#14594: "Allow for one hand victory condition."
Пра што гэтая справаздача?
Што адбылося? Калі ласка, абярыце з ніжэй прапісаныя
Што адбылося? Калі ласка, абярыце з ніжэй прапісаныя
Калі ласка, праверце, ці існуе ўжо справаздача на тую ж тэму
Калі гэта так, ПРАГАЛАСУЙЦЕ за гэтую справаздачу. Справаздачы з найбольшай колькасцю галасоў будуць разглядацца У ПЕРШУЮ ЧАРГУ!
| # | Status | Votes | Game | Type | Title | Last update |
|---|
Дэталёвае апісанне
-
• Калі ласка, скапіруйце тэкст памылкі, якую вы бачыце на экране (калі яна ёсць).
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).
-
• Калі ласка, растлумачце, што вы хацелі зрабіць, што вы зрабілі і што здарылася
• Якім браўзэрам вы карыстаецеся?
Google Chrome v80
-
• Калі ласка, скапіруйце тэкст на англійскай замест перакладу на ваш мову. Калі ў вас ёсць скрыншот гэтай памылкі (добрая звычка), вы можаце скарыстацца Imgur.com, каб загрузіць яго і ўставіць сюды спасылку.
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).
-
• Дзе можна знайсьці гэты тэкст у сістэме перакладу? Калі так, ці быў ён перакладзены больш за 24 гадзін таму?
• Якім браўзэрам вы карыстаецеся?
Google Chrome v80
-
• Калі ласка, дакладна і коратка апішыце сваю прапанову, каб зрабіць яе найбольш даступнай для разумення.
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).
• Якім браўзэрам вы карыстаецеся?
Google Chrome v80
-
• Што было намалявана на экране, калі вас заблакавала? (Пусты экран? Частка гульнявога стала? Паведамленне пра памылку?)
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).
• Якім браўзэрам вы карыстаецеся?
Google Chrome v80
-
• Якая частка правілаў не выкананая ў версіі BGA
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).
-
• Ці відаць парушэнне правілаў у паўторы гульні? Калі так, то на якім хаду?
• Якім браўзэрам вы карыстаецеся?
Google Chrome v80
-
• Якое гульнявое дзеянне вы хацелі зрабіць?
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).
-
• Што вы спрабавалі зрабіць, каб выканаць гэтае гульнявое дзеянне?
-
• Што адбылося, калі вы паспрабавалі зрабіць гэта (паведамленне пра памылку, паведамленне ў радку стану гульні ...)?
• Якім браўзэрам вы карыстаецеся?
Google Chrome v80
-
• На якім кроку гульні адбылася праблема (якая была інструкцыя ў той момант у гульні)?
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).
-
• Што адбылося, калі вы паспрабавалі здзейсніць гульнявое дзеянне (паведамленне пра памылку, паведамленне ў радку стану гульні ...)?
• Якім браўзэрам вы карыстаецеся?
Google Chrome v80
-
• Калі ласка, апішыце памылку адлюстравання. Калі ў вас ёсць скрыншот гэтай памылкі (добрая звычка), вы можаце скарыстацца Imgur.com, каб загрузіць яго і ўставіць сюды спасылку.
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).
• Якім браўзэрам вы карыстаецеся?
Google Chrome v80
-
• Калі ласка, скапіруйце тэкст на англійскай замест перакладу на ваш мову. Калі ў вас ёсць скрыншот гэтай памылкі (добрая звычка), вы можаце скарыстацца Imgur.com, каб загрузіць яго і ўставіць сюды спасылку.
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).
-
• Дзе можна знайсьці гэты тэкст у сістэме перакладу? Калі так, ці быў ён перакладзены больш за 24 гадзін таму?
• Якім браўзэрам вы карыстаецеся?
Google Chrome v80
-
• Калі ласка, дакладна і коратка апішыце сваю прапанову, каб зрабіць яе найбольш даступнай для разумення.
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).
• Якім браўзэрам вы карыстаецеся?
Google Chrome v80
Гісторыя справаздачы
A single hand option is a good idea.
Дадайце да гэтага дакладу
- Іншая Табліца ID / ID ходу
- Ці F5 вырашыла Вашу праблему?
- Ці з'яўлялася праблема некалькі разоў? Кожны раз? Выпадкова?
- Калі ў вас ёсць скрыншот гэтай памылкі (добрая звычка), вы можаце скарыстацца Imgur.com, каб загрузіць яго і ўставіць сюды спасылку.
