#118325: "Movement: if expedition member moves back to tile from which it came, treat as undo not as new move"
ما هو هذا التقرير؟
ماذا حدث؟ يرجى اختيار من أدناه
ماذا حدث؟ يرجى اختيار من أدناه
يرجى التحقق مما إذا كان هناك بالفعل تقرير عن نفس الموضوع
إذا كانت الإجابة بنعم ، يرجى التصويت لهذا التقرير. يتم إعطاء التقارير ذات أكبر عدد من الأصوات الأولوية!
| # | Status | Votes | Game | Type | Title | Last update |
|---|
وصف مفصل
-
• يرجى نسخ / لصق رسالة الخطأ التي تراها على الشاشة ، إن وجدت.
So the subject above is a bit awkwardly phrased due to BGA's character limitations, but here's the idea in full:
When moving an expedition member, I can move it multiple tiles before confirming the entire move—great!
But I notice that if I move it to a tile that I'd previously come from, the interface treats it like a new move... hmm. This is technically legal, but I suggest that a more practical usage would be to have the move treated as /undoing/ the movement to the current tile.
Here's an example: if my member starts on tile A, and I click B > C > D > C, instead of spending all the points to move from A > B > C > D > C as currently happens, the player would be better served by having the interface just spend the points for A > B > C.
I posit that players it would be /exceedingly/ rare for any player to overspend points, but allowing this "contained" undo would be a much more likely, and therefore helpful, case. And in the rare case that a player wants to do A > B > C > D > C, that player could do that in two separate moves: A > B > C > D, then D > C, confirming after both (and the double confirmation will act as a guard against unintentionally overspending on inefficient moves).
Again, any "undoing" is to happen before the move is confirmed, so hopefully this "localized" undo functionality won't have the major cost that you mentioned in boardgamearena.com/bug?id=117454 -
• يرجى توضيح ما تريد القيام به ، ماذا فعلت وما حدث
• ما هو متصفحك؟
Google Chrome v96
-
• يرجى نسخ / لصق النص المعروض باللغة الإنجليزية بدلاً من لغتك. If you have a screenshot of this bug (good practice), you can use a picture hosting service of your choice (snipboard.io for example) to upload it and copy/paste the link here. هل هذا النص متاح في translation system ؟ إذا كانت الإجابة بنعم ، فهل تمت ترجمتها لأكثر من 24 ساعة؟
So the subject above is a bit awkwardly phrased due to BGA's character limitations, but here's the idea in full:
When moving an expedition member, I can move it multiple tiles before confirming the entire move—great!
But I notice that if I move it to a tile that I'd previously come from, the interface treats it like a new move... hmm. This is technically legal, but I suggest that a more practical usage would be to have the move treated as /undoing/ the movement to the current tile.
Here's an example: if my member starts on tile A, and I click B > C > D > C, instead of spending all the points to move from A > B > C > D > C as currently happens, the player would be better served by having the interface just spend the points for A > B > C.
I posit that players it would be /exceedingly/ rare for any player to overspend points, but allowing this "contained" undo would be a much more likely, and therefore helpful, case. And in the rare case that a player wants to do A > B > C > D > C, that player could do that in two separate moves: A > B > C > D, then D > C, confirming after both (and the double confirmation will act as a guard against unintentionally overspending on inefficient moves).
Again, any "undoing" is to happen before the move is confirmed, so hopefully this "localized" undo functionality won't have the major cost that you mentioned in boardgamearena.com/bug?id=117454 • ما هو متصفحك؟
Google Chrome v96
-
• يرجى توضيح اقتراحك بدقة وإيجاز بحيث يكون من السهل قدر الإمكان فهم ما تعنيه.
So the subject above is a bit awkwardly phrased due to BGA's character limitations, but here's the idea in full:
When moving an expedition member, I can move it multiple tiles before confirming the entire move—great!
But I notice that if I move it to a tile that I'd previously come from, the interface treats it like a new move... hmm. This is technically legal, but I suggest that a more practical usage would be to have the move treated as /undoing/ the movement to the current tile.
Here's an example: if my member starts on tile A, and I click B > C > D > C, instead of spending all the points to move from A > B > C > D > C as currently happens, the player would be better served by having the interface just spend the points for A > B > C.
I posit that players it would be /exceedingly/ rare for any player to overspend points, but allowing this "contained" undo would be a much more likely, and therefore helpful, case. And in the rare case that a player wants to do A > B > C > D > C, that player could do that in two separate moves: A > B > C > D, then D > C, confirming after both (and the double confirmation will act as a guard against unintentionally overspending on inefficient moves).
Again, any "undoing" is to happen before the move is confirmed, so hopefully this "localized" undo functionality won't have the major cost that you mentioned in boardgamearena.com/bug?id=117454 • ما هو متصفحك؟
Google Chrome v96
-
• ما الذي تم عرضه على الشاشة عندما تم حظرك (شاشة فارغة؟ جزء من واجهة اللعبة؟ رسالة خطأ؟)
So the subject above is a bit awkwardly phrased due to BGA's character limitations, but here's the idea in full:
When moving an expedition member, I can move it multiple tiles before confirming the entire move—great!
