Recommend
5 
 Thumb up
 Hide
29 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Dominion» Forums » Variants

Subject: Attacks targeting specific player - why not? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Branko K.
msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I know Donald said he was against this idea.. but after some thinking I have to ask - why? I mean, I read the reasons (disencouraging kingmaking and so on) but still.. isn't there a slight chance that "targeted attacks" could actually make the game.. better?

I think such attacks would add another layer of interactivity and, well, fun to Dominion. Having to always target *all* the players waters down the concept of "attack", IMHO, and adds more fuel to the fire to multiplayer solitaire screamers. By having a choice of "who to attack" would add a nice meta-layer to the game, not to mention the overall appeal of "take that!", and noone could complain of the game not being interactive after being on the receiving end of the hitting stick a few times.

Anyways, I hold my hopes for the Intrigue expansion - not that it would include targeted attacks (because Donald specifically said it wouldn't), but rather that the attacks will be interesting enough to showcase how "always attack everybody" concept is actually better then targeted attacks.

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Chen
Taiwan
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
It wouldn't add any strategy, and it wouldn't add any interaction.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mikkel Øberg
Denmark
Virum
flag msg tools
badge
Ahh, you found me... Run!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I must admit, I like the idea.

Anything that targets specific instead of wide is good in my book.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian Klinck
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The only reason you'd want to use an "attacks one" instead of an "attacks all" card is if it was cheaper. There's no benefit to *not* attacking someone...

That said, I'm not against it, but I don't mind if they don't implement it.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennison Milenkaya
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Almost never will you buy Victory cards until after most attacks have passed their most opportune moment to hit. Think about it: Bureacrats, Militias, and Witches are most effective early on. No-one is ahead at this time. The only reason to target one specific player instead of another is to just pick on each other. Spies and Thieves are already hit or miss, so they already have somewhat of a targetting feature, but it leaves who gets hit and who doesn't up to luck of the draw. For a strategic game, I totally wouldn't welcome targetted attacks.

Having played enough Settlers Of Catan with friends and family, I know it is an uncomfortable position to roll that first "7" and either waste the chance to get something this turn or upset someone for little reason. And that just invites them to do it back, guilt free. For a friendly game, I totally wouldn't prefer targetted attacks.

If you mean just for the next batch of cards and not to play the original this way (as "variant" would suggest), I hope they continue in the same format that they follow now.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
♫ Eric Herman ♫
United States
West Richland
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
I like elephants. I like how they swing through trees.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In theory, I agree with you, but thinking of the specific attack cards in Dominion (at least currently), I can't really think of many situations where it would make a lot of sense to only attack one other player. But here are a few I came up with...

You might do that for an end game situation, where you're player 1 and you (think you) are slightly ahead of player 3 and are way ahead of player 2, and you'd like player 2 to be able to end the game, if possible. So you might play a Thief or Militia on player 3 but not player 2. Yeah, it's a kingmaker/bash-the-leader type of thing, but inasmuch as you're not entirely sure and guessing the timing of it, and inasmuch as player 2 isn't sure that they don't have a chance to win, then why not? When you are in competition/opposition, it makes sense to be able to target the stronger competition. Still, in most cases, it would be better to just hit them both...

Another possibility would be where you don't want to play the Witch against one particular player who has a lot of Gardens, where the Curse card might end up benefitting them to get to the next 10 card threshold.

Also, you might not want to play Militia against a player who has a lot of Library cards... it may actually benefit them to have to discard two VP cards from their hand to go down to 3 cards, and then play a Library to draw new cards to get up to 7.

You may not want to play a Thief against someone running a Chapel deck, because you might end up doing some of their work for them by discarding an upcoming Copper from their deck.

So there are indeed some possible strategic reasons to target specific players with Attack cards, rare though they may be.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Branko K.
msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, this is only in the variant's thread because obviously my quickbar is still messed up after that last BGG overhaul.

Anyways, I wasn't talking about playing "existing" cards as target-specific, but rather some new attack cards that would be aimed at the specific player instead of the whole group.

Last time I played Dominion we made our last game a silly-ass one, with house rules made up on the spot. One of them was that the three curses you get with the Witch could be aimed one player each (as per rules) but also any way you please, so you might give all of them to one player only. (Btw a few other rules were that Moats bounce attacks back but get discarded back to the supply after use and that you could discard a Treasure card to halt a Village played by another player forcing him to discard it as it were never played).

