n cards. Make a tally of that combination (order doesn't matter). Repeat 10,000 times. Then for the "real" shuffle, we top-deck the combination with the highest tally, and put the rest of the cards in a random order.

So, for example, if we purchased two Ambassadors on T1 and T2, our next hand would be {Copper x 3, Estate, Ambassador} with the rest of the deck random after that. The point being that even though it could happen that {Estate x 3, Ambassador x 2} is your T3 hand, there's little sense in analyzing the strategic implications of something that happens 0.1% of the time.

Make sense?

Thanks for helping me think this through.

Kind regards,
HD

Here's a crazy idea... I was thinking about Dominion simulators... specifically how they play thousands of games and aggregate the results, when I wondered:

What if we had an option where two human players could play an "aggregated" game with each other for the purposes of studying strategies? An aggregated game is the same as a normal game except for one thing... whenever a deck needs to be shuffled, shuffle it, say, 10,000 times, keeping a tally of the deck sequence for each one. Then, continue the game using whichever sequence was the most common.

I think this would be a useful tool for doing the postmortem of a game. Does the money strategy always beat the engine here? Or did it just get lucky?


Keep up the great work!

Kind regards,
HD

I taught my 4-year-old to play Dominion with a forked version of Goko Salvager that was basically a "kid mode" which limited the game as follows:

- Removed the scary cards:
var JackIsASweetInnocentBoy = " /witch /youngwitch /harem /thief /torturer /seahag /alchemy /fortuneteller /cultist /urchin /deathcart /mystic /altar /graverobber /rogue /soothsayer /cutpurse"

- Forced all games to be against Serf Bot

He loved it.  A fun way to teach basic math and logic skills. (Which the world needs more of!)

Keep up the great work!

Kind regards,
HD

- Use Apothecary
- Reveals 4 cards
- 1 copper goes to hand
- Prompts to choose order for remaining 3 cards on top of the deck

On my tablet, I cannot change the order of these 3 cards. Something's bugged with the touch-and-drag interface here. Cannot move any of the three cards to any other position.  I have to accept the original order to continue playing.

Chrome browser // Samsung SM-P900 (Android tablet // 1.9GHz Exynos® 5 Octa // 12.2 in screen // 2560 x 1600)
http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/galaxy-tab/SM-P9000ZKFXAR-specs


Keep up the great work, SI!

Kind regards,
HD

Edit: I originally said Alchemist instead of Apothecary

It would be nice if an icon was displayed next to the players' names indicating if they are playing via tablet, PC, etc. It's difficult to chat from a mobile device, so when I play from my tablet, I'd like it if the other player knew I'm on a mobile device and hence unresponsive to their glhf.

Keep up the great work SI!

Kind regards,
HD

I'd say the most important one is "I need to make a decision now, while the previous decision was made by someone else".

Quite often that would be the start of your turn, but not always. (i.e. you also want the sound when opponent plays militia, and you don't need the sound if your turn starts but you just made the last bid with mountain pass). I'm not actually sure if you'd want the sound when your opponent is done selecting cards for your militia, but why not.

Also, a sound when you click undo alerting them they need to grant it.

Kind regards,
HD

In my last game, my deck centered around Heralds and Secret Passages.  I had about 8 of each. Playing on a tablet, whenever I played a Secret Passage with about 30 cards in my deck, it was very difficult to move the slider to the Second-From-Top position using my finger. How about some buttons for the most typical Secret Passage selections? In games with Herald or Wishing Well, a "Second-From-Top" button would be very convenient.

Also, it would be nice to have an Undo button available after selecting the card for secret passage, but before placing it in the deck. One time when my Herald revealed a Secret Passage, I didn't notice and selected Outpost as my next action to play... but instead it was selected to be returned to my deck, and prompted me for where to place it. I couldn't just back up and choose another card... I had to have an undo granted from my opponent, which is unnecessary.

Keep up the great work SI!

Kind regards,
HD

Just played a game on my tablet. When I had more than 30 cards in the discard pile when I bought an Inn. I wanted all the actions. It took far too long to individually select each action card by trying to touch the 2mm area available with my 20mm wide finger.

I bought 3 such Inns that way. A Select All Actions button would have saved me and my opponent about 20 minutes tonight.

Keep up the great work SI!

Kind regards,
HD

Sorry for my last post.  It was posted in a moment of frustration.  I'm not angry anymore and have removed it.  Wish I hadn't posted it in the first place.

Thanks for the fun game.

Kind regards,
HD

[Post removed by author on 2/2/2017]

I don't know what you even mean by "stigma," and certainly don't acknowledge it.

By "stigma" I meant a perceived mark of distinction, and that was probably a poor word choice on my part.  People notice when their games start 5/2 vs 4/3.  People feel that it's a starting inequality where one side has a disadvantage.  Sometimes, they objectively do have a disadvantage.

You haven't used the word "stigma", but I'm pretty sure we agree that there is a distinction (or the perception of a distinction) of starting disadvantage in games of 5/2 vs 4/3.

