You asked
How do I set up the game?
Answered counted as answeredAsked with: Twilight Imperium: Fourth Editionbg-233078-en-1e
🔧 debug — where this ruling came from
- outcome
- ANSWERED — Answered
- corpus profile
- live
- answerer pin (deploy-frozen, attribution only)
- gemma4:26b think:false 5571076f3d70
- timings
- search 233 ms · ask 21616 ms · total 97239 ms
- single-flight (PR-5)
- queued 75380 ms · generation 21859 ms
- retrieval refs (raw) — what the PASSAGE SEARCH returned, not what the answerer read
- [{"page": 4, "score": 0.048916, "snippet": "4 STEP 4—CHOOSE COLOR: Each player chooses one color and takes the following components that correspond to that color. • 59 plastic units • 1 command sheet • 25 technology cards • 4 promissory notes Each player combines their color-specific and faction technology cards into one technology deck and t", "headingPath": "", "sharpsignalDocId": 249}, {"page": 5, "score": 0.048131, "snippet": "STEP 7—PLACE CUSTODIANS TOKEN: Place the custodians token in the center of the game board on Mecatol Rex. STEP 8—SHUFFLE COMMON DECKS: Shuffle the action card, agenda, stage I objective, stage II objective, and secret objective decks separately and place them in the common play area. STEP 9—CREATE S", "headingPath": "", "sharpsignalDocId": 249}, {"page": 4, "score": 0.047643, "snippet": "USING THIS REFERENCE This document is the definitive source for all Twilight Imperium: Fourth Edition rules. The Living Rules Reference will occasionally be updated with additions, clarifications, errata, and an FAQ, changes to which are listed on page 3. Additionally, the related topics of each ent", "headingPath": "", "sharpsignalDocId": 249}, {"page": 25, "score": 0.045476, "snippet": "70.7 STEP 7—REPAIR UNITS: Each player repairs all of their units that have the “Sustain Damage” ability by turning those units upright. 70.8 STEP 8—RETURN STRATEGY CARDS: Each player returns their strategy card to the common play area. Then, if a player has removed the custodians token from Mecatol ", "headingPath": "", "sharpsignalDocId": 249}, {"page": 5, "score": 0.031746, "snippet": "5 STEP 12—PREPARE OBJECTIVES: Prepare objectives as follows: i. Each player draws two secret objectives and chooses one to keep. Shuffle the unchosen secret objectives back into the secret objective deck without revealing them. ii. Place the victory point track near the game board. As a group, playe", "headingPath": "", "sharpsignalDocId": 249}, {"page": 25, "score": 0.030769, "snippet": "25 70 STATUS PHASE During the status phase, players score objectives and prepare for the next game round. To resolve the status phase, players perform the following steps: 70.1 STEP 1—SCORE OBJECTIVES: Following initiative order, each player may score up to one public objective and one secret object", "headingPath": "", "sharpsignalDocId": 249}, {"page": 12, "score": 0.030303, "snippet": "Then, that player must place the unit on the game board as instructed by the effect that is placing the unit. RELATED TOPICS: Initiative Order, Strategic Action, Strategy Card, Structures 24 CONTROL Each player begins the game with control of each planet in their home system. During the game, player", "headingPath": "", "sharpsignalDocId": 249}, {"page": 25, "score": 0.02967, "snippet": "The speaker is always the last player to vote and decides which outcome to resolve if the outcomes are tied. 69.3 During setup, the speaker prepares the objectives. 69.4 During the status phase, the speaker reveals a public objective. 69.5 A random player gains the speaker token during setup before ", "headingPath": "", "sharpsignalDocId": 249}]
- citations (raw) — what the answer cited, chosen from a retrieval this page cannot show
- [{"page": 4, "quote": null, "headingPath": "", "sharpsignalDocId": 249}, {"page": 4, "quote": null, "headingPath": "", "sharpsignalDocId": 249}, {"page": 5, "quote": null, "headingPath": "", "sharpsignalDocId": 249}, {"page": 5, "quote": null, "headingPath": "", "sharpsignalDocId": 249}, {"page": 19, "quote": null, "headingPath": "", "sharpsignalDocId": 249}]
- boost provenance — errata + base rulebook (E2/E3)
-
no registered errata card matched this query; base rulebook doc 249 boosted; rulesage.errata.boost-enabled=true, rulesage.errata.supersedence-enabled=true
base rulebook doc 249 boosted
- answered-before recall
-
this ruling was answered, so past rulings were not offered
similarity threshold in force: 0.55 (rulesage.answered-before.similarity-threshold; the exact-question tier is not gated by it)
- debug row retained until
- Nov 6, 2026 14:09
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. This ruling ran the THREE-ARM fuse (full-text + vector + the doc-priority boost arm, which carried the base rulebook and/or the errata corrections this query matched), whose arithmetic ceiling is 0.04918 — all three arms ranking the same chunk #1 (ceiling = arms/(k+1) at k=60). The measured healthy band 0.016–0.033 was measured on TWO-arm asks and does not bound this one: its high end is the two-arm ceiling, and a third arm has room above it. 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.
