#9811: "Downsized Castle/Keep did not ripple"
O czym jest to zgłoszenie?
Co się stało? Wybierz z poniższych opcji
Co się stało? Wybierz z poniższych opcji
Sprawdź, czy istnieje już zgłoszenie na ten sam temat
Jeśli tak, ZAGŁOSUJ na to zgłoszenie. Zgłoszenia z największą liczbą głosów mają najwyższy PRIORYTET!
| # | Status | Votes | Game | Type | Title | Last update |
|---|
Szczegółowy opis
-
• Proszę skopiować i wkleić treść błędu wyświetloną na ekranie, o ile jakaś się pojawia.
Whenever a building is downsized in Might (or Faith) so long as its shadow is the same type, same size and same owner the shadow should always be destroyed, and then the new downsized building should be rippled forward to replace it. In this case, the shadow building was left alone even though it met the requirement of same type, same size and same owner. Instead, it failed to ripple (it did not even destroy the shadow) because of a claimed conflict of hierarchy. The downsized building (castle to a keep) should have destroryed the shadow Castle, the rippled the new Keep into the domain regardless of potential "conflicts"... this is quite clear in the rules and in the FAQ on file with BGG. If a conflict of Hierarchy occurs, then the conflicting buildings (after being rippled) should be downsized by choice of the effecting player, with his own buildings being prioritized over those of other players.
-
• Proszę opisać co chciałeś zrobić, co zrobiłeś i co się stało
approximately move # 197
• Jaką masz przeglądarkę?
Google Chrome v66
-
• Proszę skopiować i wkleić tekst wyświetlany w języku angielskim zamiast w twoim języku. Jeśli posiadasz zrzut ekranu przedstawiający ten błąd (dobra praktyka), możesz skorzystać z wybranej przez siebie usługi hostującej zdjęcia (np. snipboard.io), aby go przesłać, a następnie skopiuj i wklej link tutaj. Czy ten tekst jest dostępny w systemie tłumaczeń? Jeśli tak, to czy został przetłumaczony więcej niż 24 godziny temu?
Whenever a building is downsized in Might (or Faith) so long as its shadow is the same type, same size and same owner the shadow should always be destroyed, and then the new downsized building should be rippled forward to replace it. In this case, the shadow building was left alone even though it met the requirement of same type, same size and same owner. Instead, it failed to ripple (it did not even destroy the shadow) because of a claimed conflict of hierarchy. The downsized building (castle to a keep) should have destroryed the shadow Castle, the rippled the new Keep into the domain regardless of potential "conflicts"... this is quite clear in the rules and in the FAQ on file with BGG. If a conflict of Hierarchy occurs, then the conflicting buildings (after being rippled) should be downsized by choice of the effecting player, with his own buildings being prioritized over those of other players.
• Jaką masz przeglądarkę?
Google Chrome v66
-
• Wyjaśnij swoją propozycję precyzyjnie i zwięźle, tak aby jak najłatwiej zrozumieć, co masz na myśli.
Whenever a building is downsized in Might (or Faith) so long as its shadow is the same type, same size and same owner the shadow should always be destroyed, and then the new downsized building should be rippled forward to replace it. In this case, the shadow building was left alone even though it met the requirement of same type, same size and same owner. Instead, it failed to ripple (it did not even destroy the shadow) because of a claimed conflict of hierarchy. The downsized building (castle to a keep) should have destroryed the shadow Castle, the rippled the new Keep into the domain regardless of potential "conflicts"... this is quite clear in the rules and in the FAQ on file with BGG. If a conflict of Hierarchy occurs, then the conflicting buildings (after being rippled) should be downsized by choice of the effecting player, with his own buildings being prioritized over those of other players.
• Jaką masz przeglądarkę?
Google Chrome v66
-
• Co wyświetlało się na ekranie kiedy zostałeś zablokowany (Pusty ekran? Część interfejsu gry? Komunikat o błędzie?)
Whenever a building is downsized in Might (or Faith) so long as its shadow is the same type, same size and same owner the shadow should always be destroyed, and then the new downsized building should be rippled forward to replace it. In this case, the shadow building was left alone even though it met the requirement of same type, same size and same owner. Instead, it failed to ripple (it did not even destroy the shadow) because of a claimed conflict of hierarchy. The downsized building (castle to a keep) should have destroryed the shadow Castle, the rippled the new Keep into the domain regardless of potential "conflicts"... this is quite clear in the rules and in the FAQ on file with BGG. If a conflict of Hierarchy occurs, then the conflicting buildings (after being rippled) should be downsized by choice of the effecting player, with his own buildings being prioritized over those of other players.
