Sign in to follow this  
Kevin

[Experimental Update] - 378197

Recommended Posts

Kevin    3314

There will not be a trailer for the update next week, because we're working on something special for the update after that.

There will still be a poster, though.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pacovf    890

Honestly, I’m surprised we are getting the new character so early. It sounds like a lot of extra content to code in while also adding stuff for Sal’s campaign these last few months.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
minespatch    78371
2 hours ago, Kevin said:

There will not be a trailer for the update next week, because we're working on something special for the update after that.

There will still be a poster, though.

@ResettePlayer, hype incoming in two weeks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pacovf    890
4 hours ago, Kevin said:

 

  • Update some cards that said "Play this card twice", because they don't actually play the card twice, or if they do, they function unexpectedly.  This also fixes a bug with veiled_anger_plus2 which consumed 2 dominance instead of 1.

 

Just to be clear, the cards that still say "play this card twice" (like Stab of the mirror, or Focused assault) actually *do* play the card twice?

Kind of related, but I always found this wording to be a bit confusing, coming from Dominion. I wasn't sure at first whether it meant to play the card twice total, or two additional times after the first. This is because I expect the text inside the card to be a series of instructions that the card follows when played. However, in Griftlands, the text inside the card is often not that, but instead a *modifier* to how the card is played in the first place. The best example of my confusion is Breather: if I spend 2 combo to play the card three times, is that in addition to the default single play, or instead of it? Turns out it's the former, so am I technically spending the combo before playing the card? And the effect that calls for spending combo is somehow ignored when the additional plays are processed, so you don't get to spend more combo for even more plays?

In general, something like "play this card a second time", or maybe even "this card is played two times (instead of once)" would be clearer for me. But maybe that's just me. A videogame can get away with more vague wordings than a boardgame, since the game interprets the card effects for you anyway.

Edited by pacovf
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Senteliks    32

well, I am not surprised that the new character got delayed - one thing is optimistic estimates and another the reality, when facing unpredictable obstacles, among other things. But I wouldn't' say it's " so soon". That said, it is not simple implementation and we got plenty of new features to play around that is spillover from the development of new character, which makes the wait around this mystery character, all the worthwhile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
s5unaMe    105

Wow, new menu is coool!

3 hours ago, pacovf said:

Just to be clear, the cards that still say "play this card twice" (like Stab of the mirror, or Focused assault) actually *do* play the card twice?

Spoiler

 

Kind of related, but I always found this wording to be a bit confusing, coming from Dominion. I wasn't sure at first whether it meant to play the card twice total, or two additional times after the first. This is because I expect the text inside the card to be a series of instructions that the card follows when played. However, in Griftlands, the text inside the card is often not that, but instead a *modifier* to how the card is played in the first place. The best example of my confusion is Breather: if I spend 2 combo to play the card three times, is that in addition to the default single play, or instead of it? Turns out it's the former, so am I technically spending the combo before playing the card? And the effect that calls for spending combo is somehow ignored when the additional plays are processed, so you don't get to spend more combo for even more plays?

In general, something like "play this card a second time", or maybe even "this card is played two times (instead of once)" would be clearer for me. But maybe that's just me. A videogame can get away with more vague wordings than a boardgame, since the game interprets the card effects for you anyway.

 

 

Maybe it's really just a point of view? For me it's like you just follow card text and if it stays to X times you just do this X times instead normal once.

P.S. Played only base game of Dominion and Intrigue expansion. Haven't faced this kind of problem.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pacovf    890
Spoiler


The literal effect of something like Stab of the Mirror would be something along the lines of:


Stab_Mirror.Play(target){
	Stab_Mirror.Play(target)
	Stab_Mirror.Play(target)
}

Which is recursive and obviously nonsensical. Intuitively, we interpret the text of the card to instead do:


Stab_Mirror.Play(target){
	Stab_Mirror_single.Play(target)
	Stab_Mirror_single.Play(target)
}

Stab_Mirror_single.Play(target){
	Attack(target, 2, 3)
}

That is still technically different from the real Stab of the Mirror, since this pseudo-code would trigger on-card-play effects three times, instead of the expected two. To solve the issue, there are two solutions. Either we introduce a distinction between the player "playing" a card (i.e., selecting it from their hand), and the game "playing" that card (i.e., resolving their effect), with things like Boulder stance triggering only on the latter. The pseudo-code would look like:


Stab_Mirror.Play(target){
	Stab_Mirror.Resolve(target)
	Stab_Mirror.Resolve(target)
}

Stab_Mirror.Resolve(target){
	Attack(target, 2, 3)
}

This is fine and self-consistent, but introduces a distinction that is never explicitly spelled out to the player. The second "solution" is to instead explicitly instruct the player that the card plays itself a second time:


Stab_Mirror.Play(target, nplayed=0){
	Attack(target, 2-3)
	if (nplayed<1) {
		Stab_Mirror.Play(target, nplayed+1)
	}
}

This last one, to me, is the most sensible interpretation of what's happening, or at least what the card wants me to believe it does. But it's not what's actually written on the card. The text doesn't specify either that both plays of the card will target the same enemy, but that's a second order issue.

 

Just to be clear, Breather is the only one that had me really stumped, in that the intent wasn't clear from the wording. And, currently, I can't think of any card interactions where the difference between the wording and the intent is important, at least for multi-play cards, although this could change in the future with the introduction of new cards.

(If I had to give an example of unexpected interactions from card wordings, I would cite Battle Scars + Spines / Sparring, and that's completely unrelated)

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
s5unaMe    105
2 hours ago, pacovf said:

Just to be clear, Breather is the only one that had me really stumped, in that the intent wasn't clear from the wording. And, currently, I can't think of any card interactions where the difference between the wording and the intent is important, at least for multi-play cards, although this could change in the future with the introduction of new cards.

(If I had to give an example of unexpected interactions from card wordings, I would cite Battle Scars + Spines / Sparring, and that's completely unrelated)

Agree to Breather. Little bit confusing. In my opinion instead of

"Spend 2 combo: Play this card 3 times. Gain 2 Counter. Gain 2 Defence." // feels like card does nothing if you do not spend Combo//

would be better to swap positions, like

"Gain 2 Counter. Gain 2 Defence. Spend 2 combo: Play this card 2 times extra." 

Edited by s5unaMe
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this