| fused rank | document | heading | page | fused RRF score | snippet chars |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | RULEBOOK Twilight Imperium: Fourth Edition — Rulebook (corpus doc 249) | p.4 | 0.048916 (healthy, below this ruling's 3-arm ceiling 0.04918 (the measured band 0.016–0.033 was taken on two-arm asks and does not bound a 3-arm one)) | 300 | |
| #2 | RULEBOOK Twilight Imperium: Fourth Edition — Rulebook (corpus doc 249) | p.5 | 0.048131 (healthy, below this ruling's 3-arm ceiling 0.04918 (the measured band 0.016–0.033 was taken on two-arm asks and does not bound a 3-arm one)) | 300 | |
| #3 | RULEBOOK Twilight Imperium: Fourth Edition — Rulebook (corpus doc 249) | p.4 | 0.047643 (healthy, below this ruling's 3-arm ceiling 0.04918 (the measured band 0.016–0.033 was taken on two-arm asks and does not bound a 3-arm one)) | 300 | |
| #4 | RULEBOOK Twilight Imperium: Fourth Edition — Rulebook (corpus doc 249) | p.25 | 0.045476 (healthy, below this ruling's 3-arm ceiling 0.04918 (the measured band 0.016–0.033 was taken on two-arm asks and does not bound a 3-arm one)) | 300 | |
| #5 | RULEBOOK Twilight Imperium: Fourth Edition — Rulebook (corpus doc 249) | p.5 | 0.031746 (healthy, below this ruling's 3-arm ceiling 0.04918 (the measured band 0.016–0.033 was taken on two-arm asks and does not bound a 3-arm one)) | 300 | |
| #6 | RULEBOOK Twilight Imperium: Fourth Edition — Rulebook (corpus doc 249) | p.25 | 0.030769 (healthy, below this ruling's 3-arm ceiling 0.04918 (the measured band 0.016–0.033 was taken on two-arm asks and does not bound a 3-arm one)) | 300 | |
| #7 | RULEBOOK Twilight Imperium: Fourth Edition — Rulebook (corpus doc 249) | p.12 | 0.030303 (healthy, below this ruling's 3-arm ceiling 0.04918 (the measured band 0.016–0.033 was taken on two-arm asks and does not bound a 3-arm one)) | 300 | |
| #8 | RULEBOOK Twilight Imperium: Fourth Edition — Rulebook (corpus doc 249) | p.25 | 0.02967 (healthy, below this ruling's 3-arm ceiling 0.04918 (the measured band 0.016–0.033 was taken on two-arm asks and does not bound a 3-arm one)) | 300 |
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.
| # | document | heading | page | quote chars |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [1] | RULEBOOK Twilight Imperium: Fourth Edition — Rulebook (corpus doc 249) | p.4 | no quote on the wire | |
| [2] | RULEBOOK Twilight Imperium: Fourth Edition — Rulebook (corpus doc 249) | p.4 | no quote on the wire | |
| [3] | RULEBOOK Twilight Imperium: Fourth Edition — Rulebook (corpus doc 249) | p.5 | no quote on the wire | |
| [4] | RULEBOOK Twilight Imperium: Fourth Edition — Rulebook (corpus doc 249) | p.5 | no quote on the wire | |
| [5] | RULEBOOK Twilight Imperium: Fourth Edition — Rulebook (corpus doc 249) | p.19 | no quote on the wire |
generation — timing and the path taken
- timing split
- retrieval 233 ms · first delta 14759 ms · total 97239 ms (retrieval and first-delta both measured from the START of gateway work, so first-delta INCLUDES retrieval — do not subtract)
- full breakdown
- queued 75380 ms · retrieval 233 ms · ask 21616 ms · gateway work 21859 ms · total 97239 ms
- tokens in (the prompt the answerer read)
- 4602
- tokens out (what the answerer generated)
- 960
- tok/sec
- 136.4 tok/sec — 960 output tokens in 7.039 s of generation
- live seat (read from the running child)
- answering — gemma4:26b think:false · num_ctx 32768 (live-verified 51s ago)
- stream path
- streamed — the gateway pushed at least one accumulated draft
- 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
- ANSWERED — Answered
- abstain rationale (n/a — this ruling answered)
- answered — no abstain rationale applies
setup-shape — why the checklist band did or didn't render
- decision
- NO_APPROVED_CHECKLIST — setup-shaped, but no approved setup checklist exists for this game
- pattern that matched
- SETUP — "setup" / "set up"
- matched words (in the normalized question)
-
set up
errata registry — what the gate above had to match against
this game registers NO errata cards (edition 175), so "no registered errata card matched" above could never have matched one
Errata scope: the gate above matched this ruling's own edition only. When an ask also reads an expansion, that expansion's own registered errata cards stay outside the match — a stated phase-1 limitation, not a failed lookup.