#91198: "Issues with Urgent Wire Transfer"
どうしましたか?以下から選んでください
どうしましたか?以下から選んでください
同一内容の報告がないか、ご確認ください
もしそうなら、このレポートに投票してください。投票の多いレポートから調査されます!
| # | Status | Votes | Game | Type | Title | Last update |
|---|
詳細
-
• もしあれば、画面に表示されたエラーメッセージをコピー&ペーストしてください
There is sort of a bug on "Urgent Wire Transfer." As written is says $1BB->2ECs, and as implemented its $2BB->1EC. However, this card is perhaps the most likely to be "OP" in the game, and so I am thinking it might make sense to tone it down, and perhaps your misreading of it was b/c 2-for-1 makes more sense than 1-for-2.
For the moment, can we try in the middle? 1BB->1EC? And I'll ask Rese to make a new version of the card with 1BB->1EC and also 2BB-> 1 EC so whichever way we end up deciding the card should go, you'll have the right art. (and then if we change it, I'll need an errata for the physical game, alas)
and I am kind of thinking the implementation is more balanced b/c it's more expensive. -
• 何をしたいか、何をしたか、何が起きたかを説明してください
See move 75/76.
• あなたのブラウザは何ですか?
Google Chrome v114
-
• あなたの言語の代わりに、表示されている英語の文章をコピー&ペーストしてください。 このバグのスクリーンショットをお持ちの場合は、お好みの画像ホスティングサービス(例えば、 snipboard.io など)をご利用し、コピー&ペーストしたリンクをここに書き込んでください。 このテキストは翻訳ページで翻訳可能になっていますか?もしそうならば、24時間以上前に翻訳されていますか?
There is sort of a bug on "Urgent Wire Transfer." As written is says $1BB->2ECs, and as implemented its $2BB->1EC. However, this card is perhaps the most likely to be "OP" in the game, and so I am thinking it might make sense to tone it down, and perhaps your misreading of it was b/c 2-for-1 makes more sense than 1-for-2.
For the moment, can we try in the middle? 1BB->1EC? And I'll ask Rese to make a new version of the card with 1BB->1EC and also 2BB-> 1 EC so whichever way we end up deciding the card should go, you'll have the right art. (and then if we change it, I'll need an errata for the physical game, alas)
and I am kind of thinking the implementation is more balanced b/c it's more expensive. • あなたのブラウザは何ですか?
Google Chrome v114
-
• 何を意味するのか、簡単に理解できるようにあなたの提案を正確かつ簡潔に説明してください。
There is sort of a bug on "Urgent Wire Transfer." As written is says $1BB->2ECs, and as implemented its $2BB->1EC. However, this card is perhaps the most likely to be "OP" in the game, and so I am thinking it might make sense to tone it down, and perhaps your misreading of it was b/c 2-for-1 makes more sense than 1-for-2.
For the moment, can we try in the middle? 1BB->1EC? And I'll ask Rese to make a new version of the card with 1BB->1EC and also 2BB-> 1 EC so whichever way we end up deciding the card should go, you'll have the right art. (and then if we change it, I'll need an errata for the physical game, alas)
and I am kind of thinking the implementation is more balanced b/c it's more expensive. • あなたのブラウザは何ですか?
Google Chrome v114
-
• ブロックされたときの表示は何でしたか(空のスクリーン?一部のみのゲームインターフェイス?エラーメッセージ?)
There is sort of a bug on "Urgent Wire Transfer." As written is says $1BB->2ECs, and as implemented its $2BB->1EC. However, this card is perhaps the most likely to be "OP" in the game, and so I am thinking it might make sense to tone it down, and perhaps your misreading of it was b/c 2-for-1 makes more sense than 1-for-2.
For the moment, can we try in the middle? 1BB->1EC? And I'll ask Rese to make a new version of the card with 1BB->1EC and also 2BB-> 1 EC so whichever way we end up deciding the card should go, you'll have the right art. (and then if we change it, I'll need an errata for the physical game, alas)
and I am kind of thinking the implementation is more balanced b/c it's more expensive. • あなたのブラウザは何ですか?
Google Chrome v114
-
• BGAで正しく実装されていないルールはどの部分ですか?
There is sort of a bug on "Urgent Wire Transfer." As written is says $1BB->2ECs, and as implemented its $2BB->1EC. However, this card is perhaps the most likely to be "OP" in the game, and so I am thinking it might make sense to tone it down, and perhaps your misreading of it was b/c 2-for-1 makes more sense than 1-for-2.
For the moment, can we try in the middle? 1BB->1EC? And I'll ask Rese to make a new version of the card with 1BB->1EC and also 2BB-> 1 EC so whichever way we end up deciding the card should go, you'll have the right art. (and then if we change it, I'll need an errata for the physical game, alas)
and I am kind of thinking the implementation is more balanced b/c it's more expensive. -
• ルールの間違いはゲームのリプレイで確認できますか?そうであれば、行動番号は何番ですか?
See move 75/76.
• あなたのブラウザは何ですか?
Google Chrome v114
-
• やりたかったゲームアクションは何ですか?
There is sort of a bug on "Urgent Wire Transfer." As written is says $1BB->2ECs, and as implemented its $2BB->1EC. However, this card is perhaps the most likely to be "OP" in the game, and so I am thinking it might make sense to tone it down, and perhaps your misreading of it was b/c 2-for-1 makes more sense than 1-for-2.
