Board Game Arena

[deleted]

I have and play taluva, but I am not a developper.

Tester = try the game and give feedback? I can join in such testing.

Hello

I play and own Taluva. I'd like to try it here on Bga... Thanks!

F.

I have played my first Taluva game on Bga against the user "Daggerheart" yesterday. I would not be wrong, but I see that some rules are not correctly followed in gameplay.

I want to quote some lines from original English rules ---> http://inf362.forge.imag.fr/Projet/Regl ... h_v1.1.pdf

1) EXPANDING SETTLEMENTS

"The player chooses one of his Settlements to expand. After that, he chooses one type of terrain (Jungle, Clearance, Sand, Rock or Lake) on which he would like to build. Now, he occupies every field of that terrain type that is adjacent to the Settlement".

It means that I can form a "minimum" village (formed by 3 fields - at least - where my huts are on) by starting from a single hut (already placed) only when I place AT LEAST 2 (TWO) other huts on AT LEAST 2 (TWO) adjacent fields /terrains of a kind which are connected to that single hut...

It means also that I CAN'T place a new single hut IF it is adjacent to another single hut of mine.

I have always played this way. Am I doing wrong?

In this beta version, I saw that my opponent could place just 1 hut on a empty field which was next to another single hut of his, while I assume that the "expanding rule" must involve at least 2 fields of a kind that must be adjacent to a single hut (OR to a settlement, if you want... because I can expand a single hut to form a 3 field-village, but I can also expand an existing village if I want...)

2) TEMPLES AND TOWERS in one village

My opponent could place two towers joined together on two adjacent fields. That's wrong, because:

"The player places one Tower on a level 3 or higher field, that is adjacent to one of his own Settlements. No Tower may yet be present in this Settlement". (Same rule for the temples)

It means that that a village cannot have more than 1 tower and more than 1 temple. So, If you want to join two different villages of your (through an expansion, to form ONE larger village), even in this cas you must not have more than 1 tower and 1 temple in one village, otherwise you can't join them together as one.

I don't think I saw other irregular things about the rules.
I hope to re-play it soon and more, to try it better.

I hope I was clear. English is not my first language.
Greetings from Italy.
F.

Fra83 wrote:1) EXPANDING SETTLEMENTS

Can you provide a replay + move number?

If you are saying that settlement expansions require AT LEAST the placement on AT LEAST two fields, then no, the rule does not say that.

Fra83 wrote:2) TEMPLES AND TOWERS in one village

The rule does not say "Two Towers/Temples may not be in the same settlement."

Ok, let me explain this, I'm going to simplify hexagons to squares to clarify the rules:
with
V = Volcano
A = Huts
O = Lakes
T = Temple
(all on level 1, only one player in the game)

in this situation your building options are:
1) expand the settlement on the left placing a hut on the left lake only (1hut)
2) expand the settlement on the right placing huts on the first and second lake (2huts)
3) set a new setlement on the third lake (1hut)
4) place a new temple in the first lake as this would be the temple of the first settlement, but after placing the temple it merges both settlements into one (that now would have 2 temples on it)

these are all the legal moves on that situation, you CAN join both villages into one with a Temple.

See the bottom line of the PAGE 3 of the rules here:

Limitation:
From the possibilities mentioned above, a player may only choose one for which he still has
enough building pieces (Temples, Towers or Huts) in his pool, and all the conditions are met
before building (so, after building there may be for example two Temples in a Settlement).

this means exactly that the limitation is BEFORE building, not after building.

I am re-reading your comment and the first part is also wrong

Fra83 wrote:
It means that I can form a "minimum" village (formed by 3 fields - at least - where my huts are on) by starting from a single hut (already placed) only when I place AT LEAST 2 (TWO) other huts on AT LEAST 2 (TWO) adjacent fields /terrains of a kind which are connected to that single hut...

It means also that I CAN'T place a new single hut IF it is adjacent to another single hut of mine.

I have always played this way. Am I doing wrong?

I´m afrard yes, one settlement of one hut is a settlement.... and no you don't need to expand to 2 spaces , you can pick type of terrain with only one adjacent space.

Ok, thanks for your answers and your clear explanations.
I have always enjoyed this game, but I didn't know I was playing it in a wrong way (more like a "restrictive variant").

I think I didn't make a good impression, here.
I'm really sorry.

I like it with the correct rules too, obviously.
Sorry.
Again.

Thanks for developing it.
Greetings.

Fra83 wrote:Ok, thanks for your answers and your clear explanations.
I have always enjoyed this game, but I didn't know I was playing it in a wrong way (more like a "restrictive variant").

I think I didn't make a good impression, here.
I'm really sorry.

I like it with the correct rules too, obviously.
Sorry.
Again.

Thanks for developing it.
Greetings.

no worries!!! alll help is welcome