Carcassonne String

[Liallan]

Does anyone know what "${titlearg1}" is in reference to?

It says "tile ${titlearg1}" as though the "${titlearg1}" is being used as an adjective, in which case it should be in front. I thought it was maybe the name of a tile, but they can be used as more than one thing so that doesn't make sense. (I just played a game - I should be paying attention.)

Chesslawyer did turn these two words around one place, so I'm not the only one thinking this, and always looking for consistency as well.

I'd just feel better if I knew what it was.

[Liallan]

May as well get to everything:

What is the difference between these statements?

3 points for city touching each field (International rules)
3 points for most farmers around each city (First edition rules)

I've seen these (preferences for invitation?) and it didn't make any sense then either. I've played with the international rules, and whoever has majority meeples gets the 3 points for each completed city on that field. So the first edition rules seem to stress the idea that it's the majority, even though international rules is the majority. And a "city touching each field" is saying the same basic thing as "farmers around each city." I'm missing something in the difference here, and I think these sentences could be cleared up to make more sense. I have rules from 2000, which use the word "border" the city, and anyone bordering but not sharing a field scores. (i.e. 2 players on 2 sides of a city separated by a road both score off the city). I also have a 2014 edition from Z-Man (with the new art), and it scores exactly the same way, though it says it a bit differently. 2000 isn't the first edition, so was something changed? What am I missing here?


Completely different thing: Any opinions on using the word "complete" instead of "achieve"? i.e. "completes a city," or "score uncompleted road." "Achieve" for this has been sounding odd to me. Completing something is to finish it, which is what the player is doing, whereas achieving something is reaching a goal. While completing something could be your goal, there's a difference in meaning.

Along the same vein: "counting unachieved realizations" sounds incredibly weird to me. "Realizations" seems like an odd choice of words, though I can't think of anything else. And "unachieved realizations" or even "uncompleted realizations" sounds a bit like saying an "undreamed dream." (I'm darn curious how that's translating to other languages.)

Enough of this game for one night!

[diamant]

What is the difference between these statements?

3 points for city touching each field (International rules)
3 points for most farmers around each city (First edition rules)

3 points for city touching each field (International rules) :
At the end of the game, you must determine, for each field :
* the number of completed cities adjacent to this field;
* if there are meeples in this field, which players score points (3 by adjacent completed city), according to the majority of meeples in this field.

3 points for most farmers around each city (First edition rules) :
At the end of the game, you must determine, for each completed city, which players score points (3 for this city), according to the majority of meeples (if any), adding the meeples in all the adjacent (to the city) fields.

[Liallan]

3 points for most farmers around each city (First edition rules) :
At the end of the game, you must determine, for each completed city, which players score points (3 for this city), according to the majority of meeples (if any), adding the meeples in all the adjacent (to the city) fields.

OK, so that sounds like it doesn't care about the individual fields. I never knew that rule ever existed, and I'd be curious how many people play this way. That would feel weird to me.

I don't think those short little statements make that very clear at all. But my point of view is never having heard of first edition.

Anyway, thanks for the response.