Capital City - Bug in calculating VP for adjacent Ocean tiles ?

[Sudenkaataja]

Hi,
I just played my first online game and -unless I'm wrong- the game didnt seem to calculate correctly the VPs for adjacent ocean tiles. AFAIK the calculation should be updated when new ocean tiles are placed near the Capital. However in my case it just calculated the one Ocean tile I had when placed the Capital tile adjacent to it, and not the two I placed afterward. The VP count was stuck at 1. I might be wrong but I thought all VPs from cards are counted at the moment the game ends, not when the card is played.

[chaney]

During the game, my understanding is that the "brown circle" points on cards are totaled and displayed with a similar icon, as are points on cards from accumulated resources on cards. Points from City placement (adjacent Forests and for Capital adjacent Oceans) are only counted at the end of the game.

For what it's worth, when we play the physical version of the game, we use player color cubes to track *all* "end-game" points including brown circles, resource cubes, and adjacency points. This helps us see who is actually ahead so we know who to attack and who can be supported. Sometimes the one with the most TR is actually doing really badly, it's nice to know that when drafting cards or attacking resources.

[ozkal.arayici]

Capital is working , in end game Sudenkaajata. But Chaney, your house rule (with respect) i never will apply, it should be hidden imo. An expert player is always knowing who is ahead, who he should attack, who is the other rival for first place.

[AronFJenks]

If you pace a capital next to one ocean, it gives you one VP right away, and should be updated in the VP tracker. If you add an ocean later, it will add another VP. If you add greeneries around it, those will be added to your city score (And the greeneries to the greenery score.). I haven't seen any problems with this recently; it was broken a long time ago but they fixed it (!).

[chaney]

Originally posted by ozkal.arayici:

Capital is working , in end game Sudenkaajata. But Chaney, your house rule (with respect) i never will apply, it should be hidden imo. An expert player is always knowing who is ahead, who he should attack, who is the other rival for first place.

That's fine, also with full respect. Here is the reason I disagree:

ALL of the information is completely trackable, so it is not what I would call "hidden information" even if the number is on an already played face down Event card for example. Unplayed cards are true hidden information in my terminology.

Some people find it easy to track it all mentally. Very few are accurate. Even fewer are as accurate as they think they are.

Tracking the information with cubes makes it easy for us. Without it, since we "play hard" it becomes an exercise in tedious memory techniques or an argument about whether it is ok to write down the information. How many times is it fun to recalculate points again and again to make sure it's current? It isn't forbidden by game rules to write it down, but why go through the tedium? I've seen a lot of games where someone "knew" who was ahead, was wrong, and changed the winner by acting wrongly. It's a good solution for us.

[AronFJenks]

Originally posted by chaney:

Originally posted by ozkal.arayici:

Capital is working , in end game Sudenkaajata. But Chaney, your house rule (with respect) i never will apply, it should be hidden imo. An expert player is always knowing who is ahead, who he should attack, who is the other rival for first place.

That's fine, also with full respect. Here is the reason I disagree:

ALL of the information is completely trackable, so it is not what I would call "hidden information" even if the number is on an already played face down Event card for example. Unplayed cards are true hidden information in my terminology.

Some people find it easy to track it all mentally. Very few are accurate. Even fewer are as accurate as they think they are.

Tracking the information with cubes makes it easy for us. Without it, since we "play hard" it becomes an exercise in tedious memory techniques or an argument about whether it is ok to write down the information. How many times is it fun to recalculate points again and again to make sure it's current? It isn't forbidden by game rules to write it down, but why go through the tedium? I've seen a lot of games where someone "knew" who was ahead, was wrong, and changed the winner by acting wrongly. It's a good solution for us.

I agree fully with Chaney on this one. I find it odd that in any game, there would a rule that prevents people from knowing what the score is at any given moment. As Chaney said, you can pause at any time and calculate the score - there are only 7 red cards that have points on them (in the base game), and there's no written rule against pausing to count the score, so why not just track it as the game progresses (like the steam version does)? A game of high strategy where players don't even know the score or who is winning? Seems odd to me.

What Chaney is suggesting isn't even a house rule; he's just saying they keep track of information that's public information anyway.