The Hotness
Games|People|Company
Dominion: Dark Ages
Fantastiqa
Mage Knight: Board Game
Mice and Mystics
Eclipse
Among the Stars
Collapsible D: The Final Minutes of the Titanic
Thunder Road
Agricola: All Creatures Big and Small
Lords of Waterdeep
Descent: Journeys in the Dark (Second Edition)
Dungeon Fighter
Virgin Queen
Skyline
The Lord of the Rings: The Card Game
A Game of Thrones: The Board Game (Second Edition)
Twilight Struggle
Dominion
Android: Netrunner
1989: Dawn of Freedom
Agricola
The Big Bang Theory: The Party Game
Total War
Arkham Horror
7 Wonders
Village
Dungeon Command: Sting of Lolth
Wrong Chemistry
The Castles of Burgundy
Ace of Spies
War of the Ring
Through the Ages: A Story of Civilization
Alien Frontiers
Ora et Labora
Le Havre
Kingdom Builder
Twilight Imperium (third edition)
Trajan
Glory to Rome
The Swarm
Race for the Galaxy
Caylus
Battlestar Galactica
Tammany Hall
Small World
Zombicide
Hawaii
Quarriors! Quarmageddon
Power Grid
Space Alert
Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Thumb up
2 Posts

Eketorp» Forums » Rules

Subject: another siege question rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Bruno Lambert
Belgium

hello,

After a long time I played Eketorp again, and now I'm left with two questions about sieging.

1. Can a defender defend multiple times? If, for example, the village is besieged from the catapult and the sea, and it wins the first battle, can it still serve for defending against the second attack? I was under the suspicion that you can only defend once, but I won't find it back in the rules.

2. If the answer on question 1 is no, do you have to defend against each attacker? Even if that attacker attacks from a spot where there are no bricks? And is that even legal? The rules state that it is pointless to attack from a side with no bricks, but doens't say that it is illegal. (of course it would not be very efficient if you do this if the answer on question 1 is yes).

Thank you in advance.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
Ted Groth
United Kingdom
Whitefield
Lancs
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
1) Yes, if a defender survives a previous attack unharmed, he may defend against an attack from another area (There can only be one attack from each of the three areas though)

2) Even if there was no defender, the defending player must still exchange a card. On that basis, we have played it that any available defender must defend against an attack. Otherwise if the defending player didn't hold any strong battle cards they would just choose not to risk conflict, which doesn't seem right.

On that basis, it seems that an attacker could plan an attack from a spot with no bricks first, and then follow with an attack from a spot with high value bricks, in order to have two chances to remove the defender. Inefficient, but effective. I haven't seen it done, but I may try it if the opportunity arises!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
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.