The biggest feature missing from Dominion

[Ingix]

More human-readable explanation of all options (especially the autoplay options but also the regular options)
For example, "use autobuy" wasn't clear to me at all what it would do

Agreed. The "Matching" tab has 2 little "i"s, but I guess no newbie and few seasoned players know that klicking on them results in new browser tab with a forum post with some explanation. As far as I can see, this isn't done on any other tab either (with the exception of the "Leaderboard" tab, that has 2 buttons that lead to explanations).

Especially with the autoplay options there should be more explanation, (for example when you hover over it it explains it better "If you turn this on, Moat will always reveal when an opponent plays an attack card.)

Are you aware that (in the general autoplay options) klicking on the name of the option (the bluish card name on the left) you get to a page with some description? But that page has been rigthly critizied for being to formal.

Also, make automatically choosing a card when there's only one option optional. For me, it doesn't save time, most of the time i spend more time on being confused about what just happened then the time i would normally spend on just clicking the card.

What I don't know is if this is easily possible.

[ThetaSigma12]

I miss the mobile app of MF :(.

[bananny]

I miss the mobile app of MF :(.

Me too.  That and their PC version were pretty awesome.

Offline version?  One I can keep, that I own, that won't be stripped away from me and held ransom for more money?

[Ingix]

Disclosure: I'm a mod here, so my opinion is not unbiased.

I can totally feel your pain, and I even don't buy any games on Steam, because they can also be held to ransom, if Valve chooses (or simply screws up).

I totally agree that an offline version should be an option. Shuffle iT promised it, but didn't deliver yet, which I also find unfortunate. There are reasons, one possibly that the level of the AIs is 'not that good' at the moment, also known to the game's creators. There are (most probably) more reasons.

But it also remains true that we, who bought the Making Fun version, knew (or should have known), that we were at the mercy of their servers, and that there were probably licensing deals in the background (as there were), limiting the options Making Fun had. That means while you feel cheated (I know I did when I learned of the end of the Making Fun game), ultimately Shuffle iT is not responsible for that. But I know that that doesn't change the feelings.

But Shuffle iT are responsible for their promises and it is totally in your right to be upset about them, and to consider what you do with your subscription. I probably would have been upset the same if you told me about the current state (no offline version) a year ago. Despite this, I used the 'free year', first played a little, then started helping players with their rules/card/interface problems and now I try to help in testing in general. I like the new game, still think I see the problems, small and big. Some things were definitely better at Making Fun, but would I ever want to go back to playing without the 'undo' option? I don't think so.

[rasdna]

For me the feature I'd love to see the most is probably pretty easy, all things considered.

At the beginning of the game, right after the players scores, print the win/loss/tie stats for games between those two players.

[Landungsklatscher]

One thing I'm missing in the game is a feature in the setup of the game that allows not to pick particular cards, but instead the "type" of a card. So e.g. when I setup a game I want to have cards of the following types in my game:
- two of type attack cards
- one card giving an additional buy
- one card allowing to take cards
- one defensive card

Which card will appear in the game should remain random based on the rest of the settings - but I don't care if it's a Minion Card, the Witch card or the Goons card that is chosen from the attacking cards.

[blamelewis]

That's an interesting idea - the first step to achieving it would presumably be to catalogue the cards by type so that they can be selected by type or "role" in the game...

I'm not sure if there's a canonical list of roles (I'll call them that since "type" I think has got a specific meaning ie Action, Attack, Treasure etc?)

I know the Dominion wiki http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com tens to describe cards as such things as "village" or "trasher" and so on - so maybe that's a good place to start - but does anyone have a list of these roles already? Is there an official one? Perhaps some formula that is used when making the list of recommended Kingdoms in the rulebooks?

If there's not a list out there then I may start a spreadsheet - geek alert!!

Best
Tim

Edit: found this: http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Card_category

[dingle]

I would like more support for custom kingdoms. I'm interested in using the online dominion client to playtest kingdoms for an in-person tournament with friends who do not currently live in the same country. As they are living in different time zones, I don't have much time to select a kingdom and play it with them before having to go to bed.  The ability to have a set of personal named kingdoms saved is something that would have convinced me to subscribe 2-3 months ago.
http://forum.shuffleit.nl/index.php?topic=2064.0

A "Friends only" option when creating tables would be nice.
http://forum.shuffleit.nl/index.php?topic=2118.0

I'm also a bit confused by the "join game" option that allows me to spectate games that friends are currently playing. I'm not sure how well it works.

[Ingix]

A "Friends only" option when creating tables would be nice.
http://forum.shuffleit.nl/index.php?topic=2118.0

AFAIK this is being worked on.

I'm also a bit confused by the "join game" option that allows me to spectate games that friends are currently playing. I'm not sure how well it works.

You can watch any game that's currently in progress. I did it a few times, and you can chat with the players (nice if you know them, but keep to minimum because they need to actually play). Do you have a specific question about spectating a game?