#141522: "As requested: Cards which didn't score correctly in my game"
Hvad handler denne rapport om?
Hvad skete der? Vær venlig og vælg nedenunder
Hvad skete der? Vær venlig og vælg nedenunder
Vær sød at undersøge, om der allerede er sendt en besked om emnet
Hvis ja, venligst STEM for denne rapport. Rapporter med flest stemmer er dem der får PRIORITET!
| # | Status | Votes | Game | Type | Title | Last update |
|---|
Detaljeret beskrivelse
-
• Venligst kopier/indsæt fejlmeddelelsen du ser på din skærm, hvis der er en.
All issues noted are lefalaf's turn/board. I checked each move of my opponent as well, but found no issues with scoring their plays.
Only changes to the score differential to expected are noted so that only cards (used) with potential data issues are listed here.
Move 18
card with 3 flowers, 1 gravel, and backwards L of path surrounding a flower
expected score of 17, game gives 15
(Note: The next card on this board is similar, but the L encloses gravel - that 2nd one netted out fine. This note is just to be clear the first of these similar cards played by lefalaf is the one with the scoring issue.)
Move 40
4 strawberry card
carryover score differential from move 18 was -2, increased to -3
expected 10, game reports 7
Move 43
birdbath, 2 berry, 1, flower, L path
differential of -3 increased to -5
expected 15, game reports 10
Move 48
two root, pond, gravel, straight path
differential increased from -5 to -10
expected 23, game shows 13
Move 55
2 berry, 1 flower, grey statue?, L path
differential increased from -10 to -15
expected 40, game shows 25
The differential did not change the rest of the game.
-
• Venligst forklar hvad du ønsker at gøre, hvad du gjorde og hvad der skete
Noted above inline.
• Hvilken browser bruger du?
Google Chrome v128
-
• Venligst kopier/indsæt tekst vist på engelsk i stedet for dit sprog. Hvis du har et skærmbillede af denne fejl (god øvelse), kan du bruge Imgur.com til at uploade den og kopiere/indsætte linket her.
All issues noted are lefalaf's turn/board. I checked each move of my opponent as well, but found no issues with scoring their plays.
Only changes to the score differential to expected are noted so that only cards (used) with potential data issues are listed here.
Move 18
card with 3 flowers, 1 gravel, and backwards L of path surrounding a flower
expected score of 17, game gives 15
(Note: The next card on this board is similar, but the L encloses gravel - that 2nd one netted out fine. This note is just to be clear the first of these similar cards played by lefalaf is the one with the scoring issue.)
Move 40
4 strawberry card
carryover score differential from move 18 was -2, increased to -3
expected 10, game reports 7
Move 43
birdbath, 2 berry, 1, flower, L path
differential of -3 increased to -5
expected 15, game reports 10
Move 48
two root, pond, gravel, straight path
differential increased from -5 to -10
expected 23, game shows 13
Move 55
2 berry, 1 flower, grey statue?, L path
differential increased from -10 to -15
expected 40, game shows 25
The differential did not change the rest of the game.
-
• er der adgang til denne tekst i oversættelsessystem? Hvis ja, er det blevet oversat inden for 24 timer?
Noted above inline.
• Hvilken browser bruger du?
Google Chrome v128
-
• Forklar venligst dit forslag præcist og sammenfattende, så det er så let som muligt at forstå, hvad du mener.
All issues noted are lefalaf's turn/board. I checked each move of my opponent as well, but found no issues with scoring their plays.
Only changes to the score differential to expected are noted so that only cards (used) with potential data issues are listed here.
Move 18
card with 3 flowers, 1 gravel, and backwards L of path surrounding a flower
expected score of 17, game gives 15
(Note: The next card on this board is similar, but the L encloses gravel - that 2nd one netted out fine. This note is just to be clear the first of these similar cards played by lefalaf is the one with the scoring issue.)
Move 40
4 strawberry card
carryover score differential from move 18 was -2, increased to -3
expected 10, game reports 7
Move 43
birdbath, 2 berry, 1, flower, L path
differential of -3 increased to -5
expected 15, game reports 10
Move 48
two root, pond, gravel, straight path
differential increased from -5 to -10
expected 23, game shows 13
Move 55
2 berry, 1 flower, grey statue?, L path
differential increased from -10 to -15
expected 40, game shows 25
The differential did not change the rest of the game.
• Hvilken browser bruger du?
Google Chrome v128
-
• Hvad blev der vist på skærmen, da du blev blokeret (Blank skærm? Noget af spilbrugerfladen? Fejlmeddelelse?)
All issues noted are lefalaf's turn/board. I checked each move of my opponent as well, but found no issues with scoring their plays.
Only changes to the score differential to expected are noted so that only cards (used) with potential data issues are listed here.
Move 18
card with 3 flowers, 1 gravel, and backwards L of path surrounding a flower
expected score of 17, game gives 15
(Note: The next card on this board is similar, but the L encloses gravel - that 2nd one netted out fine. This note is just to be clear the first of these similar cards played by lefalaf is the one with the scoring issue.)
