Caverna is in alpha

[pmak22]

Hi, I'd like to join the alpha. Can you please add me? Thanks!

[Tisaac]

You are all in !

[JoergBoerg]

Hi, I would like to join the Alpha as well. Thanks.

[nogardtla]

Playing in a two player game, we came to the final round (not that it mattered that it was the final round). We had to choose between harvest or breeding.

My concern/problem with the current flow - each player must decide, then each player has to feed, then do the chosen selection. So, I selected breed (I was second in turn order), then the other player fed, then I had to feed, at which point I realized I should have selected harvest.

I realize the rules have clearly defined steps, but in this particular case, I'm not sure why the implementation has to have this exact flow. It causes the turns to jump back and forth (if someone doesn't have enough food on hand and has to convert or choose to starve) AND makes it impossible to change the selection (I can't see why it matters if I change my selection to the other players).

I'd suggest that players do that entire flow as one turn: choose whether to harvest or breed, feed and then harvest or breed - all one step. It would be cleaner from the online turn perspective and avoid the slightly frustrating situation I had where I can't change my selection at a point that it shouldn't matter.

And before anyone has a cow - yes, I realize that I could change my choice AT THAT POINT and that this is not a bug. I'm simply suggesting what I see as a possible enhancement/improvement to the flow of the game that I don't think needs to be quite so broken up.

(Everything has been great so far - good work!)

[TwinMoonTerror]

Hello, could you please add Silmara12 and myself to the alpha? We will be happy to test!

Additionally, I really love the recent implementation of barenpark having an option to plan your next turn. I think for a game like this it could be really cool to have a "take this action next if available" option. It makes a HUGE difference in play speed for asynchronous games.

[Tisaac]

Playing in a two player game, we came to the final round (not that it mattered that it was the final round). We had to choose between harvest or breeding.

My concern/problem with the current flow - each player must decide, then each player has to feed, then do the chosen selection. So, I selected breed (I was second in turn order), then the other player fed, then I had to feed, at which point I realized I should have selected harvest.

I realize the rules have clearly defined steps, but in this particular case, I'm not sure why the implementation has to have this exact flow. It causes the turns to jump back and forth (if someone doesn't have enough food on hand and has to convert or choose to starve) AND makes it impossible to change the selection (I can't see why it matters if I change my selection to the other players).

I'd suggest that players do that entire flow as one turn: choose whether to harvest or breed, feed and then harvest or breed - all one step. It would be cleaner from the online turn perspective and avoid the slightly frustrating situation I had where I can't change my selection at a point that it shouldn't matter.

And before anyone has a cow - yes, I realize that I could change my choice AT THAT POINT and that this is not a bug. I'm simply suggesting what I see as a possible enhancement/improvement to the flow of the game that I don't think needs to be quite so broken up.

(Everything has been great so far - good work!)

Your suggestion is a change of the official flow so it cannot be done. The game is designed so that turn order is also relevant in harvest, which can be crucial in competitive play, even if that makes it slightly less friendly with beginners.
"I can't see why it matters if I change my selection to the other players" => it can clearly matter in general, although in your case (final round), it's probably not the case. Depending on other player choice of breeding, I can for instance guess whether they are going to take that sheeps on the board for some more points or if I can expect to collect them in the next round. If they are not going to reap their field and don't have enough food, then probably they will cook some more animals and maybe they will want to get more animals next round. And so on.
Every player's move give you some informations about his strategy, so turn orders are crucial and cannot be messed up for a good competitive environment.

Additionally, I really love the recent implementation of barenpark having an option to plan your next turn. I think for a game like this it could be really cool to have a "take this action next if available" option. It makes a HUGE difference in play speed for asynchronous games.

That sounds like a crazy amount of work (think of all possible interaction/combos with buildings) for a feature that wouldn't be that useful IMO since your choice in general heavily depends on what other players did during their last turn. So it's really not worth the dev time currently IMO.

[Dr Strangegame]

Please add me to the alpha, as I would love to test and provide feedback.
Thank you for working on this great game.

[Johnny5isAlive]

Could you please add my wife to alpha so we can playtest together? "Sarah Ivy". Thank you!

[TwinMoonTerror]

Additionally, I really love the recent implementation of barenpark having an option to plan your next turn. I think for a game like this it could be really cool to have a "take this action next if available" option. It makes a HUGE difference in play speed for asynchronous games.

That sounds like a crazy amount of work (think of all possible interaction/combos with buildings) for a feature that wouldn't be that useful IMO since your choice in general heavily depends on what other players did during their last turn. So it's really not worth the dev time currently IMO.

It seems very elegantly implemented for Barenpark. Basically it does nothing more than allowing you input the actions of your next turn as if it was your turn now, then you can just hit confirm when your turn rolls around. If any component of your planned turn doesn't work due to changed game states, you simply can't do it and you take your turn as normal.

Forgive me for explaining if you were already aware of how it works, I don't mean to be patronizing or anything. Also I'm not super familiar with what language BGA is coded in or how the server interactions work, so there may be something I am missing that makes it more difficult. I really only work in Python and I actually stole this preplanning turns idea for a little game I made with a friend of mine because I loved how elegant and snappy it was to allow players to set out their turn while they wait. But I bow to your judgement! I'll happily play either way!

And like I said Silmara12 and I would love to join the test. We are avid Agricola spammers.

[randusnuder]

Please add me and perro69, badude 101 to the testing group.

We have played Caverna on TTS vehemently, and it would be great to have it here among all the other games we play throughout the day!