But I notice that if I move it to a tile that I'd previously come from, the interface treats it like a new move... hmm. This is technically legal, but I suggest that a more practical usage would be to have the move treated as /undoing/ the movement to the current tile.
Here's an example: if my member starts on tile A, and I click B > C > D > C, instead of spending all the points to move from A > B > C > D > C as currently happens, the player would be better served by having the interface just spend the points for A > B > C.
I posit that players it would be /exceedingly/ rare for any player to overspend points, but allowing this "contained" undo would be a much more likely, and therefore helpful, case. And in the rare case that a player wants to do A > B > C > D > C, that player could do that in two separate moves: A > B > C > D, then D > C, confirming after both (and the double confirmation will act as a guard against unintentionally overspending on inefficient moves).
Again, any "undoing" is to happen before the move is confirmed, so hopefully this "localized" undo functionality won't have the major cost that you mentioned in boardgamearena.com/bug?id=117454 • ما هو متصفحك؟
Google Chrome v96
-
• أي جزء من القواعد تم مخالفته في تصميم التبني لدى BGA
So the subject above is a bit awkwardly phrased due to BGA's character limitations, but here's the idea in full:
When moving an expedition member, I can move it multiple tiles before confirming the entire move—great!
But I notice that if I move it to a tile that I'd previously come from, the interface treats it like a new move... hmm. This is technically legal, but I suggest that a more practical usage would be to have the move treated as /undoing/ the movement to the current tile.
Here's an example: if my member starts on tile A, and I click B > C > D > C, instead of spending all the points to move from A > B > C > D > C as currently happens, the player would be better served by having the interface just spend the points for A > B > C.
I posit that players it would be /exceedingly/ rare for any player to overspend points, but allowing this "contained" undo would be a much more likely, and therefore helpful, case. And in the rare case that a player wants to do A > B > C > D > C, that player could do that in two separate moves: A > B > C > D, then D > C, confirming after both (and the double confirmation will act as a guard against unintentionally overspending on inefficient moves).
Again, any "undoing" is to happen before the move is confirmed, so hopefully this "localized" undo functionality won't have the major cost that you mentioned in boardgamearena.com/bug?id=117454 -
• هل انتهاك القواعد مرئي عند إعادة اللعب؟ إذا كانت الإجابة بنعم ، فبأي رقم؟
• ما هو متصفحك؟
Google Chrome v96
-
• ما هو نشاط اللعبة الذي أردت القيام به؟
So the subject above is a bit awkwardly phrased due to BGA's character limitations, but here's the idea in full:
When moving an expedition member, I can move it multiple tiles before confirming the entire move—great!
But I notice that if I move it to a tile that I'd previously come from, the interface treats it like a new move... hmm. This is technically legal, but I suggest that a more practical usage would be to have the move treated as /undoing/ the movement to the current tile.
Here's an example: if my member starts on tile A, and I click B > C > D > C, instead of spending all the points to move from A > B > C > D > C as currently happens, the player would be better served by having the interface just spend the points for A > B > C.
I posit that players it would be /exceedingly/ rare for any player to overspend points, but allowing this "contained" undo would be a much more likely, and therefore helpful, case. And in the rare case that a player wants to do A > B > C > D > C, that player could do that in two separate moves: A > B > C > D, then D > C, confirming after both (and the double confirmation will act as a guard against unintentionally overspending on inefficient moves).
Again, any "undoing" is to happen before the move is confirmed, so hopefully this "localized" undo functionality won't have the major cost that you mentioned in boardgamearena.com/bug?id=117454 -
• ماذا تحاول أن تفعل لتحريك هذا العمل اللعبة؟
-
• ماذا حدث عند محاولة القيام بهذا (رسالة خطأ ، رسالة شريط حالة اللعبة ، ...)؟
• ما هو متصفحك؟
Google Chrome v96
-
• في أي خطوة من اللعبة حدثت المشكلة (ما هو تعليمة اللعبة الحالية)؟
So the subject above is a bit awkwardly phrased due to BGA's character limitations, but here's the idea in full:
When moving an expedition member, I can move it multiple tiles before confirming the entire move—great!
But I notice that if I move it to a tile that I'd previously come from, the interface treats it like a new move... hmm. This is technically legal, but I suggest that a more practical usage would be to have the move treated as /undoing/ the movement to the current tile.
Here's an example: if my member starts on tile A, and I click B > C > D > C, instead of spending all the points to move from A > B > C > D > C as currently happens, the player would be better served by having the interface just spend the points for A > B > C.
I posit that players it would be /exceedingly/ rare for any player to overspend points, but allowing this "contained" undo would be a much more likely, and therefore helpful, case. And in the rare case that a player wants to do A > B > C > D > C, that player could do that in two separate moves: A > B > C > D, then D > C, confirming after both (and the double confirmation will act as a guard against unintentionally overspending on inefficient moves).
