All reports
cityofthebigshoulders_displayed reports
#23292: "Price Protection should be once per Decade and optional"
What is this report about?
What happened ? Please select from below
Rules: a rule of the game has not been respected
Detailed description
• Which part of the rules was not respected by the BGA adaptation
Price Protection says: "Each decade, your company may exhaust this asset to prevent moving backwards"
If you are exhausting the tile, you shouldn't be able to protect you multiple times in a decade
Also, "you may" means it's optional, and no option was given• Is the rules violation visible on game replay? If yes, at which move number?
No because we used the Undo function after the game didn't work as expected. Was between move 369 & 370• What is your browser?
Google Chrome v84
Report history
27. Aug 2020 23:51 • Joseph2302 • Bug has not been reproduced by delopers yet:
Company owner should be given option on whether or not to use this tile
And it shouldn't work for the whole decade, as that is too powerful
And it shouldn't work for the whole decade, as that is too powerful
28. Aug 2020 22:43 • mitcharf • Bug has not been reproduced by delopers yet:
I agree that it is a powerful capital asset, but it is not intended to work just once per decade. The designer clarified this on BGG here:
boardgamegeek.com/thread/2256464/article/32703243#32703243
In terms of it being optional rather than mandatory, I'm trying to think of a case where I would NOT want to have my stock price protected from dropping. If there are legitimate cases where that would be of possible benefit, then it's worth pursuing that with the game designer, to see what he thinks. Otherwise it seems like it would needlessly delay the game if a player had to be prompted every time to see if they wanted to use it (especially since it can be used multiple times per decade)
boardgamegeek.com/thread/2256464/article/32703243#32703243
In terms of it being optional rather than mandatory, I'm trying to think of a case where I would NOT want to have my stock price protected from dropping. If there are legitimate cases where that would be of possible benefit, then it's worth pursuing that with the game designer, to see what he thinks. Otherwise it seems like it would needlessly delay the game if a player had to be prompted every time to see if they wanted to use it (especially since it can be used multiple times per decade)
29. Aug 2020 0:57 • arcadized • Bug has not been reproduced by delopers yet:
A player in that game asked the designer and the designer agrees this is bugged here:
www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/2493015/capital-asset-price-protection
www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/2493015/capital-asset-price-protection
29. Aug 2020 1:00 • arcadized • Bug has not been reproduced by delopers yet:
@mitcharf
Did you even read the link you posted? When I go there I see the designer has edited it to reflect the current version of the rules:
boardgamegeek.com/thread/2256464/article/32703243#32703243
also see the thread I posted:
www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/2493015/capital-asset-price-protection
IF you tool tip over the asset in BGA, you can see BGA is using the current version of the rules. this is a bug and the designer agrees
Did you even read the link you posted? When I go there I see the designer has edited it to reflect the current version of the rules:
boardgamegeek.com/thread/2256464/article/32703243#32703243
also see the thread I posted:
www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/2493015/capital-asset-price-protection
IF you tool tip over the asset in BGA, you can see BGA is using the current version of the rules. this is a bug and the designer agrees
29. Aug 2020 5:00 • mitcharf • Bug has not been reproduced by delopers yet:
I've been participating in both of those threads. When I posted my comment here in the bug, it was before the designer had stayed that this was a change for the second edition. I was just coming here now to mention that I was mistaken in my previous comment, but I see you've beaten me to it.
Hopefully you also saw that I asked the designer about whether you can choose when to use this asset, and he replied that you do get to choose.
Hopefully you also saw that I asked the designer about whether you can choose when to use this asset, and he replied that you do get to choose.
29. Aug 2020 16:52 • arcadized • Bug has not been reproduced by delopers yet:
Ah, I see now. Sorry, looks like it was a timing issue. Didn't realize that was your thread, I don't use BGG very much. Thanks for coming back to correct the information here.
29. Aug 2020 17:18 • mitcharf • Bug has not been reproduced by delopers yet:
No problem. We all want the same thing here -- for the BGA version to implement the rules correctly. :)
30. Aug 2020 3:49 • ggohierroy • Bug has not been reproduced by delopers yet:
Hey, so this adaptation was implemented when the 2nd edition rules were still being worked on, and the latest information I had at that time was that Price Protection was a passive ability that could be used multiple times in the same decade.
