$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 133.21

7,794 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
49.1% of Goal | left

Support:

Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
7 Posts

Pandemic Legacy: Season 1» Forums » Rules

Subject: Placement order of cubes during outbreak (no spoilers) rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Consider the following situation: We haven't had any outbreaks yet, and the following situation in Europe:

Essen: 3 blue cubes
London: 3 blue cubes
Madrid: 3 blue cubes
Paris: 1 blue cube

Now, during the infection phase, we draw the Essen card.

Therefore, we put one blue cube in any adjacent city (including Paris, excluding London of course), leading to

Paris: 2 blue cubes

The outbreak in Essen causes an outbreak in London, we proceed as above, leading to

Paris: 3 blue cubes

And again, the London outbreak causes an outbreak in Madrid. Therefore, we have to place 4 blue cubes (in New York, Sao Paulo, Algier and Paris). However, we only have 2 blue cubes left, and will thus lose when we can't place the third one. Now, in what order do we place the cubes, i.e., does an outbreak take place in Paris or not / is the panic level of Paris increased?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
j n
United States
Georgia
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
I'm about 90% sure you get to choose where the cubes go. Even if you don't, if the current outbreak causes you to lose, you shouldn't continue to resolve chain outbreaks.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
lactamaeon wrote:
I'm about 90% sure you get to choose where the cubes go. Even if you don't, if the current outbreak causes you to lose, you shouldn't continue to resolve chain outbreaks.


We would not have lost due to the number of outbreaks, but only because we were not able to place any more blue cubes. Therefore, it could theoretically be argued that we should resolve the Paris outbreak anyway (if 1 of the two remaining cubes would have been places in Paris and an outbreak had occured there before we then would have lost to the lack of available blue cubes)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joshua Blum
United States
Michigan
flag msg tools
You lose when you lose. You don't resolve outbreaks beyond that. So, regardless of if you ended up with a cube going toward Paris, you ran out of cubes before you need to resolve that outbreak, therefore you would not increase the panic level on Paris.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clive Jones

Cambridgeshire, UK
msg tools
mb
The way to think about this is in terms of "pending outbreaks".

You draw Essen. You try to infect, but there are already 3 cubes. Instead, Essen has a pending outbreak.

So you deal with the outbreak in Essen: you increase panic, you scar, you advance the outbreaks marker. Maybe characters are Lost, or you lose the game. Then you try to infect every adjacent city. You place cubes in St Petersburg, Milan and Paris, but London has a pending outbreak.

Now you deal with the outbreak in London (increasse panic, etc.). You place cubes in New York and Paris. You ignore Essen as it's already outbroken in this chain reaction. Madrid has a pending outbreak.

You deal with the outbreak in Madrid. You place cubes in New York, Sao Paolo, Algiers. London has already outbroken. Paris has a pending outbreak.

You deal with the outbreak in Paris. You place cubes in Milan and Algiers. Essen, London and Madrid have already outbroken. Maybe your hell is finally over?

If at any point in that process you run out of cubes, you lose at once. You have to live with all the consequences of any outbreak that has already happened, but you lose instantly and no more bad stuff happens.

When placing cubes in adjacent cities, you can, I guess, choose in what order to place them. But the order doesn't matter. What matters is that you place all the cubes, and then deal with all the outbreaks.

The important choice you sometimes face (though not in the example you've given) is which of several pending outbreaks to deal with next. If the chain reaction is going to run its course to completion the effect will be identical whatever order you pick, but if you're going to lose during it you're allowed to pick whatever order will be least damaging.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
clivej wrote:
The way to think about this is in terms of "pending outbreaks".

You draw Essen. You try to infect, but there are already 3 cubes. Instead, Essen has a pending outbreak.

So you deal with the outbreak in Essen: you increase panic, you scar, you advance the outbreaks marker. Maybe characters are Lost, or you lose the game. Then you try to infect every adjacent city. You place cubes in St Petersburg, Milan and Paris, but London has a pending outbreak.

Now you deal with the outbreak in London (increasse panic, etc.). You place cubes in New York and Paris. You ignore Essen as it's already outbroken in this chain reaction. Madrid has a pending outbreak.

You deal with the outbreak in Madrid. You place cubes in New York, Sao Paolo, Algiers. London has already outbroken. Paris has a pending outbreak.

You deal with the outbreak in Paris. You place cubes in Milan and Algiers. Essen, London and Madrid have already outbroken. Maybe your hell is finally over?

If at any point in that process you run out of cubes, you lose at once. You have to live with all the consequences of any outbreak that has already happened, but you lose instantly and no more bad stuff happens.

When placing cubes in adjacent cities, you can, I guess, choose in what order to place them. But the order doesn't matter. What matters is that you place all the cubes, and then deal with all the outbreaks.

The important choice you sometimes face (though not in the example you've given) is which of several pending outbreaks to deal with next. If the chain reaction is going to run its course to completion the effect will be identical whatever order you pick, but if you're going to lose during it you're allowed to pick whatever order will be least damaging.


Thanks for the detailed answer.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Stewart
United Kingdom
Newcastle-upon-Tyne
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
clivej wrote:
When placing cubes in adjacent cities, you can, I guess, choose in what order to place them. But the order doesn't matter. What matters is that you place all the cubes, and then deal with all the outbreaks.


It doesn't matter with the starting rules. Later in the campaign, the choice of which infection marker to place first and which you don't place because you run out might or might not become significant.

If it ever matters, I'd say it's player choice which to place and which to miss.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.