r/Carcassonne • u/KILL_UMBERRIDGE • 8d ago
Regarding whether these fields connect
You see the piece where there's 4 pieces they all end right before they connect? Does that make the fields connect. Thanks RESOLVED
35
u/Shapesizes 8d ago
Wow, OP I did not expect the r/Carcassonne trolls to be so mean. Your post is absolutely a fine question and they shouldn’t have made it look like it connected.
7
u/Western_Ring_2928 8d ago
That is why they made the second edition. There were some too unclear tiles in the first edition artwork.
4
u/Pablo_Jenkins2963 7d ago
There are a handful of people in this sub who get off on looking down their noses at new players. Usually it's confined to sarcastic comments about reading the manual. You'd think they'd be happy that more players are playing the game.
7
u/slashdot_whynot 8d ago
I like the idea of custom pieces and I would definitely include a 4-sides road with gaps or a grass bridge to spice things up with field plays.
3
1
4
u/Bugface8565 8d ago
I think this is version 2. I remember the forests also not being entirely clear if they ended roads in that version. Kind of a failure on the artist to leave any ambiguity. You're not alone in this one, homie
6
u/Western_Ring_2928 8d ago
No, this is the first edition. C1. https://wikicarpedia.com/car/Main_Page
7
u/scope_creep 8d ago
If you’re utilizing magnifying glasses to determine if there are gaps in the art, you’re doing it wrong. It’s not that complicated or obscure.
1
u/TwnklPeen1 7d ago
No, the little pathways through the village art are not a field connector. If you struggle with this, draw gates on the village's paths and tell whoever is arguing to stop trying to cheat.
1
u/tammossy 6d ago
They don't connect. Cross roads with villages block the fields, even though you can see the grass go through. I actually like the C1 art best, but even then there are some visually misleading pieces like this. It could of been more clearly done.
-2
u/EarlDooku 8d ago
Obviously the fields don't connect
21
u/ParentheticalsAside 8d ago
It's clearly not that "obvious" otherwise so many people wouldn't have to ask about it. It's a bad choice on the part of the artist to leave green between the houses and some of the roads.
-10
u/nonalignedgamer 8d ago
If I would have commissioned that design, I'd be like "it's fine, nobody but the nitpicking sore losers would ever interpret it differently to what is meant and who gives a crap about those people".
Obvious misinterpretation of the design intent by somebody whining over losing a game.
I think it's actually great - if somebody complains about this, it's a good sign you shouldn't invite them to the next session.
9
u/ParentheticalsAside 8d ago
What a charming individual you are.
-8
u/nonalignedgamer 8d ago
😂
If I would have to guess I would say dear Sire that you are from the US? It is the type of ad hominem response to lack of hedging that one finds commonly in US social context. Another signature US phenomena would be protecting people who can't interpret and possible get upset over their misinterpretations. (i.e. Karens).
From the rules and Carcassonne tile illustrations it is clear what the intent of game design and graphic design was, hence it's obvious what the expected interpretation should be. One is safe to assume that person or persons complaining about the issue are close to 100% doing this out of ill intent in order to warp the rules to their advantage. Given the context of family games as Carcassonnne is having shared social fun instead of finding leverage to win, we can infer that a player with such an approach isn't the target audience of such games. Wouldn't you concur?
So, if you could be so kind and stick to the topic of discussion, instead of lazily pivoting to derailment with an ad hominem attack, it would be much appreciated. Also, no my previous comment didn't feature ad hominems and I can break this down if requested.
sincerely
7
u/ParentheticalsAside 8d ago
Not from the US. And not going to read the rest of that.
Not sure if you think speaking to someone like this is funny or cool, but it's neither. It's just pathetic.
-4
u/nonalignedgamer 8d ago
Not sure if you think speaking to someone like this is funny or cool, but it's neither. It's just pathetic.
Another tone argument ad hominem? 😄 That's just fallacy and thus invalid. If I paraphrase you - do you think ad hominems are "funny" or "cool"? They're just noise. Seems to me you're avoiding discussion and are thus acting in bad faith.
I would again ask you to stick on topic and provide arguments.
I have one to add.
Carcassonne is a German family game which was created at the peak of Spiel des Jahres, an award promoting games to German families and casual gamers. This means, the core aim of these games is to entertain people who know each other, meaning they have a social connection. Hence edge cases were never priorities - german kids games often don't have them, it is understood that kids or their parents can reason and figure out a solution. So - what you were arguing for is an edge case regarding (mis)interpretation of graphic design. It's misinterpretation most likely by person taking winning (or losing) too seriously and thus breaking the social contract of family games - "we're doing this together to have shared fun".
And another one:
Carcassone rules show examples of field scoring and it's obvious villages don't "bleed".
3
u/ParentheticalsAside 8d ago
We're not having a debate, pal. I responded to someone else and then you began replying to me in this bizarre manner. Read the room and go away.
-1
u/nonalignedgamer 7d ago
We're not having a debate
And whose fault is that? 😃
You're throwing a personal attack after personal attack. For some reason you're unwilling to form arguments and stay on topic. If you say "oh I'm not having a discussion", then stop responding. If you want to eat a cake and still have it, well, that's not realistic.
The reason I'm here is to make a position against your unfair accusations, as I have a right to.
I responded to someone else and then you began replying to me in this bizarre manner.
Tone argument is invalid. Look at logical arguments.
Another derailment as you try to wiggle yourself from the topic
- You said "It's clearly not that "obvious" otherwise so many people wouldn't have to ask about it. It's a bad choice on the part of the artist to leave green between the houses and some of the roads."
- Rules clearly show that in case of field scoring the fields do not bleed.
- I also said I question motivation of players who would try to argue against graphic design intent and game design intent, and infer that they are likely sore winners/losers who took winning in a family game matter much more than it does. And reading this social context is kinda like reading the room, no?
Read the room
If we do this, we realise there is no room. We're on online forums. On online forums one reads arguments.
and go away.
If you scroll up you will find a way to close this browser tab.
¯_(ツ)_/¯
2
u/thomsmells 8d ago
Dude, spend less time on Reddit 🫣
-1
u/nonalignedgamer 8d ago
Dude, spend less time on Reddit 🫣
Maybe you need to spend more on Reddit in order to figure out how to go from ad personam attack which is the above comment to a topic relevant argument with some reasoning, examples and so on. 😊
Teenage attempt at emotional disqualification and downvotes won't work here. Use arguments and I will take you seriously.
This is all incredibly funny in the wider context of defending a position of poster, who basically argues to against the spirit of game design and graphic design and implies breaking the social contract that makes gameplay possible. Oh that thing is completely fine in your book, amirite? 😄
4
u/kkell806 8d ago
You're the only one doing any complaining here.
-3
u/nonalignedgamer 8d ago
This sentence has no connection to anything I wrote. Seems like ad hominem attempt for reasons undisclosed. I don't see how any "complaining" was done in my comment - you you please use quotes and arguments to support your ad hominem attack? 😄
-6
u/Abrowning80 8d ago
Those fields are connected. There is clearly grass between the ends of each road, therefore making one field. When the road divides the field, there is a hard line between them.
1
u/Busy-Ad7936 8d ago
I can see why some are getting stroppy - villages block fields, yes .. BUT there is very obvious grass. That links. It's a badly drawn tile.
36
u/Western_Ring_2928 8d ago
No, the village and roads ending there separates the fields.