Messages

Ingix makes a good point about the duration/reserve area vs the new trash area. Why are the 2 interfaces for showing extra information so different?

I think what we need is for the log area to be a general "extra info" space with tabs across the top for "log", "durations/reserves", and "trash".

Tabs would be much more consistent than the current interface, and it's a very common interface design that will be immediately familiar/intuitive for users. This would also allow for displaying both player's durations/reserves at the same time. Showing multiple tabs simultaneously would be a great feature down-the-road for people with enough extra screen space.

This is too much of a variant. Overall I don't support adding variants into the official implementation.

"Matching starting hands" (as an option) would be the cutoff of what I'd support. It's a super small change that doesn't really affect anything else.

Your "passing turns" system is weird. You shouldn't get Bath points before the real game even begins.

When I've played this way IRL, we just both play with whatever starting hand the first player got.

Since my other thread got closed for duplicating this one, I guess I'll repost my Fake Shuffle iT update here.

Hey everybody, I just wanted to post a quick update.

We just finished/released the initial "visual trash" area. It shows the card images (stacked), so it's a lot easier to use the trash now. Unfortunately the display doesn't update if you already have the trash displaying -- we'll get that fixed soonish, but it's low priority.

The other big thing we've been working on is the "name a card" interface. It's been more tricky to implement than we were expecting because of how the concept of a "stack of cards" is coded behind-the-scenes. We're hoping to finish this up by the end of next week though.

We haven't started working on the Journey token or Inheritence/Stash yet, but those will be next up on our list. Sorry these aren't done yet.

As always, if any of these timelines change, we'll let you know in our dev update next week.

Context: this fake dev update was inspired by the conversation here: http://forum.shuffleit.nl/index.php?topic=1336.0

This is the kind of communication that people want to see. We don't care if you can't hold to your timeline estimates 100%. We just want some indication of what you're working on. I've seen you say that you want to let your code releases speak for themselves, but that really doesn't cut it. Take 10 minutes a week to write a little something for the community. It's worth the effort.

Hey everybody, I just wanted to post a quick update.

We just finished/released the initial "visual trash" area. It shows the card images (stacked), so it's a lot easier to use the trash now. Unfortunately the display doesn't update if you already have the trash displaying -- we'll get that fixed soonish, but it's low priority.

The other big thing we've been working on is the "name a card" interface. It's been more tricky to implement than we were expecting because of how the concept of a "stack of cards" is coded behind-the-scenes. We're hoping to finish this up by the end of next week though.

We haven't started working on the Journey token or Inheritence/Stash yet, but those will be next up on our list. Sorry these aren't done yet.

As always, if any of these timelines change, we'll let you know in our dev update next week.

Yup.

Not showing the empty reserves, durations, etc area when there's nothing there makes it really hard to even discover that feature in the first place. If you're used to the fact that hovering over your name doesn't do anything, you're never going to think of trying it when you have a duration out.

I just want to echo the need for more communication than just the "missing features" thread. What Philip posted a couple of days ago is an excellent example of what people want to see. It shouldn't be hidden half-way down a random forum thread.

What I'd like to see is a thread with a basic "Hey, we just finished feature X, so now we're going to start working on Y. I'm thinking it'll take somewhere between 3-10 days to implement."

Communication like this would make a huge difference in many people's opinions. It's really not a huge timesink. Nobody will care if your estimate is wrong -- you just post again in 8 days and say "The previous estimate wasn't right. I'm thinking it'll take another week."

I think the current rules for the BM deck are a great compromise. Read through that linked thread for all of the varying opinions.

The biggest complaint that seems valid to me is the "it reduces strategy by not knowing what's in there" line of reasoning. If Stef is to be believed for Dominion strategy advice (spoiler: he probably should be), that's not an actual problem.

2) Your decision to go for the Black Market or not should not depend on its content, period. This has nothing to do with card or program design, just some strategical advice. Look at the rest of the kingdom; if you can build an engine go for Black Market - always.

Good suggestions -- this aspect of the interface definitely needs more work. It's already way better than it was in the beta though.

I suggested (http://forum.shuffleit.nl/index.php?topic=1251.0) using DataTables since it would instantly fix most of your requests. Unfortunately, it sounds like it might be a little more work to implement it since they're using Angular.

Promos seems like the best way to go. A cool way to introduce them would be to give them out as rewards for various things. Win a tournament/league? You get 1st edition cards! Get some achievement (play a Bandit 20 times in one game)? You get Thief. There are a ton of different ways they could be given out. Obviously, they could just be sold as well.

In any case, the 1st edition cards should never be used unless they're specifically selected for inclusion at a table.

Ex. You play City Quarter, revealing 3 Markets, drawing 3 cards. I can still see the 3 Markets in your hand. You then play a Secret Passage and put one of the Markets on the bottom of your deck. Should I still see 3 Markets there, or only 2?

Another example, you reveal 1 Market and draw 1 card (which happens to be a Market, but I don't know that). Now you play a Market.

In this situation, how does it choose to show or not show the Market still in your hand? If it's literally just based on which of the 2 cards you clicked on, it seems like the person playing the hand needs to have some sort of indication of which cards have been revealed and which are still secret. It's not that important for Markets, but it can be really important for cards like Torturer. This opens up a whole can of worms...

I'm thinking that when you take any action that possibly could have moved a revealed card out of your hand, it needs to be un-revealed. So in my example, playing a Market would hide the revealed Market even if it wasn't literally the same card. In a situation like Secret Passage, you would have to un-reveal one instance of every single unique card that was revealed (because you have no way of knowing what was put back). So if you earlier revealed 2 Coppers, 3 Markets, and a Gold; playing a Secret Passage would un-reveal one copper, one Market, and one Gold.

Like I said...big can of worms.

Cards should definitely be grouped/stacked for any interface like this.

Yes.

If a token somehow got on the Harem pile, sure ask which order. When there are no tokens, it should just do it.

It would be nice if there was some sort of indication like "Hey, if you stop buying stuff now, you'll be able to discard Wine Merchants". Maybe just a little WM icon next to the end turn/end buy button. It would display as long as you have at least $2 left.

Especially with the current interface, it's just way too easy to completely forget you have Wine Merchants on the mat.