• Jaką masz przeglądarkę?
Google Chrome v66
-
• Która z zasad gry nie była przestrzegana w adaptacji BGA
Whenever a building is downsized in Might (or Faith) so long as its shadow is the same type, same size and same owner the shadow should always be destroyed, and then the new downsized building should be rippled forward to replace it. In this case, the shadow building was left alone even though it met the requirement of same type, same size and same owner. Instead, it failed to ripple (it did not even destroy the shadow) because of a claimed conflict of hierarchy. The downsized building (castle to a keep) should have destroryed the shadow Castle, the rippled the new Keep into the domain regardless of potential "conflicts"... this is quite clear in the rules and in the FAQ on file with BGG. If a conflict of Hierarchy occurs, then the conflicting buildings (after being rippled) should be downsized by choice of the effecting player, with his own buildings being prioritized over those of other players.
-
• Czy naruszenie zasad gry jest widoczne w powtórce rozgrywki? Jeżeli tak, to w ruchu o jakim numerze?
approximately move # 197
• Jaką masz przeglądarkę?
Google Chrome v66
-
• Jaką akcję w grze chciałeś wykonać?
Whenever a building is downsized in Might (or Faith) so long as its shadow is the same type, same size and same owner the shadow should always be destroyed, and then the new downsized building should be rippled forward to replace it. In this case, the shadow building was left alone even though it met the requirement of same type, same size and same owner. Instead, it failed to ripple (it did not even destroy the shadow) because of a claimed conflict of hierarchy. The downsized building (castle to a keep) should have destroryed the shadow Castle, the rippled the new Keep into the domain regardless of potential "conflicts"... this is quite clear in the rules and in the FAQ on file with BGG. If a conflict of Hierarchy occurs, then the conflicting buildings (after being rippled) should be downsized by choice of the effecting player, with his own buildings being prioritized over those of other players.
-
• Co starasz się zrobić by uruchomić tę akcję w grze?
approximately move # 197
-
• Co się stało kiedy próbowałeś to zrobić (komunikat o błędzie, komunikat na pasku stanu gry, ...)?
• Jaką masz przeglądarkę?
Google Chrome v66
-
• W którym momencie gry pojawił się problem (jakie było aktualne polecenie w grze)?
Whenever a building is downsized in Might (or Faith) so long as its shadow is the same type, same size and same owner the shadow should always be destroyed, and then the new downsized building should be rippled forward to replace it. In this case, the shadow building was left alone even though it met the requirement of same type, same size and same owner. Instead, it failed to ripple (it did not even destroy the shadow) because of a claimed conflict of hierarchy. The downsized building (castle to a keep) should have destroryed the shadow Castle, the rippled the new Keep into the domain regardless of potential "conflicts"... this is quite clear in the rules and in the FAQ on file with BGG. If a conflict of Hierarchy occurs, then the conflicting buildings (after being rippled) should be downsized by choice of the effecting player, with his own buildings being prioritized over those of other players.
-
• Co się stało kiedy próbowałeś wykonać akcję w grze (komunikat o błędzie, komunikat na pasku stanu gry, ...)?
approximately move # 197
• Jaką masz przeglądarkę?
Google Chrome v66
-
• Proszę opisać problem z wyświetlaniem. Jeśli posiadasz zrzut ekranu przedstawiający ten błąd (dobra praktyka), możesz skorzystać z wybranej przez siebie usługi hostującej zdjęcia (np. snipboard.io), aby go przesłać, a następnie skopiuj i wklej link tutaj.
Whenever a building is downsized in Might (or Faith) so long as its shadow is the same type, same size and same owner the shadow should always be destroyed, and then the new downsized building should be rippled forward to replace it. In this case, the shadow building was left alone even though it met the requirement of same type, same size and same owner. Instead, it failed to ripple (it did not even destroy the shadow) because of a claimed conflict of hierarchy. The downsized building (castle to a keep) should have destroryed the shadow Castle, the rippled the new Keep into the domain regardless of potential "conflicts"... this is quite clear in the rules and in the FAQ on file with BGG. If a conflict of Hierarchy occurs, then the conflicting buildings (after being rippled) should be downsized by choice of the effecting player, with his own buildings being prioritized over those of other players.
• Jaką masz przeglądarkę?