Move 40
4 strawberry card
carryover score differential from move 18 was -2, increased to -3
expected 10, game reports 7
Move 43
birdbath, 2 berry, 1, flower, L path
differential of -3 increased to -5
expected 15, game reports 10
Move 48
two root, pond, gravel, straight path
differential increased from -5 to -10
expected 23, game shows 13
Move 55
2 berry, 1 flower, grey statue?, L path
differential increased from -10 to -15
expected 40, game shows 25
The differential did not change the rest of the game.
• Hvilken browser bruger du?
Google Chrome v128
-
• Hvilken del af reglerne blev ikke respekteret ved BGA-tilpasningen
All issues noted are lefalaf's turn/board. I checked each move of my opponent as well, but found no issues with scoring their plays.
Only changes to the score differential to expected are noted so that only cards (used) with potential data issues are listed here.
Move 18
card with 3 flowers, 1 gravel, and backwards L of path surrounding a flower
expected score of 17, game gives 15
(Note: The next card on this board is similar, but the L encloses gravel - that 2nd one netted out fine. This note is just to be clear the first of these similar cards played by lefalaf is the one with the scoring issue.)
Move 40
4 strawberry card
carryover score differential from move 18 was -2, increased to -3
expected 10, game reports 7
Move 43
birdbath, 2 berry, 1, flower, L path
differential of -3 increased to -5
expected 15, game reports 10
Move 48
two root, pond, gravel, straight path
differential increased from -5 to -10
expected 23, game shows 13
Move 55
2 berry, 1 flower, grey statue?, L path
differential increased from -10 to -15
expected 40, game shows 25
The differential did not change the rest of the game.
-
• Er regel-brudddet synligt i e
Noted above inline.
• Hvilken browser bruger du?
Google Chrome v128
-
• Hvad var den spilhandling du ønskede at udføre?
All issues noted are lefalaf's turn/board. I checked each move of my opponent as well, but found no issues with scoring their plays.
Only changes to the score differential to expected are noted so that only cards (used) with potential data issues are listed here.
Move 18
card with 3 flowers, 1 gravel, and backwards L of path surrounding a flower
expected score of 17, game gives 15
(Note: The next card on this board is similar, but the L encloses gravel - that 2nd one netted out fine. This note is just to be clear the first of these similar cards played by lefalaf is the one with the scoring issue.)
Move 40
4 strawberry card
carryover score differential from move 18 was -2, increased to -3
expected 10, game reports 7
Move 43
birdbath, 2 berry, 1, flower, L path
differential of -3 increased to -5
expected 15, game reports 10
Move 48
two root, pond, gravel, straight path
differential increased from -5 to -10
expected 23, game shows 13
Move 55
2 berry, 1 flower, grey statue?, L path
differential increased from -10 to -15
expected 40, game shows 25
The differential did not change the rest of the game.
-
• Hvad forsøgte du at gøre for at udløse denne spilhandling?
Noted above inline.
-
• Hvad skete der, da du forsøgre at gøre dette (fejlmeddelelse, meddelelsesstatusbjælke, ...)?
• Hvilken browser bruger du?
Google Chrome v128
-
• I hvilket stadie af spillet opstod problemet (hvad var den daværende spilinstruktion)?
All issues noted are lefalaf's turn/board. I checked each move of my opponent as well, but found no issues with scoring their plays.
Only changes to the score differential to expected are noted so that only cards (used) with potential data issues are listed here.
Move 18
card with 3 flowers, 1 gravel, and backwards L of path surrounding a flower
expected score of 17, game gives 15
(Note: The next card on this board is similar, but the L encloses gravel - that 2nd one netted out fine. This note is just to be clear the first of these similar cards played by lefalaf is the one with the scoring issue.)
Move 40
4 strawberry card
carryover score differential from move 18 was -2, increased to -3
expected 10, game reports 7
Move 43
birdbath, 2 berry, 1, flower, L path
differential of -3 increased to -5
expected 15, game reports 10
Move 48
two root, pond, gravel, straight path
differential increased from -5 to -10
expected 23, game shows 13
Move 55
2 berry, 1 flower, grey statue?, L path
differential increased from -10 to -15
expected 40, game shows 25
The differential did not change the rest of the game.
-
• Hvad skete der, da du forsøgte at udføre denne spilhandling (fejlmeddelelse, meddelelsesstatusbjælke, ...)?
Noted above inline.
• Hvilken browser bruger du?
Google Chrome v128
-
• Venligst beskriv display problemet. Hvis du har et skærmbillede af denne fejl (god øvelse), kan du bruge Imgur.com til at uploade den og kopiere/indsætte linket her.
All issues noted are lefalaf's turn/board. I checked each move of my opponent as well, but found no issues with scoring their plays.
