Bug in the game? Playing two developments even if phase is only selected once?

[vogella]

Hi,

player @Louismarie83 played two developments in round one (Move 9) even though only this phase was only selected once.

https://boardgamearena.com/archive/repl ... s=86884965;


This is move 7: https://boardgamearena.com/archive/repl ... 65;&goto=6
This is move 9: https://boardgamearena.com/archive/repl ... 65;&goto=8

Looks live a move is skipped, but the phase was only selected once.

Is this a bug in the game?

Best regards, Lars

[robinzig]

Just looked at the replay - I can't find a rational explanation. It definitely seems to be a bug (perhaps that player cheated, somehow - but that still counts as a bug if they were allowed to, no matter what crafty exploits they got up to in the attempt).

[PaperOwl]

It's a display issue with the replay, not one that affects gameplay. I've seen it myself when looking at replays for my games in the past.

If you choose to play a card, then cancel your decision without paying for it then the replay will still show that card in your tableau, even though in actual gameplay it's returned to your hand. You can test this yourself by doing this in a friendly game and then looking over the replay - afaik it happens every time.

If you look at the player summary on the right-hand-side then you can see that the player is shown as having a tableau size of 2 after develop (start world plus one dev) and a military of 0 (because space marines was not actually played). That's because the summary shows the correct table situation, it's just the hand/tableau displays that are wrong.

I suppose it is a bug, but it's one that only affects replays so let's not accuse the player of cheating!

[vogella]

Thanks @PaperOwl for the explanation. Nasty display bug, but great that it does not affect the real gameplay. Also thanks to @robinzig for the reply

[robinzig]

Thanks PaperOwl - I wasn't aware of that.

To be completely clear, I am not accusing anyone of cheating - and if my post was read that way, I 100% take it back. I was merely groping at things that might explain what was otherwise unexplainable - I am very happy to see that there is a perfectly innocent explanation!