#14594: "Allow for one hand victory condition."
О чём этот отчёт?
Что произошло? Пожалуйста, выберите из нижеследующего
Что произошло? Пожалуйста, выберите из нижеследующего
Пожалуйста, проверьте, существует ли уже отчёт на ту же тему
Если это так, ПРОГОЛОСУЙТЕ за этот отчёт. Отчёты с наибольшим количеством голосов будут рассматриваться В ПЕРВУЮ ОЧЕРЕДЬ!
| # | Status | Votes | Game | Type | Title | Last update |
|---|
Подробное описание
-
• Пожалуйста, скопируйте/вставьте текст ошибки, которую вы видите на экране (если она есть).
Currently the available victory conditions are either 2 hands or the points system. I think offering 1 hand as an option would be good because it would make for a MUCH shorter game (and the game length would be lower variance). For example, I just played a 4-player 2-hands game which took 4 hands total, i.e. 2 hours. If we'd been unlucky, it could have been 5 hands (2.5 hours); it also could have been over in 2 hands (1 hour). This is both longer than I wanted to play, and also way higher variance (even if I'm ok with 1-2 hours, the *potential* of a 2.5hr game may prevent me from ever playing again even if it doesn't happen often).
-
• Пожалуйста, объясните, что вы хотели сделать, что вы сделали и что случилось
• Какой браузер вы используете?
Google Chrome v80
-
• Пожалуйста, скопируйте/вставьте текст, который отображается на английском языке, вместо вашего. Если у вас есть снимок экрана с этой ошибкой (хорошая привычка), вы можете воспользоваться Imgur.com, чтобы загрузить его и вставить сюда ссылку.
Currently the available victory conditions are either 2 hands or the points system. I think offering 1 hand as an option would be good because it would make for a MUCH shorter game (and the game length would be lower variance). For example, I just played a 4-player 2-hands game which took 4 hands total, i.e. 2 hours. If we'd been unlucky, it could have been 5 hands (2.5 hours); it also could have been over in 2 hands (1 hour). This is both longer than I wanted to play, and also way higher variance (even if I'm ok with 1-2 hours, the *potential* of a 2.5hr game may prevent me from ever playing again even if it doesn't happen often).
-
• Доступен ли этот текст в системе перевода? Если да, был ли он переведён более 24 часов назад?
• Какой браузер вы используете?
Google Chrome v80
-
• Пожалуйста, точно и кратко опишите своё предложение, чтобы сделать его наиболее доступным для понимания.
Currently the available victory conditions are either 2 hands or the points system. I think offering 1 hand as an option would be good because it would make for a MUCH shorter game (and the game length would be lower variance). For example, I just played a 4-player 2-hands game which took 4 hands total, i.e. 2 hours. If we'd been unlucky, it could have been 5 hands (2.5 hours); it also could have been over in 2 hands (1 hour). This is both longer than I wanted to play, and also way higher variance (even if I'm ok with 1-2 hours, the *potential* of a 2.5hr game may prevent me from ever playing again even if it doesn't happen often).
• Какой браузер вы используете?
Google Chrome v80
-
• Что было изображено на экране, когда вас заблокировало? (Пустой экран? Часть игрового стола? Сообщение об ошибке?)
Currently the available victory conditions are either 2 hands or the points system. I think offering 1 hand as an option would be good because it would make for a MUCH shorter game (and the game length would be lower variance). For example, I just played a 4-player 2-hands game which took 4 hands total, i.e. 2 hours. If we'd been unlucky, it could have been 5 hands (2.5 hours); it also could have been over in 2 hands (1 hour). This is both longer than I wanted to play, and also way higher variance (even if I'm ok with 1-2 hours, the *potential* of a 2.5hr game may prevent me from ever playing again even if it doesn't happen often).
• Какой браузер вы используете?
Google Chrome v80
-
• Какая часть правил не соблюдена в версии БГА
Currently the available victory conditions are either 2 hands or the points system. I think offering 1 hand as an option would be good because it would make for a MUCH shorter game (and the game length would be lower variance). For example, I just played a 4-player 2-hands game which took 4 hands total, i.e. 2 hours. If we'd been unlucky, it could have been 5 hands (2.5 hours); it also could have been over in 2 hands (1 hour). This is both longer than I wanted to play, and also way higher variance (even if I'm ok with 1-2 hours, the *potential* of a 2.5hr game may prevent me from ever playing again even if it doesn't happen often).
-
• Видно ли нарушение правил в повторе игры? Если да, то на каком ходу?
• Какой браузер вы используете?
Google Chrome v80
-
• Какое игровое действие вы хотели совершить?
Currently the available victory conditions are either 2 hands or the points system. I think offering 1 hand as an option would be good because it would make for a MUCH shorter game (and the game length would be lower variance). For example, I just played a 4-player 2-hands game which took 4 hands total, i.e. 2 hours. If we'd been unlucky, it could have been 5 hands (2.5 hours); it also could have been over in 2 hands (1 hour). This is both longer than I wanted to play, and also way higher variance (even if I'm ok with 1-2 hours, the *potential* of a 2.5hr game may prevent me from ever playing again even if it doesn't happen often).
-
• Что вы пытались сделать, чтобы выполнить это игровое действие?
-
• Что произошло, когда вы попробовали сделать это (сообщение об ошибке, сообщение в строке состояния игры...)?
• Какой браузер вы используете?
Google Chrome v80
-
• На каком шаге игры произошла проблема (какой была текущая игровая инструкция)?
Currently the available victory conditions are either 2 hands or the points system. I think offering 1 hand as an option would be good because it would make for a MUCH shorter game (and the game length would be lower variance). For example, I just played a 4-player 2-hands game which took 4 hands total, i.e. 2 hours. If we'd been unlucky, it could have been 5 hands (2.5 hours); it also could have been over in 2 hands (1 hour). This is both longer than I wanted to play, and also way higher variance (even if I'm ok with 1-2 hours, the *potential* of a 2.5hr game may prevent me from ever playing again even if it doesn't happen often).
-
• Что произошло, когда вы попробовали совершить игровое действие (сообщение об ошибке, сообщение в строке состояния игры...)?
• Какой браузер вы используете?
Google Chrome v80
-
• Пожалуйста, опишите ошибку отображения. Если у вас есть снимок экрана с этой ошибкой (хорошая привычка), вы можете воспользоваться Imgur.com, чтобы загрузить его и вставить сюда ссылку.
Currently the available victory conditions are either 2 hands or the points system. I think offering 1 hand as an option would be good because it would make for a MUCH shorter game (and the game length would be lower variance). For example, I just played a 4-player 2-hands game which took 4 hands total, i.e. 2 hours. If we'd been unlucky, it could have been 5 hands (2.5 hours); it also could have been over in 2 hands (1 hour). This is both longer than I wanted to play, and also way higher variance (even if I'm ok with 1-2 hours, the *potential* of a 2.5hr game may prevent me from ever playing again even if it doesn't happen often).
• Какой браузер вы используете?
Google Chrome v80
-
• Пожалуйста, скопируйте/вставьте текст, который отображается на английском языке, вместо вашего. Если у вас есть снимок экрана с этой ошибкой (хорошая привычка), вы можете воспользоваться Imgur.com, чтобы загрузить его и вставить сюда ссылку.
Currently the available victory conditions are either 2 hands or the points system. I think offering 1 hand as an option would be good because it would make for a MUCH shorter game (and the game length would be lower variance). For example, I just played a 4-player 2-hands game which took 4 hands total, i.e. 2 hours. If we'd been unlucky, it could have been 5 hands (2.5 hours); it also could have been over in 2 hands (1 hour). This is both longer than I wanted to play, and also way higher variance (even if I'm ok with 1-2 hours, the *potential* of a 2.5hr game may prevent me from ever playing again even if it doesn't happen often).
-
• Доступен ли этот текст в системе перевода? Если да, был ли он переведён более 24 часов назад?
• Какой браузер вы используете?
Google Chrome v80
-
• Пожалуйста, точно и кратко опишите своё предложение, чтобы сделать его наиболее доступным для понимания.
Currently the available victory conditions are either 2 hands or the points system. I think offering 1 hand as an option would be good because it would make for a MUCH shorter game (and the game length would be lower variance). For example, I just played a 4-player 2-hands game which took 4 hands total, i.e. 2 hours. If we'd been unlucky, it could have been 5 hands (2.5 hours); it also could have been over in 2 hands (1 hour). This is both longer than I wanted to play, and also way higher variance (even if I'm ok with 1-2 hours, the *potential* of a 2.5hr game may prevent me from ever playing again even if it doesn't happen often).
• Какой браузер вы используете?
Google Chrome v80
История отчёта
A single hand option is a good idea.
Добавить что-нибудь к этому отчёту
- Другой номер игрового стола / номер хода
- Помогло ли решить проблему нажатие F5?
- Случилась ли проблема несколько раз? Постоянно? От случая к случаю?
- Если у вас есть снимок экрана с этой ошибкой (хорошая привычка), вы можете воспользоваться Imgur.com, чтобы загрузить его и вставить сюда ссылку.