Only changes to the score differential to expected are noted so that only cards (used) with potential data issues are listed here.
Move 18
card with 3 flowers, 1 gravel, and backwards L of path surrounding a flower
expected score of 17, game gives 15
(Note: The next card on this board is similar, but the L encloses gravel - that 2nd one netted out fine. This note is just to be clear the first of these similar cards played by lefalaf is the one with the scoring issue.)
Move 40
4 strawberry card
carryover score differential from move 18 was -2, increased to -3
expected 10, game reports 7
Move 43
birdbath, 2 berry, 1, flower, L path
differential of -3 increased to -5
expected 15, game reports 10
Move 48
two root, pond, gravel, straight path
differential increased from -5 to -10
expected 23, game shows 13
Move 55
2 berry, 1 flower, grey statue?, L path
differential increased from -10 to -15
expected 40, game shows 25
The differential did not change the rest of the game.
• Hvilken browser bruger du?
Google Chrome v128
-
• Venligst kopier/indsæt tekst vist på engelsk i stedet for dit sprog. Hvis du har et skærmbillede af denne fejl (god øvelse), kan du bruge Imgur.com til at uploade den og kopiere/indsætte linket her.
All issues noted are lefalaf's turn/board. I checked each move of my opponent as well, but found no issues with scoring their plays.
Only changes to the score differential to expected are noted so that only cards (used) with potential data issues are listed here.
Move 18
card with 3 flowers, 1 gravel, and backwards L of path surrounding a flower
expected score of 17, game gives 15
(Note: The next card on this board is similar, but the L encloses gravel - that 2nd one netted out fine. This note is just to be clear the first of these similar cards played by lefalaf is the one with the scoring issue.)
Move 40
4 strawberry card
carryover score differential from move 18 was -2, increased to -3
expected 10, game reports 7
Move 43
birdbath, 2 berry, 1, flower, L path
differential of -3 increased to -5
expected 15, game reports 10
Move 48
two root, pond, gravel, straight path
differential increased from -5 to -10
expected 23, game shows 13
Move 55
2 berry, 1 flower, grey statue?, L path
differential increased from -10 to -15
expected 40, game shows 25
The differential did not change the rest of the game.
-
• er der adgang til denne tekst i oversættelsessystem? Hvis ja, er det blevet oversat inden for 24 timer?
Noted above inline.
• Hvilken browser bruger du?
Google Chrome v128
-
• Forklar venligst dit forslag præcist og sammenfattende, så det er så let som muligt at forstå, hvad du mener.
All issues noted are lefalaf's turn/board. I checked each move of my opponent as well, but found no issues with scoring their plays.
Only changes to the score differential to expected are noted so that only cards (used) with potential data issues are listed here.
Move 18
card with 3 flowers, 1 gravel, and backwards L of path surrounding a flower
expected score of 17, game gives 15
(Note: The next card on this board is similar, but the L encloses gravel - that 2nd one netted out fine. This note is just to be clear the first of these similar cards played by lefalaf is the one with the scoring issue.)
Move 40
4 strawberry card
carryover score differential from move 18 was -2, increased to -3
expected 10, game reports 7
Move 43
birdbath, 2 berry, 1, flower, L path
differential of -3 increased to -5
expected 15, game reports 10
Move 48
two root, pond, gravel, straight path
differential increased from -5 to -10
expected 23, game shows 13
Move 55
2 berry, 1 flower, grey statue?, L path
differential increased from -10 to -15
expected 40, game shows 25
The differential did not change the rest of the game.
• Hvilken browser bruger du?
Google Chrome v128
Rapporthistorik
I will begin investigating this.
The pathing algorithm is arduous. I've rewritten it completely and it I still find insidious bugs like this on occasion.
Thank you for your detailed reporting. It helped tremendously.
As a retired software engineer, I can appreciate the complexities involved, and need for good detail in bug reports.
Some of these did not involve changes to the longest path, so I wonder it there might be other things to look at:
While moves 18 and 40 involved changes to the longest path at the time, AND were values that coincided with the path changes, moves 43, 48, and 55 increased the amount of missing points by 5 points at the same time a new berry should have been scoring pointing to a possible issue with berry scoring.
43 also involved changed to the sum for longest path, but 48, and 55 did not, although 55 did cover part of the width of a still counted path segment, but the increase in the score differential (5 vp) indicated a berry missed which was just added.
Hope this helps and curious if you think even 43, 48, and 55 would be fixed as it sounds like they may not be yet.
Since you're technically inclined, you may find it interested to open the browser javascript console and type TBP.players[93239080]["subscore"] to see a breakdown of your score at any point in the game or replay.
Tilføj noget til denne rapport
- Et andet bord-ID / træk ID
- Løste F5 problemet?
- Skete problemet flere gange? Hver gang? Tilfældigt?
- Hvis du har et skærmbillede af denne fejl (god øvelse), kan du bruge Imgur.com til at uploade den og kopiere/indsætte linket her.
