Combat phase: The engine asks me to interrupt "combat damages" twice

[GoogleCodeExporter]

In the Combat phase, the interrupt box saying "interrupt ?" "combat Damage" 
pops up twice. It should only appear once in the general case.

(Note that I'm not using the pass phase automation setting)

What concerns me is that one of the interrupts seems to be directed at player 2.

In theory, there can be 2 "combat damage" phases, when first strike is 
involved. So, tests must be done in a very simple condition, with just one 
vanilla creature attacking

I believe this problem was introduced in this revision: 
http://code.google.com/p/wagic/source/detail?r=2444

This is low priority because I don't think this is causing any major damage, 
but this hurts the flow of the game for people who don't use the "pass phase 
automation"

Original issue reported on code.google.com by wagic.the.homebrew@gmail.com on 7 Nov 2010 at 9:37

[GoogleCodeExporter]

are you sure its combat damage your interupting? and not the warning for combat 
ends?

Original comment by omegabla...@gmail.com on 7 Nov 2010 at 2:56

[GoogleCodeExporter]

100% sure. I will provide screenshots if needed. This thing is very easy to 
confirm if you don't have phase automation. Just compare to 0.13.1 if you need 
to be completely convinced that the behavior is different.
Again, it's not a release blocker, but it's annoying.

Original comment by wagic.the.homebrew@gmail.com on 7 Nov 2010 at 10:45

[GoogleCodeExporter]

i would like to add to this, the same annoyence happens with no pass phase 
on...draw step.
draw step is forcing players to hit left trigger even tho there is absolutely 
no actions in MTG rules, or stratigies that can take place AFTER the draw 
during the draw step.

Original comment by omegabla...@gmail.com on 10 Nov 2010 at 5:51

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

tracked this one down, it is not directed at player 2, what is happening is 
first strike and double strike now offer an interupt before THIER damage step, 
and then you get offered another interupt offer for the real damage step. not 
game breaking, but yes i agree its slightly annoying.

Original comment by omegabla...@gmail.com on 25 Nov 2010 at 10:31

[GoogleCodeExporter]

note that one difference with the Draw step is that the draw interrupt has 
always been there, and was intentional, as a way to provide the player with a 
possibility to interrupt the AI's turn before the first main phase.

I later understood that it was not ok with the MTG rules, but it's not the same 
issue. 

Original comment by wagic.the.homebrew@gmail.com on 25 Nov 2010 at 10:42

[GoogleCodeExporter]

i was talking about AFTER the interupt, the interupt i think is fine, but then 
it sits there....waiting for a left trigger press...it should be 
"interupt:yes/no" no---->go...not interupt:no--->sit there and wait for trigger 
button press......

Original comment by omegabla...@gmail.com on 25 Nov 2010 at 1:52

[GoogleCodeExporter]

also i meant on YOUR turn, not ai's turn.

Original comment by omegabla...@gmail.com on 25 Nov 2010 at 1:53

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Ah, thanks for the clarification, I see what you mean now, after drawing, the 
draw step should automatically end, not allowing you to do anything at that 
step.

Original comment by wagic.the.homebrew@gmail.com on 25 Nov 2010 at 2:01

[GoogleCodeExporter]

a fix for this is on the way, still playtesting it.

Original comment by omegabla...@gmail.com on 6 Dec 2010 at 11:32

[GoogleCodeExporter]

committed a change/ rearrange that corrects this, please check it out when you 
have a chance.

Original comment by omegabla...@gmail.com on 7 Dec 2010 at 6:13

[GoogleCodeExporter]

this still exist, had to revert the change that removed this.

Original comment by omegabla...@gmail.com on 9 Dec 2010 at 2:18

[GoogleCodeExporter]

ok after some research, it turns out that this is NOT a bug, combat steps are 
now following MTG rules

Combat phase
----Beginning of combat step
--------Triggered abilities that triggered at the beginning of combat are put 
on the stack.
--------Players receive priority (starting with the active player).
----Declare attackers step
--------Active player declares attackers.
--------Triggered abilities that triggered at the beginning of this step or 
upon declaration of attackers
--------are put on the stack.
--------Players receive priority (starting with the active player).
--------Skip to end of combat step if no attackers have been declared.
----Declare blockers step
--------Defending player declares blockers.
--------Triggered abilities that triggered at the beginning of this step or 
upon declaration of blockers
--------are put on the stack.
--------Players receive priority (starting with the active player).
----First strike combat damage step (This step doesn't happen if no creatures 
with first or double
----strike are involved with combat.)
--------First/double strike combat damage is assigned and dealt.

--------Players receive priority (starting with the active player).<----look 
here

----Combat damage step
--------Regular/double strike combat damage is assigned and dealt.

--------Players receive priority (starting with the active player). <--look here

----End of combat
--------Triggered abilities that trigger "at end of combat" are put on the 
stack.
--------Players receive priority (starting with the active player).

when first or double damage is called for in MTG rules...you get a 2ND combat 
damage step and the player IS supposed to be able to respond inbetween the 2 
steps...

meaning being offered a second interrupt is correct.

"After combat damage is dealt in either the "first strike" combat damage step 
or "normal" combat damage step, the active player gets priority. This is partly 
necessary to check state-based actions before the next combat damage step, 
important for dealing with creatures that have been dealt lethal damage, but it 
also provides players the opportunity to cast spells or activate abilities 
before the next step.
__________________
DCI Regional Judge (L3)"

Original comment by omegabla...@gmail.com on 26 Jan 2011 at 2:32

• Changed state: Invalid

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Thanks a lot for the research.
As I sent you by PM (but posting here as well for archives), can you give a 
real-life example of when this is useful, and how the lack of interrupt would 
prevent Wagic to handle the case?

Thanks a lot.

Original comment by wagic.the.homebrew@gmail.com on 26 Jan 2011 at 10:52