#157339: "Players won't agree on removing capullis"
Worum geht es bei dieser Meldung?
Was ist passiert? Bitte wähle unten aus
Was ist passiert? Bitte wähle unten aus
Bitte überprüfe, ob bereits eine Meldung zum gleichen Thema existiert
Wenn ja, STIMME bitte für diese Meldung. Meldungen mit mehr Stimmen erhalten höhere PRIORITÄT!
| # | Status | Votes | Game | Type | Title | Last update |
|---|
Detaillierte Beschreibung
-
• Falls du eine Fehlermeldung auf dem Bildschirm siehst, bitte kopieren und einfügen.
We have a situation in which none of the remaining capullis can be played with 1 double canal left. But since players have to agree on the proposed removal, any one of them can disagree to deliberately prolonging the game even though its obvious no move makes the remaining capulli playable. This forces one of the remaining players to cede an action points to play a canal to forcibly correct the issue and remove the capullis.
The reason for the proposal and agreement is just to test the legitimacy of the proposal. There is to be no tactical or strategic reason for making or rejecting a proposal, but that appears to be what some players are using it for. I would expect a person to give some explanation for which capullis are still foundable if a disagreement is made. -
• Bitte erkläre, was du machen wolltest, was du dann getan hast und was dann passiert ist
I proposed the move at 234 and again at 314.
• Welchen Browser benutzt du?
Google Chrome v132
-
• Bitte kopiere den Text, der in Englisch anstatt in deiner Sprache angezeigt wird, und füge ihn hier ein. Wenn du einen Screenshot dieses Fehlers hast (empfohlene Vorgehensweise), kannst du einen Bild‑Hosting‑Dienst deiner Wahl verwenden (snipboard.io zum Beispiel), um ihn hochzuladen und den Link hier einzufügen. Ist dieser Text auf der Übersetzungsseite verfügbar? Wenn ja, wurde dieser vor mehr als 24 Stunden übersetzt?
We have a situation in which none of the remaining capullis can be played with 1 double canal left. But since players have to agree on the proposed removal, any one of them can disagree to deliberately prolonging the game even though its obvious no move makes the remaining capulli playable. This forces one of the remaining players to cede an action points to play a canal to forcibly correct the issue and remove the capullis.
The reason for the proposal and agreement is just to test the legitimacy of the proposal. There is to be no tactical or strategic reason for making or rejecting a proposal, but that appears to be what some players are using it for. I would expect a person to give some explanation for which capullis are still foundable if a disagreement is made. • Welchen Browser benutzt du?
Google Chrome v132
-
• Bitte erkläre deinen Vorschlag so präzise und genau wie möglich, damit er leicht zu verstehen ist.
We have a situation in which none of the remaining capullis can be played with 1 double canal left. But since players have to agree on the proposed removal, any one of them can disagree to deliberately prolonging the game even though its obvious no move makes the remaining capulli playable. This forces one of the remaining players to cede an action points to play a canal to forcibly correct the issue and remove the capullis.
The reason for the proposal and agreement is just to test the legitimacy of the proposal. There is to be no tactical or strategic reason for making or rejecting a proposal, but that appears to be what some players are using it for. I would expect a person to give some explanation for which capullis are still foundable if a disagreement is made. • Welchen Browser benutzt du?
Google Chrome v132
-
• Was wurde auf dem Bildschirm angezeigt, als du blockiert wurdest (weißer Bildschirm? Teil der Spieloberfläche? Fehlermeldung?)
We have a situation in which none of the remaining capullis can be played with 1 double canal left. But since players have to agree on the proposed removal, any one of them can disagree to deliberately prolonging the game even though its obvious no move makes the remaining capulli playable. This forces one of the remaining players to cede an action points to play a canal to forcibly correct the issue and remove the capullis.
The reason for the proposal and agreement is just to test the legitimacy of the proposal. There is to be no tactical or strategic reason for making or rejecting a proposal, but that appears to be what some players are using it for. I would expect a person to give some explanation for which capullis are still foundable if a disagreement is made. • Welchen Browser benutzt du?
Google Chrome v132
-
• Welcher Teil der Spielregel wurde durch die BGA-Adaption nicht beachtet?
We have a situation in which none of the remaining capullis can be played with 1 double canal left. But since players have to agree on the proposed removal, any one of them can disagree to deliberately prolonging the game even though its obvious no move makes the remaining capulli playable. This forces one of the remaining players to cede an action points to play a canal to forcibly correct the issue and remove the capullis.
The reason for the proposal and agreement is just to test the legitimacy of the proposal. There is to be no tactical or strategic reason for making or rejecting a proposal, but that appears to be what some players are using it for. I would expect a person to give some explanation for which capullis are still foundable if a disagreement is made. -
• Ist der Regelverstoß in der Spielwiederholung zu sehen? Falls ja, bei welcher Zugnummer?
I proposed the move at 234 and again at 314.
• Welchen Browser benutzt du?
Google Chrome v132
-
• Welche Spielaktion wolltest du durchführen?
We have a situation in which none of the remaining capullis can be played with 1 double canal left. But since players have to agree on the proposed removal, any one of them can disagree to deliberately prolonging the game even though its obvious no move makes the remaining capulli playable. This forces one of the remaining players to cede an action points to play a canal to forcibly correct the issue and remove the capullis.
