Carcassonne Central
Carc Central Community => Official Rules => Topic started by: NGC 54 on May 31, 2021, 02:25:53 AM
-
Carcassonne93 - This isn't the place to make your entitled claims for clarifications. No wonder HiG are in no rush to answer questions posed by 'fans' in this manner. I know I wouldn't if I was working for them. But I'm not. Regardless, it's also the 2nd time on this thread, that I've said this to you. This time I've deleted your post.
To be clear you're welcome to post your concerns elsewhere on the forum, where it can be ignored. This thread is currently being seen by a large number of members here and not for this purpose.
This is the perfect place to talk about this. 20+ years of unstable rules. Even the rules for The Abbot are unstable, that is considered part of Base Game by HiG. A tribute for 1–3 expansions... but how to play the 20 miniexpansion with Exp. 2? I still wait clarifications for River and the 20 miniexpansion with builder etc. Too much words for an unstable semi-nothing that cannot be truly played. But of course, HiG will still receive moneys...
-
I have split this off from the announcement thread because, despite what you have said, this discussion definitely does not belong on an announcement/news thread and any subsequent posts of a similar nature from you or any other member on that thread will be deleted without further explanation or apology.
That being said, your actual complain is fair and justified as far as I see it. Ever since the 2nd edition art came out in 2014, Hans im Glück has indeed given up on even attempting to make their mini expansions compatible with the expansions and in the rare times when they do note rules conflicts, they seem half-hearted. While I don't expect every single conflict between Carcassonne II large and small expansions to be addressed, I feel that the major issues between them should either be FAQ'd or players should be able to message HiG and expect a response. If Hans im Glück doesn't like fans having issues with rules conflicts, perhaps they need to think through their expansions better. So on that point, I wholeheartedly agree with Carcassonne93.
I am a little curious what unstable nature of The Abbot you are speaking of. I don't disbelieve you, but I just haven't noticed any major issue. But I admit I only play Carcassonne II at work with mostly the base game and maybe expansion 1, so perhaps the conflict has just not arisen yet.
And yes, HiG will receive my monies regardless, as they always do, which is perhaps the problem...?
-
I agree it can be very annoying in case you want to play a MEGA carcassonne game.
It has come to the point where we prefer short games with a few expansions over long games.
And in case we play MEGA carcassonne, we leave out some of the elements which can cause problems, such as The Plague, The Bazaars or The Builder (anything which can trigger multiple tiles to be drawn during one turn actually), etc.
But I must add it does not bother me anymore. There are so many expansions that playing them all together will take way too long anyway. But maybe its because over the years I have grown used to the rule discrepancies. This could be part of the problem :P
-
Carcassonne93 I've banned you from posting for 2 days.
This was the third time you've disrupted the announcement thread.
Whaleyland was kind enough to move your post. I gave you the opportunity to post your thoughts on this matter else where, but you refused to take me up on the offer.
Good luck on your hunt for clarifications.
-
What is the problem with the Abbot?
By the way Plague really isn't as problematic as its reputation would lead you to believe. It works quite well even in large games (you just have to define under what circumstances can you flee from the plague and when).
-
Regarding The Abbot, we have an open question with HiG since January about then the abbot is scored when removed...
Back in 2015, Georg Wild indicated that the abbot is scored during 2. Placing a meeple:
This scoring occurs immediately during the 2. Placing a meeple phase when the abbot is removed. This effectively protects the abbot from the dragon and produces a scoring round for Messages. Afterwards, the normal scoring phase occurs. (3/2015)
And this matches the turn sequence in BB6:
(https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/740546221592018986/805856562827624468/Turn_Sequence_BB6_v1.png?width=819&height=595)
However, a discussion back in January led to revisiting this topic and, to our surprise, HiG was presented with this information above but they were commenting that the scoring of the abbot was supposed to happen in 3. Scoring a feature. So we tried to confirm whether you could score your abbot in 3. Scoring a feature even if the dragon has just eaten it... At this point, no answer was obtained.
So we have an Schöndinger abbot situation here: The written rules do not clearly specify the moment the abbot is actually scored when removed, andafter sharing with HiG the BB6 turn sequence and clarifications we have, they haven't been able to clarify this point for several months....
Given this issue, the discussion was also extended to other scoring actions allegedly happening in 2. Placing a meeple: shepherds and their flocks, acrobat pyramids and fruit actions... No answer about the dragon interactions either for the time being...
The available turn sequences in Big Boxes were also presented...
Shephered scoring in BB5 happens in 2. Placing a meeple:
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/740546221592018986/805832409525649408/Turn_Sequence_BB5.png)
Dragon movement in BB3 happening between 2. Placing a meeple and 3. Scoring a feature:
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/740546221592018986/805832686333591572/Turn_Sequence_BB3.png)
All this gets intertwined with messages and robbers... but this is another story to be clarified...
So this interelated mess has led to several open issues, since HiG can see that some actions triggered in the phase where they are explained do not match the moment they should be performed:
- The shepherd scoring is explained in 1. Placing a tile, since it is triggered by extending a field with the tile just placed, but the shepherd action takes place in 2. Placing a meeple.
- The abbot removal is explained in 3. Scoring a feature, but as per the other information we have, it should haapen in 2. Placing a meeple.
- The scoring of an acrobat pyramid is explained in 3. Scoring a feature, but it should happen in 2. Placing a meeple as an alternative to placing a figure.
- The fruit actions are explained in 2. Placing a meeple, where it is assumed to happen (the only correct case).
