"Crown" Logic

[Linda B]

Logically, if I am out of actions when I play a Crown and the next card is a coin, I should not have had to tell the system "End Actions" to get the Crown to work with the Coin. Thanks if you can eventually correct this.

[LaLight]

Logically, if I am out of actions when I play a Crown and the next card is a coin, I should not have had to tell the system "End Actions" to get the Crown to work with the Coin. Thanks if you can eventually correct this.

Hello! In some cases (+1 Card token for one) you might want to play Crown as an action even when you don\t have any more actions in hand.

[Linda B]

Hello! In some cases (+1 Card token for one) you might want to play Crown as an action even when you don\t have any more actions in hand.

Quite true, but when I play it at the end of my action play and next play a coin, it should not assume that I did not want to Crown the coin. It could offer an option.

[trazoM]

Other edge case: you want to lower the cost of Peddlers by 2. I guess you have to play it as a action to do that.

[AdamH]

Why are people arguing that the default behavior should be something that could possibly maybe be useful in some edge cases that will never actually happen?

Playing Crown to double a Treasure still lowers the cost of Peddler. If the next card you click is a Treasure card after you clicked Crown (or a series of Crowns) then it should double the treasure.

I can't think of any edge cases to this but even if there are, they should be handled as edge cases instead of making the default interface really confusing.

[LaLight]

Why are people arguing that the default behavior should be something that could possibly maybe be useful in some edge cases that will never actually happen?

Playing Crown to double a Treasure still lowers the cost of Peddler. If the next card you click is a Treasure card after you clicked Crown (or a series of Crowns) then it should double the treasure.

I can't think of any edge cases to this but even if there are, they should be handled as edge cases instead of making the default interface really confusing.

You are right, actually. We will change the logic of it, but right now it's not high on priority list.

[Chris is me]

Other edge case: you want to lower the cost of Peddlers by 2. I guess you have to play it as a action to do that.

You do not, actually. The card isn't played "as an Action" or "as a Treasure" - no matter which phase it is, it counts as an Action card in play for Peddler. The card is always both types, it just takes an Action to play it if you play it in the Action phase.

As far as I can tell, the one edge case is the card token. The interface should at least warn you if you play Crown during the Action phase with no other Actions in hand. You need to be ABLE to do this somehow, and I am having trouble understanding a way to make it the other way. Really it should ask "Action phase" or "Buy phase" in this one edge case.

[Ingix]

I strongly disagree with AdamH's notion that the game client should somehow "guess what is intended" as the default behavior. There are so many things that might be considered edge cases in Dominion, that putting shurtcuts that work 99% of the time into the client is jeopardizing the integrity of the game. Because if this is implemented for the Crown, I'm sure that many more such things will be demanded.

Making the client not autmatically do things in many cases that might be edge cases is what the undo feature is for, IMO. That is a great thing to have for the cases here where it may be 'obvious' to humans that the Crown is supposed to be played in the buy phase and not in the action phase.

[Polk5440]

Having to use undo to get your intended outcome because you are misled by the client or can't tell what the client is going to do is bad UI design, not an ideal use of the undo button. The Undo button (assuming it can't be abused) should be only needed for careless play mistakes.

Edit: spelling.

[Stef]

We will certainly do something about Crown at some point. Current situation is much too likely to go wrong.

[AdamH]

I strongly disagree with AdamH's notion that the game client should somehow "guess what is intended" as the default behavior. There are so many things that might be considered edge cases in Dominion, that putting shurtcuts that work 99% of the time into the client is jeopardizing the integrity of the game. Because if this is implemented for the Crown, I'm sure that many more such things will be demanded.

I never said this, I don't know where you're getting it from. Let me say what I said before only in different words, maybe that will help you understand.

There are some cases where half of the users think it's better to do it one way, and half think it's better some other way. Obviously you can't make everyone happy, so you make a configurable option where everyone can set it the way they want it. Everyone is happy now!

But what is the default setting for that option? What do you do before you have the time to implement this option because there are more important things to do? I assert that the best thing to do is to have someone (ideally multiple people) completely new to the game try it both ways for a while and do what they say is the most intuitive.

Is this more clear?

[Ingix]

What I'm saying is that this is not a case of "how do I best provide an UI for Hamlet that requires as little clicks as possible and that is not confusing" (which I think you also commented on), which is something where it makes sense to discuss edge cases to show why some implementation may or may not work.

This is a case of a player being in his action phase and still having exactly one action card in his hand to play and at least one free game action. Then you want the computer to understand that if this is the case, and if the one action card in his hand is "Crown", it should be treated as "The player has changed to his buy phase and intended the Crown to be played there, not in his action phase" by default and a game option to change that default.

What I am objecting to is that we should not starting going down that path were we need the computer to understand more and more *complicated* situations in order to provide the shortcut for the player to simply press the "End actions" button in this case.

[AdamH]

OK I completely agree with you. I just think that there are no edge cases for Crown that can't be solved by "the next card you click should be doubled whether it's an Action or a Treasure"

...I have not gone through every single interaction though, so maybe I'm missing something.

What I am objecting to is that we should not starting going down that path were we need the computer to understand more and more *complicated* situations in order to provide the shortcut for the player to simply press the "End actions" button in this case.

Why not? The choice here is that either two people write some extra lines of code, or their product is worse. I think the product should be as good as possible.

[Watno]

OK I completely agree with you. I just think that there are no edge cases for Crown that can't be solved by "the next card you click should be doubled whether it's an Action or a Treasure"

the edge case is +card token on Crown. You have to decide before you see what you draw.

(Not disagreeing with the fact that the current way it is handled is not ideal)

[yed]

OK I completely agree with you. I just think that there are no edge cases for Crown that can't be solved by "the next card you click should be doubled whether it's an Action or a Treasure"

the edge case is +card token on Crown. You have to decide before you see what you draw.

(Not disagreeing with the fact that the current way it is handled is not ideal)

I agree with Adam, that if there is no +card token on Crown, the interface could "transfer" the crown action to the buy phase (it would need to increase the action counter).