I would appreciate it if we addressed the salient points of my last post.  What's the harm in letting this be an option for private, friends-only tables?

Kind regards,
HD

[I. It's unanimously agreed that in certain circumstances Different Starting Hands gives one player a significant advantage over the other]

Thanks everybody for the feedback.

This started as a simple feature request.  By "simple" I'm talking about adding a checkbox and 3-5 lines of code.  I'd be surprised if it takes SI more than 10 minutes.  I did not expect SI to attend to it immediately and place it above their current priorities.  It's something that would be nice for me and other like-minded Dominion fans.  I posted it here so they could add it to their list.  Isotropic had it.


I.  It's unanimously agreed that in certain circumstances Different Starting Hands gives one player a significant advantage over the other

The first turns are often the most important ones and largely set the pace of the game and the effect of opening moves is exponential on what happens later. 

Often the player with $5 is better off, but as DonaldX and Funhaver pointed out, having $5 can also put you at a disadvantage.  According to the Isotropic stats, some opening combinations in pre-Dark-Ages-Dominion had the effect of making you perform 8 levels higher than normal.


II.  It's a matter of opinion whether or not Identical Starting Hands is more fun

Randomness, Variety, and Inequality exist on a continuum.  The game of Dominion could have less Randomness/Variety/Inequality with Identical Starting Hands or Stack-Your-Deck-On-Each-Shuffle or Ban-Swindler.  The game could also have more R/V/I with a house rule that, say, randomly dishes out a couple Silvers/Golds into some players' starting decks.

It doesn't sound like the whole community sits in the same place on the R/V/I continuum.

For me, Dominion more than satisfies my need for variety in the random nature of the kingdoms.  That's a form of variety that doesn't put any one player at a large advantage over the others.  I've been playing Identical Starting Hands for years and never once thought "Gee, this game would have been way more fun if one of us had a $5/$2 and the other didn't."  And, obviously, we started playing that way, because there were many post-game whines about how it was "impossible to catch" the guy who started with the advantage.  Analogies to playing a game of chess starting a "rook down" were made... or running a footrace with cement blocks for shoes.  That all resonates with me.

I understand that AdamH likes the David-defeating-Goliath dynamic, and I can relate to a certain extent.  But, the position I really don't like is when I'm "Goliath"... because it feels like a no-win.  Either (a) I get a tainted win (and my opponent usually reminds me of it), or (b) I lose and feel like I totally suck. 

But again, R/V/I is a continuum, so we can pull this in the opposite direction.  How would the community feel about the feature request: "let's have one random player add 2 curses to their starting deck"?  That adds more variety, right?  If you have the curses and win, man, that's like David besting ten Goliaths!

Point being that for me, going from Identical Starting Hands to Different Starting Hands feels like randomly giving someone a starting curse.  Yeah, that game can still be enjoyed.  (I mean, with the right crowd Cootie and Uno can be enjoyed... and obviously, in the "big picture" those games outsell Dominion by some ridiculous margin.  Casinos testify that plenty of people enjoy the thrill of sheer luck.)  But you can't wash away the stigma of a lopsided match when there are starting inequalities.  Every single poster in this thread acknowledges that that stigma is there.


III.  "People who had no special interest in [Identical Starting Hands] would nevertheless end up playing with it."

This objection is totally work-aroundable.

(a) Identical Starting Hands is not an option in auto-match
(b) Identical Starting Hands is only available as an option when you create your own (private? or password-protected?) table
(c) Identical Starting Hands is only available when you are playing with someone on your friends list

Those of us who desire Identical Starting Hands, can play it all day with one another without affecting anyone else.  I have no idea how many people here prefer this.  I just know that all my real-life playgroup does.  Maybe it will only be used by me and my friends... but it doesn't cost anything or hurt anyone if implemented this way.

Kind regards,
HD

Thanks everyone for all the input.  I think I now agree with the majority that this option is more trouble than it's worth.

I really liked the line of reasoning that the 2nd player can mitigate the inherent 2nd-turn disadvantage by reacting to Player 1's purchases.

I also think that splitting the community into players who insist on Blind-Reveal and those who oppose it will cause chaos in online matchmaking.

Thanks for the consideration.

Kind regards,
HD

Blind-Reveal makes the game worse and less fun. It prevents me from taking into account what my opponent buys on the first two turns, not because I want to copy them, but because I want to respond to them. They buy Young Witch, so I buy the Bane even if I otherwise wouldn't have. They buy Sea Hag, so I pick up that Watchtower. Dominion has some first-player advantage, and one of the things that mitigates it a bit is Player 2's ability to see what Player 1 buys before deciding what they should buy. It's important, and I do it ALL. THE. TIME.

That's a good point.  I can see how Blind-Reveal would be detrimental in your Sea Hag/Young Witch scenarios.  But taking into account all Dominion kingdoms, I still prefer Blind-Reveal.

I'm just requesting an option, not forcing you to play with it.