Quote from: Meepledrone on April 29, 2020, 04:47:21 PMQuote from: Vital Pluymers on April 29, 2020, 10:20:04 AM3) Watchtowers with meeple symbol vs Big Top. Both mechanics give points for the number of meeples on the tile itself and the eight spaces around. What is the logic of including meeples on castles for the scoring of the Big Top, but excluding them for the scoring of the Watchtower? I think for the sake of consistency, it should be scored the same.Ha ha ha! You finally noticed. When updating some weeks ago the rules about the interaction of castles and the big top, I realized this would be the same case for watchtowers. But of course, the Watchtowers rules do not cover anything but the base game. A shame!I agree with you, but was keeping that debate for a little later. Now it is on the table.I sent some question to Cundco about Exp. 10 on December 11th, before I realized about this, and I'm still waiting for an answer. I have prepared a longer list since and even I was thinking of opening a thread with open question so HiG ends up hating us deeply. We can start just collecting all the footnotes in WICA with padlock icons to start with. That seems like a great idea :-)But it will be useless, I'm afraid. I am sure that HiG hates us already for years...
Quote from: Vital Pluymers on April 29, 2020, 10:20:04 AM3) Watchtowers with meeple symbol vs Big Top. Both mechanics give points for the number of meeples on the tile itself and the eight spaces around. What is the logic of including meeples on castles for the scoring of the Big Top, but excluding them for the scoring of the Watchtower? I think for the sake of consistency, it should be scored the same.Ha ha ha! You finally noticed. When updating some weeks ago the rules about the interaction of castles and the big top, I realized this would be the same case for watchtowers. But of course, the Watchtowers rules do not cover anything but the base game. A shame!I agree with you, but was keeping that debate for a little later. Now it is on the table.I sent some question to Cundco about Exp. 10 on December 11th, before I realized about this, and I'm still waiting for an answer. I have prepared a longer list since and even I was thinking of opening a thread with open question so HiG ends up hating us deeply. We can start just collecting all the footnotes in WICA with padlock icons to start with.
3) Watchtowers with meeple symbol vs Big Top. Both mechanics give points for the number of meeples on the tile itself and the eight spaces around. What is the logic of including meeples on castles for the scoring of the Big Top, but excluding them for the scoring of the Watchtower? I think for the sake of consistency, it should be scored the same.
Quote from: Meepledrone on April 29, 2020, 04:47:21 PMQuote from: Vital Pluymers on April 29, 2020, 10:20:04 AM4) The last step of the feature scoring for roads is: Markets of Leipzig: Player sending their only meeple on the road to Leipzig -> (x0) pointsIf the multiplication times 0 is part of the feature scoring, it would imply that robbers, the teacher or the neighbouring castle(s) would also receive 0 points in case the player having the majority would decide to send his only meeple to Leipzig. I don't think this would be correct.I agree that we have a problem with castles.Let's see each case separately when you complete a road and decide to send your only meeple on it to Leipzig:* Robbers: Since you score 0 points, a robber next to any of your scoring figures would steal nothing and would stay where it is.* Teacher: Since you score 0 points, the teacher won't get any points either. As per the rules: "When the next feature is scored, the player with the teacher scores the same number of points."* Castles: You score 0 points but a castle nearby could score the full points for this road, since castles score the points the feature is worth, not the points scored by the players with the majority, if any (the feature could be unoccupied and even so the castle would score for it).I assume, I will have to figure out how to express this in a simple way since we have to dissociate:* The points tallied by the feature, that is, the points the feature is worth* The points scored by the player(s) with the majority (if any), that is, the points scored on the scoreboardA mayor in a city with no coats of arms or in a castle shows this. The mayor gets 0 points but a nearby castle could score the full points for the feature.So this means that on the table we will have to indicate:* Points tallied for the feature --> These would go to a castle nearby too* Points scored for the feature (if there are any special cases: mayors, meeple sent to Leipzig) --> These would go to the scoreboard, a robber, the teacher Any comments?I agree with everything you wrote above. There is no issue with the Robbers and the Teacher.But for Castles, we need that split-up you proposed.
Quote from: Vital Pluymers on April 29, 2020, 10:20:04 AM4) The last step of the feature scoring for roads is: Markets of Leipzig: Player sending their only meeple on the road to Leipzig -> (x0) pointsIf the multiplication times 0 is part of the feature scoring, it would imply that robbers, the teacher or the neighbouring castle(s) would also receive 0 points in case the player having the majority would decide to send his only meeple to Leipzig. I don't think this would be correct.I agree that we have a problem with castles.Let's see each case separately when you complete a road and decide to send your only meeple on it to Leipzig:* Robbers: Since you score 0 points, a robber next to any of your scoring figures would steal nothing and would stay where it is.* Teacher: Since you score 0 points, the teacher won't get any points either. As per the rules: "When the next feature is scored, the player with the teacher scores the same number of points."* Castles: You score 0 points but a castle nearby could score the full points for this road, since castles score the points the feature is worth, not the points scored by the players with the majority, if any (the feature could be unoccupied and even so the castle would score for it).I assume, I will have to figure out how to express this in a simple way since we have to dissociate:* The points tallied by the feature, that is, the points the feature is worth* The points scored by the player(s) with the majority (if any), that is, the points scored on the scoreboardA mayor in a city with no coats of arms or in a castle shows this. The mayor gets 0 points but a nearby castle could score the full points for the feature.So this means that on the table we will have to indicate:* Points tallied for the feature --> These would go to a castle nearby too* Points scored for the feature (if there are any special cases: mayors, meeple sent to Leipzig) --> These would go to the scoreboard, a robber, the teacher Any comments?
