You asked
How do I setup the game?
Refused — answer could not be verified against the rulebook counted as refused 3 of 3 books answeredAsked with: Catanbg-13-en-1e · Catan: Cities & Knightsbg-926-en-1e · Catan: Seafarersbg-325-en-1e
Answered before
This question didn't get an answer just now — but Catan has been asked something like it before. The corpus may have changed since, so check the date and the answerer on each one before you rule from it.
Catanbg-13-en-1e Answered
Catan: Cities & Knightsbg-926-en-1e Answered
Catan: Seafarersbg-325-en-1e Answered
Strategy guides → — community tips, kept separate from rulings
🔧 debug — where this ruling came from
- outcome
- REFUSED_UNVERIFIED — Refused — answer could not be verified against the rulebook
- corpus profile
- live
- answerer pin (deploy-frozen, attribution only)
- gemma4:26b think:false 5571076f3d70
- timings
- search null ms · ask null ms · total 33806 ms
- single-flight (PR-5)
- queued 0 ms · generation 33806 ms
- retrieval refs (raw) — what the PASSAGE SEARCH returned, not what the answerer read
- citations (raw) — what the answer cited, chosen from a retrieval this page cannot show
- boost provenance — errata + base rulebook (E2/E3)
- gate not evaluated for this ruling (boost, supersedence, and wrench all off at ask time), and the base-rulebook arm went unrecorded for the same reason — the wrench that would have stored it was off; rulesage.errata.boost-enabled=true, rulesage.errata.supersedence-enabled=true
- layering — route
- layered — the question is setup-shaped, so every book was read on its own (the setup-shape lens below shows the pattern that matched)
- layering — how this ask was counted
- counted as REFUSED_UNVERIFIED — carried by layer 1 (Catan) ⚠ the row says REFUSED_UNVERIFIED but its books roll up to ANSWERED; layer 2 ANSWERED, layer 3 ANSWERED; 0 not read; rung: ANSWERED ▸ ABSTAINED ▸ UNATTRIBUTABLE ▸ REFUSED
- layering — books not run
- layer valve: rulesage.table.max-layers = 8 (today's setting, not necessarily the one this ask ran under). A book the valve trims is not read and leaves NO row of its own, so it cannot be listed above or counted in the census — an empty list here means the corpus breaker marked nobody, not that nothing was left out.
- layering — queued between books
- queued between layers: 0 ms of the 0 ms total queue wait (every wait after the first is a mid-ask wait, because the generation permit is released and re-taken for each book)
- answered-before recall
-
past answered rulings were found and offered
similarity threshold in force: 0.55 (rulesage.answered-before.similarity-threshold; the exact-question tier is not gated by it)
- ruling 4633 — matched by the same question (normalized, punctuation folded) — measured similarity 1.0
- ruling 2721 — matched by the same question (normalized, punctuation folded) — measured similarity 1.0
- ruling 2592 — matched by the same question (normalized, punctuation folded) — measured similarity 1.0
- debug row retained until
- Nov 3, 2026 20:36
retrieval — what the passage search returned
what this block IS: the PASSAGE SEARCH's own results — the same search that fills this page's closest-passages list — and NOT the passages the answerer read. Answering runs its OWN retrieval: a far wider candidate pool, re-ranked down to a final handful, plus floors this search never applies — the base rulebook, surviving errata corrections, and one slot per book on a multi-book read. Each of those armed only if THIS ask sent what it needs: the boost block names the ids it forwarded, and the scope line names the books it read. A document the answer CITES that no row here names is therefore EXPECTED, not a defect: two searches, two candidate pools, two orders. How much wider that pool was is set gateway-side and is NOT REPORTED for this ruling, and neither are the answerer's final rows — so rulesage has nothing of its own to show beside these.
score = the fused retrieval score (reciprocal-rank fusion over the search arms) — NOT a cosine similarity. How many arms fused this ruling was NOT RECORDED (it predates the boost trail, ran on the path that stored none, or stored one that could not be read), and the ceiling depends on that count (ceiling = arms/(k+1) at k=60): 2 arms top out at 0.03279; 3 arms top out at 0.04918. So a score above 0.03279 here is not an anomaly: it is arithmetic proof a boost arm voted, and the measured band 0.016–0.033 (taken on two-arm asks) is what does not apply. A chunk only one arm ranked highly lands near 0.016 (that one arm's #1 vote), so 0.03 here is an excellent hit, not a 3% match.
per-arm ranks (the rank each search arm gave a chunk): NOT DISCLOSED by the gateway. Fusion happens gateway-side and only the FUSED score crosses the wire, so rulesage cannot show them without a gateway change. The rank column below is the FUSED rank (position in the returned list), which is real.