Google Chrome v66
-
• Proszę skopiować i wkleić tekst wyświetlany w języku angielskim zamiast w twoim języku. Jeśli posiadasz zrzut ekranu przedstawiający ten błąd (dobra praktyka), możesz skorzystać z wybranej przez siebie usługi hostującej zdjęcia (np. snipboard.io), aby go przesłać, a następnie skopiuj i wklej link tutaj. Czy ten tekst jest dostępny w systemie tłumaczeń? Jeśli tak, to czy został przetłumaczony więcej niż 24 godziny temu?
Whenever a building is downsized in Might (or Faith) so long as its shadow is the same type, same size and same owner the shadow should always be destroyed, and then the new downsized building should be rippled forward to replace it. In this case, the shadow building was left alone even though it met the requirement of same type, same size and same owner. Instead, it failed to ripple (it did not even destroy the shadow) because of a claimed conflict of hierarchy. The downsized building (castle to a keep) should have destroryed the shadow Castle, the rippled the new Keep into the domain regardless of potential "conflicts"... this is quite clear in the rules and in the FAQ on file with BGG. If a conflict of Hierarchy occurs, then the conflicting buildings (after being rippled) should be downsized by choice of the effecting player, with his own buildings being prioritized over those of other players.
• Jaką masz przeglądarkę?
Google Chrome v66
-
• Wyjaśnij swoją propozycję precyzyjnie i zwięźle, tak aby jak najłatwiej zrozumieć, co masz na myśli.
Whenever a building is downsized in Might (or Faith) so long as its shadow is the same type, same size and same owner the shadow should always be destroyed, and then the new downsized building should be rippled forward to replace it. In this case, the shadow building was left alone even though it met the requirement of same type, same size and same owner. Instead, it failed to ripple (it did not even destroy the shadow) because of a claimed conflict of hierarchy. The downsized building (castle to a keep) should have destroryed the shadow Castle, the rippled the new Keep into the domain regardless of potential "conflicts"... this is quite clear in the rules and in the FAQ on file with BGG. If a conflict of Hierarchy occurs, then the conflicting buildings (after being rippled) should be downsized by choice of the effecting player, with his own buildings being prioritized over those of other players.
• Jaką masz przeglądarkę?
Google Chrome v66
Historia zgłoszeń
Table 39642880 move #197 (about); The is complete... the bug caused me to lose the game btw.. :p
imgur.com/gallery/7Ss4nex
What happened:
My placing the hamlet in Might (circled in red) merged two domains, each with a Castle... my Castle had superior strength, and so won the contest. Red player downsized his Castle to a keep and then the system claimed "Ripple Cancelled due to Conflict of Hierarchy". Nothing was changed in Faith or Reason.
What should have occurred:
The castle in Faith (marked with a red "X" in my diagram) should have downsized to a keep with the same footprint as the Keep in Might (circled in Red). This should have caused a conflict of hierarchy with the Black player's Keep already in that same domain, however it is clear in the rules that such a conflict is allowed to occur but must be immediately resolved by the effecting player. I should've been allowed to then choose which Keep would win the conflict (if i had a Keep of my own in the contest, then I would've had to downsize it first, but i did not). I was planning to choose the black keep to downsize... then, no matter where the black player located his downsized Watchtower, the City in the upper right corner would've been 'isolated' in a domain without any religious buildings. I then would've used one of my last 2 actions to place a chapel in that domain and claim 5 additional points for the final scoring, allowing me to win by 3 points, instead of losing by 1 point.
The system needs to learn to ignore conflicts when resolving separations of domains due to downsized buildings. It also needs to learn the timing of events... the shadows are always destroyed first, and the the ripple of the new building is placed -- so, even if something prevents the downsize in Faith or Reason, the original building is still destroyed in those realms (and ruin renovations are lost in Reason).
Your bug has probably been fixed already, or was linked to a temporary failure of BGA service.
In any case, when filling a bug report, make sure to have an explicit title linked to the incident (ex: with error message), so other players can recognize it and vote for it.
Dodaj coś do tego zgłoszenia
- Kolejne ID stołu / ID ruchu
- Czy F5 rozwiązało problem?
- Czy problem zdarzył się kilka razy? Za każdym razem? Losowo?
- Jeśli posiadasz zrzut ekranu przedstawiający ten błąd (dobra praktyka), możesz skorzystać z wybranej przez siebie usługi hostującej zdjęcia (np. snipboard.io), aby go przesłać, a następnie skopiuj i wklej link tutaj.
