1 minute ago, RandomJC said:

The feeling when it takes you a good 30 seconds, and had already opened up google before I realized what ganstabeeotch was.

I mean, I haven't really read anything, but it seems mostly based around "I won, why am I losing honor", but I don't really know. It's a lot of effort put forth about something that isn't going to change, that most people don't want to change.

See my XKCD!

You have the gist, except "I won, but made poor choices, so now I'm losing the game, though I won the battle, because decisions are difficult".

Just now, RandomJC said:

I think I win a soda if we make it to 15 pages.

Beer, or margaritas. I do want to try to make frozen margaritas in my ice cream maker!

Just now, Mirith said:

See my XKCD!

You have the gist, except "I won, but made poor choices, so now I'm losing the game, though I won the battle, because decisions are difficult".

I do love me some XKCD.

This is why I know when I respond to people with my argument I try not to read when they respond, especially in long winded tirades like this one. It's best to just...walk away.

1 minute ago, Mirith said:

Beer, or margaritas. I do want to try to make frozen margaritas in my ice cream maker!

I'll take a margarita, but I think that's 18 pages, gotta be old enough to drink.

Any drink, so long as it's not purple.

Just now, Ersatz Nihilist said:

Any drink, so long as it's not purple.

We used to mix Everclear with the Purple Mountain Dew. It was... special.

1 minute ago, Ersatz Nihilist said:

Any drink, so long as it's not purple.

Be wary, my ignore button is twitchy.

3 minutes ago, RandomJC said:

Be wary, my ignore button is twitchy.

Maybe he just doesn't like grape. Can you name a good non-grape flavored purple drink?

2 minutes ago, Mirith said:

Maybe he just doesn't like grape. Can you name a good non-grape flavored purple drink?

...what kind of monster doesn't like grape?

Just now, RandomJC said:

...what kind of monster doesn't like grape?

To be honest, the grape might be the guy in Shiba's play group dialing it to 5 every duel despite losing the last three duels that turn because of it.

14 minutes ago, Shiba Jaimi said:

First, the four point swing can happen to either party. It is the difference between someone bidding "1" and the other person bidding "5". No special cards or special plays need apply here. Three duels ending in a 4 point swing, going in the same direction, ends the game. Yes, it is unlikely, but my point is that IT SHOULDN'T BE POSSIBLE! If you think it should be, fine...we disagree.

And this is why your Thesis is subjective. It certainly contains facts, but they all build up to two statements: that winning a duel shouldn't have any negative repercussions and that the honor swings from duels are too great. Neither of these are objective statements: you have shown that you can win a duel and lose the game, but not why that is something that needs fixing. You have shown that you can lose 4 honor at once from a duel, but again not why that needs fixing. These statements are further hamstrung by the fact that even if these were problems they are easily mitigable by the person they would be an issue for, just by not bidding so high. You have a long way to go before you actually support the claim that a 4 point honor swing is something that "shouldn't be possible".

Just now, Ersatz Nihilist said:

To be honest, the grape might be the guy in Shiba's play group dialing it to 5 every duel despite losing the last three duels that turn because of it.

Well, clearly it's the rules fault, and not the players.

3 minutes ago, RandomJC said:

...what kind of monster doesn't like grape?

Maybe grapes killed his parents?

22 minutes ago, Mirith said:

How is spending honor to win a duel not paying a cost, like say Assassination? When you bid 5, you risk paying 4 honor to achieve your purpose. Or you Bid 1 and decide that your opponent chooses "Bow my guy or lose 4 honor". You should consider it a sunk cost, with the possibility of a refund. Whether or not it is a "Legal play" in terms of achieving your goal is a bit more murky, since you need to decide before hand what the possible costs are considering your opponents possible bids, and not choose poorly. I don't see this as "Punishment" I see this as "Cost". Same as Assassination. Or For Shame, where your opponent gets the choice. You can do things to force the choice, and it isn't as cut and dry as other mechanics.

Because it is not clearly stated up front, as with every other card action in the game. You making a bid is not clear cost, it is a gamble. This idea is stated clearly in the rules.

25 minutes ago, Mirith said:

2) You shouldn't play assassination if you are at 3 honor. You shouldn't bid 5 if you are at 4 honor. Again, you haven't expressed anything as long as you consider the honor bid to be a cost. The player making bad choices isn't a balance issue. Its a player issue. You shouldn't use Doji Gift Giver when you have 1 fate left you need for that Admit Defeat! If you can't pay the cost, or it actively moves you towards not winning, don't use the ability!

My second point is the argument that each micro-conflict, other than dueling, brings you closer to a win condition. In dueling, you can get both closer and farther away at the same time. No other action in the game does this. Paying costs is marshaling resources up front to create the effect that changes the board in your favor. The dueling rules, very often, do not do this.

You said, "If you can't pay the cost, or it actively moves you towards not winning, don't use the ability!" you do not know the exact cost of the duel until you resolve it, that IS NOT A COST!

33 minutes ago, Mirith said:

If you think that you need to bid high to use the ability, don't use it.

This does not address anything I said in the thesis. This is a strategy to negotiate the broken rules, not a defense of them.

35 minutes ago, Mirith said:

If I'm reading your arguments correctly, you want the game to not let you decide the risk for reward?

I put forward four points, this has nothing to do with them.

36 minutes ago, Mirith said:

You want it told to you. Perhaps you shouldn't use duels if you are risking dying first turn by making poor choices.