4) The last step of the feature scoring for roads is: Markets of Leipzig: Player sending their only meeple on the road to Leipzig -> (x0) pointsIf the multiplication times 0 is part of the feature scoring, it would imply that robbers, the teacher or the neighbouring castle(s) would also receive 0 points in case the player having the majority would decide to send his only meeple to Leipzig. I don't think this would be correct.
Quote from: Meepledrone on April 29, 2020, 04:47:21 PMQuote from: Vital Pluymers on April 29, 2020, 10:20:04 AM5) In the C2 rules for Robbers is written: If playing with other expansions, please take the following notes into consideration: The Messengers: If either your messenger or your scoring meeple lands on a dark space as a result of your robber stealing points from another player, draw a message tile. i) Is this a seperate scoring event? In that case, the Messengers should be added after the Robber scoring topic.ii) Or is it just part of the scoring round in which the robber is stealing the points? Then nothing should be changed in the scoring file as Messengers are added after every scoring round.I think whatever is the outcome, this remark with regards to Robbers should be added to the playing rules of the Messenger expansion.The points stolen by a robber are circumscribed to the round of scoring the scoring is happening. So we are talking about option ii). That's why the message is the last action every round of scoring. You check the final location of your scoring figures if any of them moved during that round of scoring. However, a message can generate new points and a robber can steal points from the outcome and a new message can be triggered as well, so you may enter an loop here where new rounds of scoring are generated on the fly.Regarding additional clarifications to WICA, you have this separation of concerns:* Mini #2 - Messages describes rounds of scoring and actions not triggering one. - Section on rounds of scoring: http://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/The_Messages#Rounds_of_Scoring* Mini #6 - Robbers indicate that styling points may trigger a message if combined with Mini #2 - Messages - Clarification after the red box: http://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/The_Robbers#Final_scoringWhat would you like to add? Add to the section on rounds of scoring that any scoring moving forward on the scoreboard (including stolen points or payments received) may trigger a message?Indeed, I would add this to the section on rounds of scoring in the rules for the Messages and in the WICA.Anyhow, if the Robbers are always "awarded" for their work taking into account all the scoring activities in one scoring round, ánd messages are delivered just after the end of a scoring round, then what is the added value of the sentence "[/b]: If either your messenger or your scoring meeple lands on a dark space as a result of your robber stealing points from another player, draw a message tile.[/b] ?
Quote from: Vital Pluymers on April 29, 2020, 10:20:04 AM5) In the C2 rules for Robbers is written: If playing with other expansions, please take the following notes into consideration: The Messengers: If either your messenger or your scoring meeple lands on a dark space as a result of your robber stealing points from another player, draw a message tile. i) Is this a seperate scoring event? In that case, the Messengers should be added after the Robber scoring topic.ii) Or is it just part of the scoring round in which the robber is stealing the points? Then nothing should be changed in the scoring file as Messengers are added after every scoring round.I think whatever is the outcome, this remark with regards to Robbers should be added to the playing rules of the Messenger expansion.The points stolen by a robber are circumscribed to the round of scoring the scoring is happening. So we are talking about option ii). That's why the message is the last action every round of scoring. You check the final location of your scoring figures if any of them moved during that round of scoring. However, a message can generate new points and a robber can steal points from the outcome and a new message can be triggered as well, so you may enter an loop here where new rounds of scoring are generated on the fly.Regarding additional clarifications to WICA, you have this separation of concerns:* Mini #2 - Messages describes rounds of scoring and actions not triggering one. - Section on rounds of scoring: http://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/The_Messages#Rounds_of_Scoring* Mini #6 - Robbers indicate that styling points may trigger a message if combined with Mini #2 - Messages - Clarification after the red box: http://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/The_Robbers#Final_scoringWhat would you like to add? Add to the section on rounds of scoring that any scoring moving forward on the scoreboard (including stolen points or payments received) may trigger a message?
5) In the C2 rules for Robbers is written: If playing with other expansions, please take the following notes into consideration: The Messengers: If either your messenger or your scoring meeple lands on a dark space as a result of your robber stealing points from another player, draw a message tile. i) Is this a seperate scoring event? In that case, the Messengers should be added after the Robber scoring topic.ii) Or is it just part of the scoring round in which the robber is stealing the points? Then nothing should be changed in the scoring file as Messengers are added after every scoring round.I think whatever is the outcome, this remark with regards to Robbers should be added to the playing rules of the Messenger expansion.
Added some slight updates to the Scoring During the Game Test:http://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/Scoring_per_Feature_-_TestStep 2B-1:* Abbots: - Added abbot scoring when removing an abbot placed as an abbot on a special monastery
This is the result of a number of circumstances not covered in the rules (of course) but that may happen:* You can place any meeple as an abbot on a special monastery* An abbot meeple is a meeple * An abbot meeple can be removed and scoredErgo, you should be able to remove an abbot meeple placed as an abbot on a special monastery.Lovely, isn't it?
I wish we could have only one section like for Monasteries, but some scoring tiles apply to individual tiles and some other to the feature as a whole. So you need to split them into groups depending on the moment they should be applied when combined with other expansions.
http://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/The_Farmers(typo) existing text - "The yellow farmer has not impact since he occupies another field."suggested edit - change "not" to "no"
Started by NGC 54
Started by JoeSesquipedalian
Started by mike_bike_kite
Started by forumisto
Started by Bixby