You asked
How do I set up Lords of Vegas?
Answered counted as answeredAsked with: Lords of Vegasbg-20437-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 488 ms · ask 5583 ms · total 6089 ms
- single-flight (PR-5)
- queued 0 ms · generation 6089 ms
- retrieval refs (raw) — what the PASSAGE SEARCH returned, not what the answerer read
- [{"page": 1, "score": 0.032787, "snippet": "A game for 2-4 players by James Ernest & Mike Selinker Las Vegas, 1941. Stretching before you is Highway 91, soon to be known as the Las Vegas Strip. In this desert landscape you see the future home of the most fabulous hotels and casinos in the world. Over the next few decades, you and your fellow ", "headingPath": "™ · COMPONENTS · Summary", "sharpsignalDocId": 590}, {"page": 4, "score": 0.032258, "snippet": "Designers: James Ernest and Mike Selinker Art: Franz Vohwinkel, Fastner and Larson Art Direction: Morgan Dontanville, Pete Fenlon Special Thanks: Peter Bromley, Robert T. Carty, Jr., Dan Decker, Marinda Darnell, Morgan Dontanville, Nick Johnson, Kim Marino, Marty McDonnell, Brad McWilliams, Jim Mile", "headingPath": "CREDITS", "sharpsignalDocId": 590}, {"page": 2, "score": 0.031746, "snippet": "You and the other players each take an action card and the scoring chip, markers, and dice of 1 color. Choose a player to be the Banker. Put the scoring chip for each player on the '0' space of the scoring track. Remove the ' End of Game' card from the property cards and shuffle the remaining cards.", "headingPath": "SETTING UP · WHO OWNS WHAT", "sharpsignalDocId": 590}, {"page": 2, "score": 0.03125, "snippet": "At the start of the game, each player rolls 2 dice. The highest roller takes the player card and begins the first turn. Each turn represents roughly a year of activity, during which certain players and development companies prosper. When a player's turn ends, the next player to the left takes the pl", "headingPath": "TAKING TURNS · ON EVERY TURN · Step 1: DRAW · Take Over Your Lot · Owned Lots Pay · Casinos Pay · …", "sharpsignalDocId": 590}, {"page": 1, "score": 0.030769, "snippet": "You win the game by accumulating the most points. You are paid points when your casinos' colors are drawn-larger casinos are worth more points. Casinos also pay money, which you can spend to manage your properties. Your basic strategy is to build and control the largest and best casinos. Scoring Chi", "headingPath": "Objective", "sharpsignalDocId": 590}, {"page": 4, "score": 0.030303, "snippet": "If all players agree, you can use the following variant: Before the gambler rolls, the boss of the casino taking the bet may opt to 'lay off' half of the bet to the bank. After the roll, If the gambler wins, the casino boss only pays half (round down) and the bank pays the rest. Of course, if the ga", "headingPath": "Gamble Variant · After Each Action: Reroll if Tied", "sharpsignalDocId": 590}, {"page": 3, "score": 0.029851, "snippet": "Example: If your scoring chip is on the 8-space on the scoring track and a casino pays you only 1 point, your chip does not advance to the 10-space. If you are paid 2 or 3 points, your chip advances to the 10-space. If you are paid 4 or 5 points, your chip advances to the 12-space. When you are paid", "headingPath": "Scoring · Ending Step 1 · Step 2: PLAY · Action - Build", "sharpsignalDocId": 590}, {"page": 3, "score": 0.029412, "snippet": "When you take the sprawl action, you expand a casino where you are the boss: ⚀ Pay twice the amount specified on that lot. ⚁ Place a tile of the same color as the sprawling casino on any empty, unowned lot with an edge adjacent to the sprawling casino. If a tile of that color isn't available, you ca", "headingPath": "Action - Sprawl · Action - Remodel", "sharpsignalDocId": 590}]
- citations (raw) — what the answer cited, chosen from a retrieval this page cannot show
- [{"page": 2, "quote": null, "headingPath": "SETTING UP · WHO OWNS WHAT", "sharpsignalDocId": 590}]
- boost provenance — errata + base rulebook (E2/E3)
-
no registered errata card matched this query; base rulebook doc 590 boosted; rulesage.errata.boost-enabled=true, rulesage.errata.supersedence-enabled=true
base rulebook doc 590 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 7, 2026 16:47
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 Lords of Vegas — Rulebook (corpus doc 590) | ™ · COMPONENTS · Summary | p.1 | 0.032787 (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 Lords of Vegas — Rulebook (corpus doc 590) | CREDITS | p.4 | 0.032258 (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 Lords of Vegas — Rulebook (corpus doc 590) | SETTING UP · WHO OWNS WHAT | p.2 | 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 |
| #4 | RULEBOOK Lords of Vegas — Rulebook (corpus doc 590) | TAKING TURNS · ON EVERY TURN · Step 1: DRAW · Take Over Your Lot · Owned Lots Pay · Casinos Pay · … | p.2 | 0.03125 (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 Lords of Vegas — Rulebook (corpus doc 590) | Objective | p.1 | 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 |
| #6 | RULEBOOK Lords of Vegas — Rulebook (corpus doc 590) | Gamble Variant · After Each Action: Reroll if Tied | p.4 | 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 |
| #7 | RULEBOOK Lords of Vegas — Rulebook (corpus doc 590) | Scoring · Ending Step 1 · Step 2: PLAY · Action - Build | p.3 | 0.029851 (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 Lords of Vegas — Rulebook (corpus doc 590) | Action - Sprawl · Action - Remodel | p.3 | 0.029412 (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 Lords of Vegas — Rulebook (corpus doc 590) | SETTING UP · WHO OWNS WHAT | p.2 | no quote on the wire |
generation — timing and the path taken
- timing split
- retrieval 488 ms · first delta 4292 ms · total 6089 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 488 ms · ask 5583 ms · gateway work 6089 ms · total 6089 ms
- tokens in (the prompt the answerer read)
- 3974
- tokens out (what the answerer generated)
- 240
- tok/sec
- 137.9 tok/sec — 240 output tokens in 1.740 s of generation
- live seat (read from the running child)
- answering — gemma4:26b think:false · num_ctx 32768 (live-verified 55s 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 522), 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.