In a light fog game, I was under the impression that the number of armies in the player menu was always the number of armies that the player actually recieves. (i.e. AFTER sanctions).

In a game now where a player claims to be receiving less than the number of displayed armies.

I'm almost certain this has been covered before in the forums, but I couldn't find it.

I can't seem to reproduce a situation in which the current income is NOT correctly displayed under sanctions in light fog. Yet, the other player has provided a screenshot suggesting that he was, in fact, sanctioned.

Here is the link: http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=4321657

and the screenshot: http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/7367/proofhu.jpg

WalterND14 claims he was sanctioned in Turn 1. The attacks he made in turns 2 and 3 would have been possible with proper planning. As of yet nobody has confirmed that they sanctioned him, nor has anyone confirmed that he has deployed more armies that he says he is receiving. With the screenshot, it would appear that he is telling the truth.

The player menu, however, does not reflect any sanctions. (Sanctions are 75% for 15 turns and would be rather obvious.) It shows that he received 15,14, and 30 armies for turns 2-4.

So what gives? Am I missing something, is there a technical error, or are we being duped?

If you look in the game settings, you'll see "Visibility of opponents playing cards: Hidden."

This means that if one of your opponents plays a sanctions card on someone else that's not you, you won't have any idea the card was played -- the incomes won't change and clicking Cards -> View Active won't show it.

If you want all sanctions to be visible, you can change this setting when creating the game and all cards being played will be public knowledge.

Cheers, Fizzer. I had a feeling it had something to do with that, but couldn't figure it out since I obviously couldn't reproduce it. Time to go be humble.

Sorry Fizzer but that doesn't explain it. We ran a test game with identical (relevant) settings with a different result.

http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=4360178

Regardless of the "card fog" settings, we should see his true income. These guys have done some really tricky moves at this point in the game and this smells fishy.

Colonel Mustard, the test game didn't have enough players to demonstrate the situation. We both saw adjusted income because we were both involved with the sanctions card. Imagine that you keep the same settings with 3 players.

If you play the sanctions card on Player 3, and I can see the reduced income, then it is quite obvious that you have played the sanctions card, without even looking at the map.

To avoid this, the number of armies displayed remains true to the game information visible to me, which doesn't include play of a sanctions card between other players. As in a normal fog game, you must rely on other clues (deployment, attacks, etc.) to figure out the number of armies a player is receiving.

That makes sense but I need another test game to prove it.

Fizzer, in case you are following this thread, I wanted to thank you again for your help and let you know that we resolved this with another test game. I appreciate your input.