Všechna hlášení
Hlášení Saint Petersburg
#24803: "Log players decision on using the pub AFTER all players made their choice"
acknowledged: Vývojáři souhlasí, že je to dobrý nápad, a mají v úmyslu na tom pracovat
Čeho se toto hlášení týká?
Co se stalo? Prosím vyberte níže
Podnět: podle mého názoru by následující významně vylepšilo hru
Detailní popis
-
• Prosím popiš svůj návrh přesně a konzistentně, aby bylo snadné pochopit, co máš na mysli.
Currently, the log immediately shows whether players have used the pub to buy points and if so, how many. Especially in the last building phase before the end of the game it can have an impact on the other player's decision, so it is a disadvantage to buy points first. My suggestion is to wait with the logging of the points bought until all pub owners have decided on a number of points.
• Jaký prohlížeč používáte?
Safari v13.1
Historie hlášení
14. Sep 2020 13:33 • Tikhonov • Tento návrh zatím nebyl analyzován vývojáři:
In the given table number you can see the logging in move #120 and #121 for example.
16. Sep 2020 01:00 • Marcuda • Vývojáři souhlasí, že je to dobrý nápad, a mají v úmyslu na tom pracovat:
Interesting idea. I see you're point. I'll need to look into how to delay those messages.
17. Sep 2020 06:05 • Marcuda • Vývojáři souhlasí, že je to dobrý nápad, a mají v úmyslu na tom pracovat:
This requires a change to the database so it's going to take a little more time to do properly.
26. Sep 2020 15:32 • ShimokitaJer • Vývojáři souhlasí, že je to dobrý nápad, a mají v úmyslu na tom pracovat:
I'll agree this may be a good idea, but is it in accord with the original game? After all, if you were playing this in a physical space someone would need to express their intention first, wouldn't they?
28. Sep 2020 05:13 • Marcuda • Vývojáři souhlasí, že je to dobrý nápad, a mají v úmyslu na tom pracovat:
True, but the difference here is that there is no turn order for Pub. To be most authentic it should probably force turn order for that phase, but in most cases that doesn't matter and would only slow the game down. Also, I'm not sure the rules are explicit here. Perhaps it would be relevant in Arena, but I think this approach would be best of both worlds--faster play while not giving advantage to any player.
Regardless I haven't begun this one yet :)
Regardless I haven't begun this one yet :)
29. Sep 2020 03:28 • SamHellerman • Vývojáři souhlasí, že je to dobrý nápad, a mají v úmyslu na tom pracovat:
Rulebook is silent on this matter. In physical play, I think players just tend to choose simultaneously. One *might* wait to hear the other announce their move first before choosing, but it's a borderline cheat if they do, and of course a player who is concerned about this problem can simply refrain from announcing until both have paid.
For online, it *could* enforce a turn order, but I see nothing to support that idea in the rules at all. It could use the blue start player first, but being blue start player in the last round is (in a majority of games) probably a disadvantage to begin with. It could be the next player after the last player to "pass" (turn order just keeps going around as it was), but again, nothing in the rules to support that.
I think simultaneous selection is the way to go, and not sharing the information with other players until everyone is committed.
For online, it *could* enforce a turn order, but I see nothing to support that idea in the rules at all. It could use the blue start player first, but being blue start player in the last round is (in a majority of games) probably a disadvantage to begin with. It could be the next player after the last player to "pass" (turn order just keeps going around as it was), but again, nothing in the rules to support that.
I think simultaneous selection is the way to go, and not sharing the information with other players until everyone is committed.
7. Oct 2020 19:40 • Supergravity • Vývojáři souhlasí, že je to dobrý nápad, a mají v úmyslu na tom pracovat:
In our group, we make use of the pub an ordinary action (much like use of the observatory). This eliminates the turn-order ambiguity, but it does make the pub very slightly less valuable b/c sometimes you would need the blue-round income to fully use it.
8. Oct 2020 08:57 • SamHellerman • Vývojáři souhlasí, že je to dobrý nápad, a mají v úmyslu na tom pracovat:
That does make Pub less useful, and has some weird effects. You don't want to allow a "use then upgrade" loophole, so you'd have to gray out (IRL, flip) the Pub to make sure it isn't upgraded for a while. But then when does it become upgradeable again? To stay similar to the real rules, that would be as soon as aristocrats are dealt, but then your Pub and Observatory are unflipping at different times.
Main issue though, being able to funnel blue income straight into the Pub is useful and imho shouldn't be lost even as an option.
Main issue though, being able to funnel blue income straight into the Pub is useful and imho shouldn't be lost even as an option.
Doplňte tuto zprávu
Prosím přidej sem cokoli, co by mohlo být relevantní pro reprodukci této chyby nebo pochopení tvého návrhu:
- ID dalšího stolu / ID tahu
- Byla chyba odstraněna stisknutím F5?
- Objevila se tato chyba častěji? Pokaždé? Náhodně?
- Pokud máš snímek obrazvky zobrazující tuto chybu (doporučujeme!), můžeš použít Imgur.com pro nahrání obrázku a pak odkaz na tento obrázek na Imguru zkopírovat a vložit sem.