Well, I know this "variant" is obviously broken beyond belief, but you'd never believe how much fun it was. I don't know whether I would like to play that way often because the goofyness can only take you so far, but one thing is certain - it was interactive as hell. Curses were flying all over the place, Moats too, Villages got zapped, you were constantly watching what other players are playing, .. well, it was a blast.

Edit: My speling seriously suck.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
♪ Isaäc Bickërstaff ♫
United States
Greer
South Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
Entropy Seminar:
badge
The results of a five yeer studee ntu the sekund lw uf thurmodynamiks aand itz inevibl fxt hon shewb rt nslpn raq liot.
Avatar
mb
iklinck wrote:
The only reason you'd want to use an "attacks one" instead of an "attacks all" card is if it was cheaper. There's no benefit to *not* attacking someone...

Yeah, this was my thought. Why not spread the pain around instead of just hitting one person?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nick Fisk
United Kingdom
Stoke on Trent
Staffordshire
flag msg tools
Come on you Seagulls! Sami Hyppia's Blue & White army!
badge
That's weird. This bit used to mention Shire Games, and tell you all how wonderful we are. But it seems to have got deleted. Let's see what happens this time ....
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Attacks targeting specific player - why not?


Because I would be that player.

shake


N.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sure. some people would certainly like a game with targeted attacks. But I don't think that's the majority, there's a reason Dominion has a much higher rating here than Munchkin. It's very very hard (evidence would suggest perhaps impossible) to have a game where you can target whoever you want at any time and keep it from coming down to a popularity contest of who goes after whom, or who's perceived to be leading.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brent Mair
United States
Roy
Utah
flag msg tools
The Meeple Nation Boardgame Podcast - 30 minutes a week!
badge
BGGCon 2015 or Bust
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
baba44713 wrote:
I know Donald said he was against this idea.. but after some thinking I have to ask - why? I mean, I read the reasons (disencouraging kingmaking and so on) but still.. isn't there a slight chance that "targeted attacks" could actually make the game.. better?


Not in my opinion. I love the fact that attacks are against everybody. I was pondering this wonderful feature on the drive to work today. I like games where there is no direct attacks between individual players.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Myke Madsen
United States
Salt Lake City
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Let's imagine there's some targeted attack card called Plague. Here's how I see it playing out:

Player 1: "Then with my remaining Action I'll play Plague on... you (points to Player 2)."

Player 2: "Me? Why me?"

Player 1: "Because you're winning."

Player 2: "I'm not winning, she is (pointing to Player 3)."

Player 3: "I'm DEFINITELY not winning. Besides, you hit me with Plague on your last turn."

Player 2: "Who hasn't been hit by Plague yet? (looks at Player 4)"

and on and on...


This sort of metagaming has a place in some games, but I think it would really taint Dominion.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Petersen
United States
Daly City
California
flag msg tools
If there's a card called Plague, I'd be mighty disappointed if it didn't affect everyone. ^_~
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
baba44713 wrote:
but one thing is certain - it was interactive as hell.


you were constantly watching what other players are playing, .. well, it was a blast.

Try the "variant" of misinterpreting the curse rules. This allows you to give a curse as a free buy. Very interactive, very fun. Lots of scheming and table-talk as you decide whether or not to give a curse, and who to give it to.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
joedogboy wrote:
Very interactive, very fun. Lots of scheming and table-talk as you decide whether or not to give a curse, and who to give it to.


That would be fun for me in the same sense that a root canal is fun. Seriously, if you like that, then you would love Munchkin.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Branko K.
msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I saw your variant.. but I think it's broken beyond belief.

Free cursing, without the chance of defending? Come on. The obvious abuse is just piling up buys and spilling Curses all over the place. Once everyone is cursed to hell and back, you start playing with your horribly bloated decks. Nah.. not for me.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken B.
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
joedogboy wrote:
Very interactive, very fun. Lots of scheming and table-talk as you decide whether or not to give a curse, and who to give it to.


That would be fun for me in the same sense that a root canal is fun. Seriously, if you like that, then you would love Munchkin.




The passive-aggressiveness knows no boundaries.



This is a lesson in how to properly phrase the following without risk of suspension:


"Your taste in games are ass and your ideas are stupid, so stupid in fact that you'd probably like this completely shitty game over here."


5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
franklincobb wrote:
"Your taste in games are ass and your ideas are stupid, so stupid in fact that you'd probably like this completely shitty game over here."


