search

NETRATz / evaluatedecks

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/evaluatedecks
0 stars 0 forks source link

If swipe kills an adjacent card to Israfel, a logic error occurs when Israfel is hit by the swipe #30

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. Attack deck: QVIWL2
2. Defense deck: RLIG
3. Full command: iteratedecks-cli.exe -v QVIWL2 RLIG

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
[ 67|U "Heracles" A:1 H:5 D:0] begins attack
[ 67|U "Heracles" A:1 H:5 D:0] tries to attack [ 65|U "Subterfuge" A:1 H:3 D:0]
...
[ 65|U "Subterfuge" A:1 H:1 D:0] suffered 2 damage
[ 67|U "Heracles" A:1 H:5 D:0] tries to attack [ 69|U "Israfel" A:2 H:7 D:2] ...

[ 69|U "Israfel" A:2 H:5 D:2] suffered 2 damage
Logic error:
toString: undefined card

What version of the product are you using? On what operating system?
iteratedecks-cli version 480

Please provide any additional information below.
I have included the full verbose output as an attachment.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by malats...@gmail.com on 5 Sep 2012 at 10:39

Attachments:

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by fabianku...@web.de on 6 Sep 2012 at 1:05

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
That one still exists. Working on it.

Original comment by fabianku...@web.de on 6 Sep 2012 at 10:36

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by fabianku...@web.de on 6 Sep 2012 at 10:36

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Actually subterfuge does not seem to die. So your ticket name is incorrect.

In particular, the error is generated in the "on attack" event handling...
Before this time, both subterfuge and Israfel are alive. And so is Heracles.
(The actual hitting of Israfel is not the cause.)

Original comment by fabianku...@web.de on 7 Sep 2012 at 12:47

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Okay, should be resolved by now. Stupid me confused the decks.

Original comment by fabianku...@web.de on 7 Sep 2012 at 4:43

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by fabianku...@web.de on 7 Sep 2012 at 4:43

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by fabianku...@web.de on 7 Sep 2012 at 4:44

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
This issue was closed by revision r492.

Original comment by fabianku...@web.de on 7 Sep 2012 at 4:46