You are missing the point. This has nothing to do with me playing. The rules are broken in the way they interact with the game itself, with any two players.

37 minutes ago, Mirith said:

I think they could be very interesting and powerful. They add a bluffing aspect to the game that I really liked out of Netrunner, where you had to decide on what information your opponent is trying to hide or achieve.

There is a part of that I can agree with, but there are better ways to skin that cat. Someone else has posted a set of dueling rules that allows for that. It is back a number of pages...not sure where.

1 minute ago, RandomJC said:

Well, clearly it's the rules fault, and not the players.

The constant repetition of that argument really grapes.

All I hear is wine wine wine.

We really ought to find some way to crush the whole thing underfoot right now.

1 minute ago, Mirith said:

Maybe grapes killed his parents?

Maybe then his parents deserved it.

Just now, Ersatz Nihilist said:

The constant repetition of that argument really grapes.

All I hear is wine wine wine.

We really ought to find some way to crush the whole thing underfoot right now.

I thought that's what we're doing right now?

Putting on my Otomo hat (finally)...

The debate exhaustively discussed in this thread can be summarized in the following core viewpoints. For the sake of brevity, the detailed description of the dueling mechanics are represented by "X".

Shiba Jaimi's Argument:
Dueling Rules are X.

X is broken.

Dueling Rules are broken.

Therefore, Dueling Rules need to be changed or fixed.

Opposing Argument:

Dueling Rules are X.

X is NOT broken.

Dueling Rules are NOT broken.

Therefore, Dueling Rules do NOT need to be changed or fixed.

This comparison of arguments clarifies what should be easily recognizable. Both sides agree on how the dueling rules work. The mechanics are never in question. However, as is demonstrated, the viewpoint of each side arrives at diametrically opposed conclusions because the premises that their respective arguments differ on the point of whether the rules as written are, in fact, broken. In essence, one argument is stating that because of X, dueling is broken; the other side is stating that because of X, dueling is not broken. These irreconcilable statements result in the current impasse. In conclusion, pursuing the debate further is pointless, and the recommendation suggested here is ending the debate at this juncture.

Otomo hat off...I could figuratively kill for some Mountain Dew Pitch Black right now.

1 minute ago, Zesu Shadaban said:

These irreconcilable statements result in the current impasse.

... sounds like the next step to take is to then fight four duels consecutively and perform an identical action each time, then.

2 minutes ago, Zesu Shadaban said:

Putting on my Otomo hat (finally)...

The debate exhaustively discussed in this thread can be summarized in the following core viewpoints. For the sake of brevity, the detailed description of the dueling mechanics are represented by "X".

Shiba Jaimi's Argument:
Dueling Rules are X.

X is broken.

Dueling Rules are broken.

Therefore, Dueling Rules need to be changed or fixed.

Opposing Argument:

Dueling Rules are X.

X is NOT broken.

Dueling Rules are NOT broken.

Therefore, Dueling Rules do NOT need to be changed or fixed.

This comparison of arguments clarifies what should be easily recognizable. Both sides agree on how the dueling rules work. The mechanics are never in question. However, as is demonstrated, the viewpoint of each side arrives at diametrically opposed conclusions because the premises that their respective arguments differ on the point of whether the rules as written are, in fact, broken. In essence, one argument is stating that because of X, dueling is broken; the other side is stating that because of X, dueling is not broken. These irreconcilable statements result in the current impasse. In conclusion, pursuing the debate further is pointless, and the recommendation suggested here is ending the debate at this juncture.

That's all well and good, but if this thread ends, it won't be fun anymore.

Just now, RandomJC said:

That's all well and good, but if this thread ends, it won't be fun anymore.

Who said anything about ending the thread? I'm just advocating ending the debate. We can talk purple drinks for another 2 pages for that bet...

4 minutes ago, GoblinGuide said:

And this is why your Thesis is subjective. It certainly contains facts, but they all build up to two statements: that winning a duel shouldn't have any negative repercussions...

The Thesis has four points to it. You saying, "that winning a duel shouldn't have any negative repercussions" is not articulating the point accurately.

7 minutes ago, GoblinGuide said:

and that the honor swings from duels are too great. Neither of these are objective statements: you have shown that you can win a duel and lose the game, but not why that is something that needs fixing...You have shown that you can lose 4 honor at once from a duel, but again not why that needs fixing...You have a long way to go before you actually support the claim that a 4 point honor swing is something that "shouldn't be possible"...

The point about the honor swing includes how fast this can end a game. It is too powerful...more powerful than any Clan Champion, any Stronghold and any Ring. This is why it needs to be fix. You are not reading the thesis.

11 minutes ago, GoblinGuide said:

These statements are further hamstrung by the fact that even if these were problems they are easily mitigable by the person they would be an issue for, just by not bidding so high.

Describing how to negotiate the broken rules does not fix them. They are still broken, even if you don't suffer the extremes of them. Putting lipstick on the pig does not make it a geisha.

4 minutes ago, Zesu Shadaban said:

Who said anything about ending the thread? I'm just advocating ending the debate. We can talk purple drinks for another 2 pages for that bet...

I'm ok with this.

And I think Beet Juice is purple too.

3 minutes ago, Shiba Jaimi said:

The point about the honor swing includes how fast this can end a game. It is too powerful...more powerful than any Clan Champion, any Stronghold and any Ring. This is why it needs to be fix. You are not reading the thesis.

lostarkmeltingface.gif