For the moment, can we try in the middle? 1BB->1EC? And I'll ask Rese to make a new version of the card with 1BB->1EC and also 2BB-> 1 EC so whichever way we end up deciding the card should go, you'll have the right art. (and then if we change it, I'll need an errata for the physical game, alas)
and I am kind of thinking the implementation is more balanced b/c it's more expensive. -
• このゲームアクションを引き起こす為に何を試みましたか?
See move 75/76.
-
• これを行おうとしたときに何が起こりましたか?(エラーメッセージ、ステータスバーメッセージ、他)
• あなたのブラウザは何ですか?
Google Chrome v114
-
• どの段階でこの問題が起こりましたか?(画面の指示はどうなっていましたか)
There is sort of a bug on "Urgent Wire Transfer." As written is says $1BB->2ECs, and as implemented its $2BB->1EC. However, this card is perhaps the most likely to be "OP" in the game, and so I am thinking it might make sense to tone it down, and perhaps your misreading of it was b/c 2-for-1 makes more sense than 1-for-2.
For the moment, can we try in the middle? 1BB->1EC? And I'll ask Rese to make a new version of the card with 1BB->1EC and also 2BB-> 1 EC so whichever way we end up deciding the card should go, you'll have the right art. (and then if we change it, I'll need an errata for the physical game, alas)
and I am kind of thinking the implementation is more balanced b/c it's more expensive. -
• ゲームアクションを行おうとしたとき、何が起こりましたか?(エラーメッセージ、ステータスバーメッセージ、他)
See move 75/76.
• あなたのブラウザは何ですか?
Google Chrome v114
-
• 表示の問題を説明してください このバグのスクリーンショットをお持ちの場合は、お好みの画像ホスティングサービス(例えば、 snipboard.io など)をご利用し、コピー&ペーストしたリンクをここに書き込んでください。
There is sort of a bug on "Urgent Wire Transfer." As written is says $1BB->2ECs, and as implemented its $2BB->1EC. However, this card is perhaps the most likely to be "OP" in the game, and so I am thinking it might make sense to tone it down, and perhaps your misreading of it was b/c 2-for-1 makes more sense than 1-for-2.
For the moment, can we try in the middle? 1BB->1EC? And I'll ask Rese to make a new version of the card with 1BB->1EC and also 2BB-> 1 EC so whichever way we end up deciding the card should go, you'll have the right art. (and then if we change it, I'll need an errata for the physical game, alas)
and I am kind of thinking the implementation is more balanced b/c it's more expensive. • あなたのブラウザは何ですか?
Google Chrome v114
-
• あなたの言語の代わりに、表示されている英語の文章をコピー&ペーストしてください。 このバグのスクリーンショットをお持ちの場合は、お好みの画像ホスティングサービス(例えば、 snipboard.io など)をご利用し、コピー&ペーストしたリンクをここに書き込んでください。 このテキストは翻訳ページで翻訳可能になっていますか?もしそうならば、24時間以上前に翻訳されていますか?
There is sort of a bug on "Urgent Wire Transfer." As written is says $1BB->2ECs, and as implemented its $2BB->1EC. However, this card is perhaps the most likely to be "OP" in the game, and so I am thinking it might make sense to tone it down, and perhaps your misreading of it was b/c 2-for-1 makes more sense than 1-for-2.
For the moment, can we try in the middle? 1BB->1EC? And I'll ask Rese to make a new version of the card with 1BB->1EC and also 2BB-> 1 EC so whichever way we end up deciding the card should go, you'll have the right art. (and then if we change it, I'll need an errata for the physical game, alas)
and I am kind of thinking the implementation is more balanced b/c it's more expensive. • あなたのブラウザは何ですか?
Google Chrome v114
-
• 何を意味するのか、簡単に理解できるようにあなたの提案を正確かつ簡潔に説明してください。
There is sort of a bug on "Urgent Wire Transfer." As written is says $1BB->2ECs, and as implemented its $2BB->1EC. However, this card is perhaps the most likely to be "OP" in the game, and so I am thinking it might make sense to tone it down, and perhaps your misreading of it was b/c 2-for-1 makes more sense than 1-for-2.
For the moment, can we try in the middle? 1BB->1EC? And I'll ask Rese to make a new version of the card with 1BB->1EC and also 2BB-> 1 EC so whichever way we end up deciding the card should go, you'll have the right art. (and then if we change it, I'll need an errata for the physical game, alas)
and I am kind of thinking the implementation is more balanced b/c it's more expensive. • あなたのブラウザは何ですか?
Google Chrome v114
報告履歴
here's the real card: imgur.com/1WmiVah showing 2BB paid and 1 EC returned, and that is what the game's logic is enforcing correctly, but the card as displaying has it backwards, saying 1BB paid and 2 EC returned, which is, as I suspected OP-to-the-Max
報告に書き加える
- 他のテーブルID/行動ID
- F5キー(ページの再読込)で問題は解決されましたか?
- 問題は何回も起こりましたか?毎回 起こりますか?ランダムに起きますか?
- このバグのスクリーンショットをお持ちの場合は、お好みの画像ホスティングサービス(例えば、 snipboard.io など)をご利用し、コピー&ペーストしたリンクをここに書き込んでください。