Again, any "undoing" is to happen before the move is confirmed, so hopefully this "localized" undo functionality won't have the major cost that you mentioned in boardgamearena.com/bug?id=117454 -
• ماذا حدث عند محاولة إجراء هذه الحركة داخل اللعبة (رسالة خطأ ، رسالة شريط حالة اللعبة ، ...)؟
• ما هو متصفحك؟
Google Chrome v96
-
• يرجى وصف مشكلة العرض. If you have a screenshot of this bug (good practice), you can use a picture hosting service of your choice (snipboard.io for example) to upload it and copy/paste the link here.
So the subject above is a bit awkwardly phrased due to BGA's character limitations, but here's the idea in full:
When moving an expedition member, I can move it multiple tiles before confirming the entire move—great!
But I notice that if I move it to a tile that I'd previously come from, the interface treats it like a new move... hmm. This is technically legal, but I suggest that a more practical usage would be to have the move treated as /undoing/ the movement to the current tile.
Here's an example: if my member starts on tile A, and I click B > C > D > C, instead of spending all the points to move from A > B > C > D > C as currently happens, the player would be better served by having the interface just spend the points for A > B > C.
I posit that players it would be /exceedingly/ rare for any player to overspend points, but allowing this "contained" undo would be a much more likely, and therefore helpful, case. And in the rare case that a player wants to do A > B > C > D > C, that player could do that in two separate moves: A > B > C > D, then D > C, confirming after both (and the double confirmation will act as a guard against unintentionally overspending on inefficient moves).
Again, any "undoing" is to happen before the move is confirmed, so hopefully this "localized" undo functionality won't have the major cost that you mentioned in boardgamearena.com/bug?id=117454 • ما هو متصفحك؟
Google Chrome v96
-
• يرجى نسخ / لصق النص المعروض باللغة الإنجليزية بدلاً من لغتك. If you have a screenshot of this bug (good practice), you can use a picture hosting service of your choice (snipboard.io for example) to upload it and copy/paste the link here. هل هذا النص متاح في translation system ؟ إذا كانت الإجابة بنعم ، فهل تمت ترجمتها لأكثر من 24 ساعة؟
So the subject above is a bit awkwardly phrased due to BGA's character limitations, but here's the idea in full:
When moving an expedition member, I can move it multiple tiles before confirming the entire move—great!
But I notice that if I move it to a tile that I'd previously come from, the interface treats it like a new move... hmm. This is technically legal, but I suggest that a more practical usage would be to have the move treated as /undoing/ the movement to the current tile.
Here's an example: if my member starts on tile A, and I click B > C > D > C, instead of spending all the points to move from A > B > C > D > C as currently happens, the player would be better served by having the interface just spend the points for A > B > C.
I posit that players it would be /exceedingly/ rare for any player to overspend points, but allowing this "contained" undo would be a much more likely, and therefore helpful, case. And in the rare case that a player wants to do A > B > C > D > C, that player could do that in two separate moves: A > B > C > D, then D > C, confirming after both (and the double confirmation will act as a guard against unintentionally overspending on inefficient moves).
Again, any "undoing" is to happen before the move is confirmed, so hopefully this "localized" undo functionality won't have the major cost that you mentioned in boardgamearena.com/bug?id=117454 • ما هو متصفحك؟
Google Chrome v96
-
• يرجى توضيح اقتراحك بدقة وإيجاز بحيث يكون من السهل قدر الإمكان فهم ما تعنيه.
So the subject above is a bit awkwardly phrased due to BGA's character limitations, but here's the idea in full:
When moving an expedition member, I can move it multiple tiles before confirming the entire move—great!
But I notice that if I move it to a tile that I'd previously come from, the interface treats it like a new move... hmm. This is technically legal, but I suggest that a more practical usage would be to have the move treated as /undoing/ the movement to the current tile.
Here's an example: if my member starts on tile A, and I click B > C > D > C, instead of spending all the points to move from A > B > C > D > C as currently happens, the player would be better served by having the interface just spend the points for A > B > C.
I posit that players it would be /exceedingly/ rare for any player to overspend points, but allowing this "contained" undo would be a much more likely, and therefore helpful, case. And in the rare case that a player wants to do A > B > C > D > C, that player could do that in two separate moves: A > B > C > D, then D > C, confirming after both (and the double confirmation will act as a guard against unintentionally overspending on inefficient moves).
Again, any "undoing" is to happen before the move is confirmed, so hopefully this "localized" undo functionality won't have the major cost that you mentioned in boardgamearena.com/bug?id=117454 • ما هو متصفحك؟
Google Chrome v96
سجل التاريخ
اضف لهذا البلاغ
- تعريف طاولة/تعريف حركة
- هل حلَت F5 المشكلة؟
- هل ظهرت المشكلة عدة مرات؟ كل مرة؟ بطريقة عشوائية؟
- If you have a screenshot of this bug (good practice), you can use a picture hosting service of your choice (snipboard.io for example) to upload it and copy/paste the link here.
