Board Game Arena

There are 2 different examples above:

@Michielos with 3 players, A,B and C: Indeed B should have had a chance to block IF he really did have a captain, which would require evidence as bluffing and table talk lying is a MAJOR part of this game. But yeah if Player B did have a captain then he should have been able to block.

@truecolors with 2 players. Player B is immediately eliminated after making a false accusation, so the result of the action does not complete and A does not get any money from B.

Where does @truecolors mention a 2 player game? Am I missing that?

The example suggests an interaction between just 2 players. A and B. I don't know how many players were in the game, but looks to be irrelevant. I'm going on the information provided.

RicardoRix wrote:There are 2 different examples above:

@Michielos with 3 players, A,B and C: Indeed B should have had a chance to block IF he really did have a captain, which would require evidence as bluffing and table talk lying is a MAJOR part of this game. But yeah if Player B did have a captain then he should have been able to block.

@truecolors with 2 players. Player B is immediately eliminated after making a false accusation, so the result of the action does not complete and A does not get any money from B.

even if B didnt had a captain (which he had) he should be able to CLAIM he has a captain and block. None of this happened, he just lost 2 coins (while actually having a captain...). Its a rule error imo

Michielos wrote:

RicardoRix wrote:There are 2 different examples above:

@Michielos with 3 players, A,B and C: Indeed B should have had a chance to block IF he really did have a captain, which would require evidence as bluffing and table talk lying is a MAJOR part of this game. But yeah if Player B did have a captain then he should have been able to block.

@truecolors with 2 players. Player B is immediately eliminated after making a false accusation, so the result of the action does not complete and A does not get any money from B.

even if B didnt had a captain (which he had) he should be able to CLAIM he has a captain and block. None of this happened, he just lost 2 coins (while actually having a captain...). Its a rule error imo

Yes he should be able to block, but did this actually happen, or was it some table talk?

RicardoRix wrote:

Michielos wrote:

RicardoRix wrote:There are 2 different examples above:

@Michielos with 3 players, A,B and C: Indeed B should have had a chance to block IF he really did have a captain, which would require evidence as bluffing and table talk lying is a MAJOR part of this game. But yeah if Player B did have a captain then he should have been able to block.

@truecolors with 2 players. Player B is immediately eliminated after making a false accusation, so the result of the action does not complete and A does not get any money from B.

even if B didnt had a captain (which he had) he should be able to CLAIM he has a captain and block. None of this happened, he just lost 2 coins (while actually having a captain...). Its a rule error imo

Yes he should be able to block, but did this actually happen, or was it some table talk?

ofcourse this happened. Player B is a in real life friend of mine. We wanted to play Coup together (against each other ofcourse) and this is what happened.

You will ofcourse have already raised or voted for the bug then.
https://en.boardgamearena.com/#!bug?id=11583

some people lie during games, especially if they are playing bluffing games.

The name in Polish language should be "Zamach stanu" instead of "Światowy konflikt". Światowy konflikt is a name which is used for this game being played with different cards, their naming and meaning.

ogrey69 wrote:The name in Polish language should be "Zamach stanu" instead of "Światowy konflikt". Światowy konflikt is a name which is used for this game being played with different cards, their naming and meaning.

Translation on BGA is a collaborative effort. You should be able to fix the game name by going to community / help us translate BGA.

I wasn't aware this thread existed and am not following the comments here. This isn't the place for reporting bugs. Most of the initial bugs mentioned here have been fixed, by the way. For any other bugs or suggestions, use the official BGA bug report system to open or vote for issues so they can be examined and resolved individually.

However, we won't be making this game turn-based. It is just not happening. The game is very fast anyway (and now limited to one round), and the entire point is the quick reaction time. (Personally, I think even the current 15 second allowance is too generous.)