Now, I understand this has changed with the 2nd edition, but it wouldn't be easy to change with the implementation because it means multiple actions can be interrupted and switch to the player holding price protection because they now have a decision to make. This changes the flow of the game significantly, and in asynchronous games, this also has a big impact.
Just so you know, I have no intention of changing this in the short term because of those reasons. I'll leave it open for visibility.
Now, I understand this has changed with the 2nd edition, but it wouldn't be easy to change with the implementation because it means multiple actions can be interrupted and switch to the player holding price protection because they now have a decision to make. This changes the flow of the game significantly, and in asynchronous games, this also has a big impact.
Just so you know, I have no intention of changing this in the short term because of those reasons. I'll leave it open for visibility.
12. Sep 2020 4:28 • alexsim • Bug has not been reproduced by delopers yet:
I think it would be reasonable to trigger the Asset automatically the first time it could be used. I can see where there would be edge cases where you wouldn't want it used, but I think the loss from automatically applying it would be less of a problem than letting it work all the time.
14. Sep 2020 2:02 • ggohierroy • Bug has not been reproduced by delopers yet:
@alexsim
Good idea, but knowing this, a player would use this knowledge to their advantage, making this capital asset go from amazing, to complete shit.
Good idea, but knowing this, a player would use this knowledge to their advantage, making this capital asset go from amazing, to complete shit.
4. Dec 2020 22:51 • Neramoor • Bug has not been reproduced by delopers yet:
Bug appeared in real time game. Price protection not exhausting during stock phase
imgur.com/a/kvZYdhh
imgur.com/a/kvZYdhh
3. Jan 2021 0:19 • Nickelz • Bug has not been reproduced by delopers yet:
Neramoor, the company that lost 3 steps is not the same as the company with the asset.
18. Jan 2021 13:48 • attagamer • Bug has not been reproduced by delopers yet:
The designer of the game has published a rewording of the capital asset effect on BGG:
boardgamegeek.com/thread/2256464/article/35690787#35690787
I believe the BGA implementation is in accordance with this new/clarified rule.
boardgamegeek.com/thread/2256464/article/35690787#35690787
I believe the BGA implementation is in accordance with this new/clarified rule.
19. Jan 2021 8:53 • attagamer • Bug has not been reproduced by delopers yet:
Ooops, sorry! I meant that the BGA implementation is in accordance with the v1 rules.
Note the inconsistence between the behaviour (v1) and the tip text when hovering over the capital asset: the latter reflects the v2 rules!
The v2 rules have changed the ability of the capital asset, and the BGA implementation has thus become wrong.
Clarification by Mr Chandler (author) here: boardgamegeek.com/thread/2256464/article/35690787#35690787
He says: "In the Second Edition, this rule has changed to be a "ONCE PER DECADE" ability. It is no longer a passive ability."
Do not forget to grey out the capital asset once used.
Thank you for your time!
Ooops, sorry! I meant that the BGA implementation is in accordance with the v1 rules.
Note the inconsistence between the behaviour (v1) and the tip text when hovering over the capital asset: the latter reflects the v2 rules!
The v2 rules have changed the ability of the capital asset, and the BGA implementation has thus become wrong.
Clarification by Mr Chandler (author) here: boardgamegeek.com/thread/2256464/article/35690787#35690787
He says: "In the Second Edition, this rule has changed to be a "ONCE PER DECADE" ability. It is no longer a passive ability."
Do not forget to grey out the capital asset once used.
Thank you for your time!
18. Apr 2021 20:28 • MrGeorge • Bug has not been reproduced by delopers yet:
So, to clarify, how do we use this asset to prevent the stock price from dropping during the stock phase?
22. Apr 2021 3:10 • JohnOrigan • Bug has not been reproduced by delopers yet:
Price protection is currently always enable (passive ability).
To follow the rules, it should protect only once (not implemented)
To follow the rules, it should protect only once (not implemented)
Add something to this report
Please add here anything that seems relevant to reproduce this bug or understand your suggestion:
- Another table ID / move ID
- Did F5 solve the problem?
- Did the problem appears several time? Everytime? Randomly?
- If you have a screenshot of this bug (good practice), you can use Imgur.com to upload it and copy/paste the link here.