So far the open discussion served for HiG to realize the dragon movement as explained in Exp. 3 was mistaken... Step 1b in the rules should be Step 2b...
Another open issue: the ringmaster bonus... Nobody understood correctly the written rules about the interactions with other expansions...
HiG commented they will have to update the rules in some expansions, but they didn't confirm what they have in mind. We also offered our help in the process but no answer yet either.
All in all, it seems that the guys at HiG are not on the same page with the rules they publish, and they also have little knowledge about the clarifications they shared a few years ago... A real pity!
-
The best (and probably the easiest) thing HiG could do is going through WICA's order of play, scoring during the game and scoring after the game, select every expansions, and correct and clarify everything. :yellow-meeple:
WICA'd become the reference and could be used to answer player's questions, and HiG wouldn't have to answer the same question multiple times...
-
There are some background concpts to be discussed before that point specially regarding scoring: order or evaluation, sequence of expansions to be considered and tile count to be considered depending on the expansion....
I mean that, in order to maintained expansions independent, the whole scoring sequence for roads and cities got very complicated. Considering two tile counts (one to be considered for the points per tile and another for bonuses depending on tile count) due to the Prime Directive turns the scoring sequence into an Eleusinian Mystery.
So a common ground has to be defined first... And this requires a lot of insight on their part to go down the path we already did in order to make the right decisions...
-
Sure, but those sequence and background concepts have a direct impact (and are clearly visible) on WICA's order of play, scoring during the game and scoring after the game pages. So if HiG corrects those pages with attention, most background concepts will be clarified by how the "new" order of play, scoring during the game and scoring after the game structures :yellow-meeple:
-
As a lawyer particularly in the American system that derives from the English system of case law rather than the more common civil code system, unstable rules are the juice of life. Having inconsistencies and unclear areas and nuances to argue are the juice of life!
-
The issue here is that everything was okay until January when the discussions with HiG opened a Pandora's box of changes and misinterpretations. This process showed the people left managing Carcassonne these days (some people left HiG) don't have a deep knowldge of the game or historical perspective of the clarificacions HiG have been providing until the end of 2015...
These means that we are not on the same page and they need to do some catching up to be able to discuss open issues properly. The question is whether HiG will be willing to make that effort.
-
A few comments:
- Thanks @Meepledrone, @Decar, @Whaleyland, and everyone else who invests so much in making Carcassonnecentral & Wikicarpedia such thoughtful and useful resources for all of us. Very grateful. I consider these sites as the "official" source for rules--I never look at the HiG website.
- Schöndinger's abbot! Haha +1 merit! I hope someone runs with that as a variant...
- As a corollary, perhaps "These Carcassonne rules are complete and consistent" is a Gödel sentence? ::)
-
Ha ha ha! Thanks!
I will check if the answers can be found in "GÖDEL, ESCHER, CARCASSONNE, BACH: An Eternal Golden Princess Braid"
-
There's always a set of axoims.
-
A meeple is a meeple is a meeple...
-
I agree with Allograft's view on the incosistencies. It would be too boring if everything was served to us on a silver plater!
But yeah, some things can be annoying to deal with.
-
HiG and the rules…. Rules and HiG…. My advice is to play only with few expansions at the same time not a mega carcassonne…
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
A meeple is a meeple is a meeple...
Which we called a horige.
-
A meeple is a meeple is a meeple...
Which we called a horige.
But that's just the dutch translation ;D
-
I agree with Allograft's view on the incosistencies. It would be too boring if everything was served to us on a silver plater!
But yeah, some things can be annoying to deal with.
This is not about serving on silver plate. I have to tell that Meepledrone made great and huge work on discovering rules. Compare multiple editions, word by word, German - English and so on.
WiCa stands on CAR and on years of discovering rules and long discussions here.
Problem is way how looks HiG to our rules questions.
It is not about simple tasks. It is about really unsolved cases and/or about cases where rules on different editions says something else.
I'm very happy for WiCa existing. Those Carcassonne universe is much simpler whit it.
Odoslané z SM-A202F pomocou Tapatalku
-
It's almost like Carcassonne93 doesn't want to discuss potential solutions with other like-minded fans who have been similarly affected and is only interested in complaining about the situation...
-
Umhhh...
I forgot to mention that the indefinition I described in an earlier post (see http://www.carcassonnecentral.com/community/index.php?topic=5344.msg78202#msg78202 (http://www.carcassonnecentral.com/community/index.php?topic=5344.msg78202#msg78202)) also has ripples in what scorings should be taken into consideration when sending a meeple to Carcassonne... As per the rules, you may not get any points in 3. Scoring a feature but now they are assuming all scorings after placing a tile including the abbots, fruit actions, acrobat pyramids and shepherds' flock happen in that phase too instead of in 2. Placing a meeple. In this case, abbots and acrobat pyramids may be actions strictly unrelated to the tile just placed, that is, the tile that should be triggering the scorings in 3. Scoring a feature... :o
So any scoring happening in 1. Placing a tile such as fairy points, WoF actions, peasant revolts are performed right away, but anything happening in 2. Placing a meeple has to be delayed despite the turn summaries telling otherwise? ???
So these contradictions should also be clarified.
-
If you play on asmodee digital with P&D and abbot you can see the order of play. I have all stuff of carcassonne on asmodee digital. If someone has an account I can create a game and invite him to play P&D with abbot. Someone interested can send me a PM and after we can share here the order of play etc…
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk