#118325: "Movement: if expedition member moves back to tile from which it came, treat as undo not as new move"
על מה דוח זה?
מה קרה? אנא בחר מהרשימה מטה
מה קרה? אנא בחר מהרשימה מטה
בבקשה בדוק אם יש כבר דוח על אותו נושא
אם כן, הצביעו בעד הדיווח הזה, דיווחים עם הכי הרבה קולות נחקרים ראשונים
| # | Status | Votes | Game | Type | Title | Last update |
|---|
תיאור מפורט
-
• אנא העתק/הדבק את הודעת השגיאה המופיעה במסך, אם יש כזו.
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 -
• בבקשה הסבר מה רצית לעשות,מה עשית ומה קרה
• מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v96
-
• בבקשה העתק והדבק את הטקסט המוצג באנגלית במקום בשפה שלך. 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. האם טקסט זה זמין במערכת התרגום? אם כן, האם היא תורגמה במשך יותר מ -24 שעות?
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 • מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v96
-
• אנא הסבר את ההצעה שלך במדויק ותמצית כדי שיהיה קל ככל האפשר להבין למה אתה מתכוון.
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 • מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v96
-
• מה הוצג על המסך כאשר נחסמה (מסך ריק? חלק ממשק המשחק? הודעת שגיאה?)
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 • מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v96
-
• איזה חלק של הכללים לא היה מכובד על ידי עיבוד 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 -
• האם אפשר לראות את הפרת החוק בשידור החוזר? אם כן, באיזה מספר מהלך?
• מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v96
-
• מה היה המהלך במשחק שרצית לבצע?
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 -
• מה ניסית לעשות שגרם לפעולה הזו
-
• מה קרה כאשר את/ה מנסה לעשות את זה (הודעת שגיאה, הודעת פס סטטוס משחק, ...)?
• מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v96
-
• באיזה שלב במשחק הבעייה קרתה (מה היו ההוראות הנכונות)
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 -
• מה קרה כאשר את/ה מנסה לבצע פעולת משחק (הודעת שגיאה, הודעת פס סטטוס משחק, ...)?
• מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v96
-
• אנא תאר/י את הנושא המוצג. 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 • מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v96
-
• בבקשה העתק והדבק את הטקסט המוצג באנגלית במקום בשפה שלך. 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. האם טקסט זה זמין במערכת התרגום? אם כן, האם היא תורגמה במשך יותר מ -24 שעות?
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 • מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v96
-
• אנא הסבר את ההצעה שלך במדויק ותמצית כדי שיהיה קל ככל האפשר להבין למה אתה מתכוון.
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 • מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v96
היסטוריית דיווחים
הוסף לדוח הזה
- מספר שולחן/מהלך אחר
- האם לחיצה על F5 פתר את הבעיה?
- האם הבעיה הופיע כמה פעמים? בכל פעם? באופן אקראי?
- 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.