token count per chunk: NOT DISCLOSED — chunk token counts are not reported on the ask path. The character counts below are of the bounded snippet/quote rulesage actually received — a real measurement of what we hold, never an estimate of the chunk.
no payload was recorded for this ruling (the call never returned one)
what the answerer read — the passages it actually had in front of it
what this block IS: the passages the ANSWERING read put in front of the answerer, in the order it read them — the other half of the two reads described above, and the one that decides what the answer could possibly say. Each row names the book it came from and where in that book it sits, what it scored when the search arms were fused, which arm carried it there, and whether the re-ranker chose it or a floor guaranteed it a slot. A row here that no passage-search row names is EXPECTED: a far wider pool, re-ranked, with floors the passage search never applies.
the passages the answerer read: NOT RECORDED for this ruling. Any of three things leaves this empty, and they are all different from the answerer having had nothing to read: this ask may never have reached a gateway at all; a multi-book ask keeps each book's own context on that book's own page rather than here; or the gateway build that answered may simply not report it. What this NEVER means is that the answerer read nothing — an answer was composed from passages either way, and their absence here is a gap in what we were told, not in what it read.
chosen chunks — what the answer actually cited
token count per chunk: NOT DISCLOSED — chunk token counts are not reported on the ask path. The character counts below are of the bounded snippet/quote rulesage actually received — a real measurement of what we hold, never an estimate of the chunk.
no payload was recorded for this ruling (the call never returned one)
generation — timing and the path taken
- timing split
- retrieval n/a · first delta n/a · total 33806 ms (retrieval and first-delta both measured from the START of gateway work, so first-delta INCLUDES retrieval — do not subtract)
- full breakdown
- queued 0 ms · retrieval n/a ms · ask n/a ms · gateway work 33806 ms · total 33806 ms
- live seat (read from the running child)
- answering — gemma4:26b think:false · num_ctx 32768 (live-verified 16s ago)
- stream path
- not requested — no progress token attached (stream-answers off, or a non-streaming caller)
- watchdog
- first-token watchdog: 30s per arming window (rulesage.table.first-token-watchdog-seconds), re-armed once by the passages frame — so the worst case before a reader falls back to polling is 60s. Whether it actually fired is a BROWSER-side decision that never reaches the server, so it is not recorded here. The stream path above is the server's half of that story: whether a delta was emitted at all.
- num_ctx · think posture
- both are the CHILD's settings, not rulesage's, and no ask reply carries them — an answer never states which context window or think posture produced it. The live-seat line above reads them from the running child instead, where the gateway can answer for itself; it describes the child NOW, not this ask.
disposition
- outcome
- REFUSED_UNVERIFIED — Refused — answer could not be verified against the rulebook
- abstain rationale
- withheld BY DESIGN: this refusal's text is the drafted answer that failed the quote gate, and nothing unverified serves (D-9) — it is never recorded, here or anywhere a reader can reach
setup-shape — why the checklist band did or didn't render
- decision
- SERVED — setup-shaped and this game's approved setup checklist is offered above
- pattern that matched
- SETUP — "setup" / "set up"
- matched words (in the normalized question)
-
setup
layers — one row per book this ask read
| # | book | outcome | timings | search refs | answer cited | stream | arms | row |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Catan (bg-13-en-1e) | Answered | queued 0 ms · search 288 ms · ask 10201 ms · first delta 8070 ms · gateway work 10501 ms | 8 | 4 | STREAMED | base rulebook doc 43 boosted · no registered errata card matched · keyed on edition 1 | ruling 1470 |
| 2 | Catan: Cities & Knights (bg-926-en-1e) | Answered | queued 0 ms · search 306 ms · ask 9797 ms · first delta 6560 ms · gateway work 10117 ms | 8 | 5 | STREAMED | no base-rulebook boost — this edition registers no ingested rulebook to anchor retrieval to · no registered errata card matched · keyed on edition 119 | ruling 1471 |
| 3 | Catan: Seafarers (bg-325-en-1e) | Answered | queued 0 ms · search 226 ms · ask 12952 ms · first delta 7609 ms · gateway work 13188 ms | 8 | 8 | STREAMED | no base-rulebook boost — this edition registers no ingested rulebook to anchor retrieval to · no registered errata card matched · keyed on edition 118 | ruling 1472 |
errata registry — what the gate above had to match against
this game registers NO errata cards (edition 1), so "no registered errata card matched" above could never have matched one
Errata scope: each book this ask READ got its own errata gate, keyed on that book's own edition — so an expansion's registered cards were matched against that expansion's own layer rather than left outside the match. The per-layer table above shows what each one sent, and any book that was not read ran no gate at all.