Is that really what you think? I don't think that at all. I just happened to be in a room with a group playing Munchkin last week. They were having a great time. I don't think they are stupid, I'm sorry if you do.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken B.
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
franklincobb wrote:
"Your taste in games are ass and your ideas are stupid, so stupid in fact that you'd probably like this completely shitty game over here."


Is that really what you think? I don't think that at all. I just happened to be in a room with a group playing Munchkin last week. They were having a great time. I don't think they are stupid, I'm sorry if you do.



My apologies DdJ, you just compared Munchkin to a root canal. Apparently my grasp of the English language can't match yours.



Quote:
That would be fun for me in the same sense that a root canal is fun. Seriously, if you like that, then you would love Munchkin.


1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
franklincobb wrote:
My apologies DdJ, you just compared Munchkin to a root canal. Apparently my grasp of the English language can't match yours.


Apparently. I said it's not fun for me. That doesn't mean it's
"shitty". It just means I like something else. There are a million things in the world that others like and I don't. I still recommend them to people who I think will like them.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
午餐先生
United States
San Mateo
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
HappyProle wrote:
Let's imagine there's some targeted attack card called Plague. Here's how I see it playing out:

Player 1: "Then with my remaining Action I'll play Plague on... you (points to Player 2)."

Player 2: "Me? Why me?"

Player 1: "Because you're winning."

Player 2: "I'm not winning, she is (pointing to Player 3)."

Player 3: "I'm DEFINITELY not winning. Besides, you hit me with Plague on your last turn."

Player 2: "Who hasn't been hit by Plague yet? (looks at Player 4)"

and on and on...


This sort of metagaming has a place in some games, but I think it would really taint Dominion.


this totally sounded like my last game of Settlers... only replace "Plague" with "Robber".
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bill Barksdale
United States
Mountain View
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
joedogboy wrote:
Very interactive, very fun. Lots of scheming and table-talk as you decide whether or not to give a curse, and who to give it to.


That would be fun for me in the same sense that a root canal is fun. Seriously, if you like that, then you would love Munchkin.


Now let's not forget about Killer Bunnies and the Quest for the Magic Carrot.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennison Milenkaya
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Amen, Happy Prole and Mister Lunch.

The thing is, you don't know who is winning early on, when it is most critical to attack the other players and slow them down. If your attack could only hit one opponent at a time, that'd mean that after you hit the first opponent, your second opponent now has the same advantage you do, which means you have to hit him the next time around. This simply means that it takes two plays of an attack to do the same thing that a 'hits-everyone' attack already does. Only after everyone's deck is built up to its player's liking will anyone buy Victory cards and you can start to see a likely winner emerge. Later, it is too late to slow the leader down too much--especially because experienced players will, by then, have counter-measures for the attacks in the set.

I don't see the point to choosing a less-efficient attack just to cause the problems of favouratism, simply guessing wrong, degenerating to a slap contest ("you hit me last time, so now I hit you, while John Doe avoids the scene altogether and wins"), or making it another 'win by being in second place' game.

Furthermore, such attack cards would cause the game to play very differently depending on the number of players. In a two-player game, it would essentially be a 'hits-everyone' attack. With each additional player, the same attack becomes far less effective.

And do we need to invite the opportunity for tough decisions slowing down Dominion ("Who is the most beneficial target this time?") when one of its great strengths is its fast play time?

Overall, I don't see any pros to switching the current attack format to targetted attacks. Already, the idea of "multi-player solitaire" is retarded. If solitaire were multi-player, it would cease to be solitaire. Just tell anyone that makes that complaint to play Dominion alone and see if it holds any worth.

Branko, if you Quickbars are messed up after the BBG overhaul, you should Edit the Quickbar, remove all the links, and re-link everything. I did that and it worked fine since.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
DaviddesJ wrote:
joedogboy wrote:
Very interactive, very fun. Lots of scheming and table-talk as you decide whether or not to give a curse, and who to give it to.


That would be fun for me in the same sense that a root canal is fun. Seriously, if you like that, then you would love Munchkin.


At the right time, and with the right group, I do enjoy Munchkin (as do many people). Light simple games with interaction/screwage and table talk are a nice break from heavier/deeper/longer games that I also enjoy.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
joedogboy wrote:
At the right time, and with the right group, I do enjoy Munchkin (as do many people). Light simple games with interaction/screwage and table talk are a nice break from heavier/deeper/longer games that I also enjoy.


Good to hear. I'm glad I got one thing right.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.