The reason for the proposal and agreement is just to test the legitimacy of the proposal. There is to be no tactical or strategic reason for making or rejecting a proposal, but that appears to be what some players are using it for. I would expect a person to give some explanation for which capullis are still foundable if a disagreement is made. -
• Was versuchst du, um diese Spielaktion auszulösen?
I proposed the move at 234 and again at 314.
-
• Was passiert, wenn du dies versuchst (Fehlermeldung, Statusmeldung des Spiels, ...)?
• Welchen Browser benutzt du?
Google Chrome v132
-
• An welcher Stelle im Spiel ist das Problem aufgetreten? Was war die aktuelle Spielanweisung?
We have a situation in which none of the remaining capullis can be played with 1 double canal left. But since players have to agree on the proposed removal, any one of them can disagree to deliberately prolonging the game even though its obvious no move makes the remaining capulli playable. This forces one of the remaining players to cede an action points to play a canal to forcibly correct the issue and remove the capullis.
The reason for the proposal and agreement is just to test the legitimacy of the proposal. There is to be no tactical or strategic reason for making or rejecting a proposal, but that appears to be what some players are using it for. I would expect a person to give some explanation for which capullis are still foundable if a disagreement is made. -
• Was passiert, wenn du die Spielaktion ausführen möchtest (Fehlermeldung, Statusmeldung des Spiels, ...)?
I proposed the move at 234 and again at 314.
• Welchen Browser benutzt du?
Google Chrome v132
-
• Bitte beschreibe die Anzeigeschwierigkeiten. Wenn du einen Screenshot dieses Fehlers hast (empfohlene Vorgehensweise), kannst du einen Bild‑Hosting‑Dienst deiner Wahl verwenden (snipboard.io zum Beispiel), um ihn hochzuladen und den Link hier einzufügen.
We have a situation in which none of the remaining capullis can be played with 1 double canal left. But since players have to agree on the proposed removal, any one of them can disagree to deliberately prolonging the game even though its obvious no move makes the remaining capulli playable. This forces one of the remaining players to cede an action points to play a canal to forcibly correct the issue and remove the capullis.
The reason for the proposal and agreement is just to test the legitimacy of the proposal. There is to be no tactical or strategic reason for making or rejecting a proposal, but that appears to be what some players are using it for. I would expect a person to give some explanation for which capullis are still foundable if a disagreement is made. • Welchen Browser benutzt du?
Google Chrome v132
-
• Bitte kopiere den Text, der in Englisch anstatt in deiner Sprache angezeigt wird, und füge ihn hier ein. Wenn du einen Screenshot dieses Fehlers hast (empfohlene Vorgehensweise), kannst du einen Bild‑Hosting‑Dienst deiner Wahl verwenden (snipboard.io zum Beispiel), um ihn hochzuladen und den Link hier einzufügen. Ist dieser Text auf der Übersetzungsseite verfügbar? Wenn ja, wurde dieser vor mehr als 24 Stunden übersetzt?
We have a situation in which none of the remaining capullis can be played with 1 double canal left. But since players have to agree on the proposed removal, any one of them can disagree to deliberately prolonging the game even though its obvious no move makes the remaining capulli playable. This forces one of the remaining players to cede an action points to play a canal to forcibly correct the issue and remove the capullis.
The reason for the proposal and agreement is just to test the legitimacy of the proposal. There is to be no tactical or strategic reason for making or rejecting a proposal, but that appears to be what some players are using it for. I would expect a person to give some explanation for which capullis are still foundable if a disagreement is made. • Welchen Browser benutzt du?
Google Chrome v132
-
• Bitte erkläre deinen Vorschlag so präzise und genau wie möglich, damit er leicht zu verstehen ist.
We have a situation in which none of the remaining capullis can be played with 1 double canal left. But since players have to agree on the proposed removal, any one of them can disagree to deliberately prolonging the game even though its obvious no move makes the remaining capulli playable. This forces one of the remaining players to cede an action points to play a canal to forcibly correct the issue and remove the capullis.
The reason for the proposal and agreement is just to test the legitimacy of the proposal. There is to be no tactical or strategic reason for making or rejecting a proposal, but that appears to be what some players are using it for. I would expect a person to give some explanation for which capullis are still foundable if a disagreement is made. • Welchen Browser benutzt du?
Google Chrome v132
Meldungshistorie
The easiest way I can think of is in order to reject any one capulli from the proposal, the player has to show how the remaining capulli could be placed.
Having implemented the game Mexica myself (on my own site) and not addressed this problem, it is something I hadn't anticipated either. I addressed it initially by forcing all canals to be played, but in playing here I realized this was not the right call. Clearly the designers did not mean to force the canals to be played if no further districts could be founded.
I'll think about your proposal. Thanks for playing Mexica!
Ergänze diese Meldung
- Eine weitere Tisch-ID/Zug-ID
- Konnte F5 das Problem lösen?
- Trat das Problem öfter auf? Jedes Mal? Zufällig?
- Wenn du einen Screenshot dieses Fehlers hast (empfohlene Vorgehensweise), kannst du einen Bild‑Hosting‑Dienst deiner Wahl verwenden (snipboard.io zum Beispiel), um ihn hochzuladen und den Link hier einzufügen.
