$10.00
Recommend
3 
 Thumb up
 Hide
18 Posts

Warriors & Traders» Forums » Rules

Subject: Fleeing barbarians rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Steen Bang-Madsen
Denmark
Taastrup
DK
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I just played this game for the first time, and a situation arose, which I don't think the rules clarified...

When two neighbouring barbarian areas are being attacked by two different players, will the first player of the two make the barbarian retreat into that particular barbarian area, which is already under attack.

I think the answer will be yes, and that the barbarians won't be able to defend that area, but will be easy picks for the second player.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrei Novac
Belgium
Brussels
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
mbmbmbmbmb
Stony wrote:
I just played this game for the first time, and a situation arose, which I don't think the rules clarified...

When two neighbouring barbarian areas are being attacked by two different players, will the first player of the two make the barbarian retreat into that particular barbarian area, which is already under attack.

I think the answer will be yes, and that the barbarians won't be able to defend that area, but will be easy picks for the second player.


The Maneuvering phase, as described in the rule book, is played according to the turn order on the country card. Each player goes through the whole Maneuvering phase, then the next one starts.

Taking this into consideration, the situation described is not possible.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steen Bang-Madsen
Denmark
Taastrup
DK
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I just experienced a slightly different situation, but along the same lines.

One player attacked two neighbouring barbarian areas. But I wasn't certain about how to resolve. In both areas one footman would send the barbarian unit fleeing, and the footman would die. But where would the barbarian units go?
If one region is resolved before the other, the I suspect the second barbarian would flee into the now vacant region, that was resolved first...?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Olesen
Denmark
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Stony wrote:
I just experienced a slightly different situation, but along the same lines.

One player attacked two neighbouring barbarian areas. But I wasn't certain about how to resolve. In both areas one footman would send the barbarian unit fleeing, and the footman would die. But where would the barbarian units go?
If one region is resolved before the other, the I suspect the second barbarian would flee into the now vacant region, that was resolved first...?

Good question. I'm interested in the answer as well.

The same situation can arise if - say - Player 1 attacks a region and leaves it empty, then Player 2 attacks a neighboring region and forces the barbarian there to flee. Does the fleeing barbarian go into the now empty region that was attacked previously?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alexandru Aleman
Netherlands
Rotterdam
Zuid Holland
flag msg tools
Stony wrote:
I just played this game for the first time, and a situation arose, which I don't think the rules clarified...

When two neighbouring barbarian areas are being attacked by two different players, will the first player of the two make the barbarian retreat into that particular barbarian area, which is already under attack.

I think the answer will be yes, and that the barbarians won't be able to defend that area, but will be easy picks for the second player.


According to the rules, it can't. Barbarians can retreat only in empty territories, or territories that have only barbarians. If during the "solve battles" phase another's players army are already in a territory, moved there in the previous "move armies" phase, than barbarians can't retreat there. If they can't retreat anywhere else, they die without giving victory points (they "retreat" in Heaven or Hell)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alexandru Aleman
Netherlands
Rotterdam
Zuid Holland
flag msg tools
Robert Olesen wrote:
Stony wrote:
I just experienced a slightly different situation, but along the same lines.

One player attacked two neighbouring barbarian areas. But I wasn't certain about how to resolve. In both areas one footman would send the barbarian unit fleeing, and the footman would die. But where would the barbarian units go?
If one region is resolved before the other, the I suspect the second barbarian would flee into the now vacant region, that was resolved first...?

Good question. I'm interested in the answer as well.

The same situation can arise if - say - Player 1 attacks a region and leaves it empty, then Player 2 attacks a neighboring region and forces the barbarian there to flee. Does the fleeing barbarian go into the now empty region that was attacked previously?


Yeah, I guess this is the way it is. If the region has already been vacated in the "solve battle" phase of a previous player, than in the "solve battles" phase of a following player barbarians could retreat there. I guess this is the only serious disadvantage you would have by being first in turn order
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alexandru Aleman
Netherlands
Rotterdam
Zuid Holland
flag msg tools
Read the rules again. AS the "solve battle" phase is simultaneous, than you cannot encounter this situation, so the retreat is also simultaneous - thus barbarians or armies cannot retreat in a province where another player/Barbarian has a fight that turn.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alexandru Aleman
Netherlands
Rotterdam
Zuid Holland
flag msg tools
And read the rules again :-).
You cannot encounter this phase as each players military phase is done before the next player's.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt Logan
United States
Peoria
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
If a player's army fights a barbarian, and they have equal Power/Life, AND the player does not have the Command talent; the player's army dies and the barbarian retreats. Is that correct? If so, that became an actual strategy in our first game. Sacrifice infantry to vacate the province, then move a princess into the vacated province at the end of the maneuver phase.

Of course, the other side of that argument would be that the barbarian doesn't have to retreat because the province he is in is vacant. Basically, we couldn't find a rule that clarified battle ties, and we played with what I described in my first paragraph. Ties create a vacant province.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Remy Suen
Canada
Nepean
Ontario
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Matt Logan wrote:
If a player's army fights a barbarian, and they have equal Power/Life, AND the player does not have the Command talent; the player's army dies and the barbarian retreats. Is that correct?

This is correct. The Barbarian's life has been reduced to 0 and is forced to retreat.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt Logan
United States
Peoria
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I can live with this rule if that is the rule. However, it makes no sense thematically. If two opposing armies fight each other, and one is wiped out, why would the other retreat?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Remy Suen
Canada
Nepean
Ontario
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Matt Logan wrote:
I can live with this rule if that is the rule. However, it makes no sense thematically. If two opposing armies fight each other, and one is wiped out, why would the other retreat?

The designers would have to take this one but I suppose one interpretation might be that the winning army is retreating to either a) regroup with their allies and/or b) tend to their wounded somewhere safe. One side may have come out as the victor, but at what cost? The region is clearly contested and hanging around there may not be the best idea.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrei Novac
Belgium
Brussels
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
mbmbmbmbmb
From the thematic point of view, I will support actually what Remy said, sometimes you get to destroy the enemy forces, but your army is no longer fit enough to 'protect' the province, so you retreat to an adjacent free or friendly province.

From the practical point of view, the way you played is absolutely fine, it is a valid strategy and I've seen it employed by many, forcing a Barbarian army to retreat and then moving in a Princess. If that strategy works, why not use it?

rcjsuen wrote:
Matt Logan wrote:
I can live with this rule if that is the rule. However, it makes no sense thematically. If two opposing armies fight each other, and one is wiped out, why would the other retreat?

The designers would have to take this one but I suppose one interpretation might be that the winning army is retreating to either a) regroup with their allies and/or b) tend to their wounded somewhere safe. One side may have come out as the victor, but at what cost? The region is clearly contested and hanging around there may not be the best idea.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt Logan
United States
Peoria
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
In response to what Remy said, if my army is not fit to support a province, how is my princess able to at the end of the phase?

I respect that it's a valid strategy, it just seems like it's "gaming the system". My army is wiped out, but I forced the barbarian to retreat, leaving the province vacant for a princess to claim later in the phase.

I think the rule becomes especially dubious, when a player has the Commander talent. In that battle scenario, when both barbarian and army are the same strength, both have to retreat, but the player's princess can move in.

An alternative rule would be that a player cannot enter a barbarian controlled province unless he can defeat them, or is willing to be defeated. In other words, remove the possibility of a vacant province.

All that said, I do enjoy the game. Thanks Andrei for all your responses and support.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Remy Suen
Canada
Nepean
Ontario
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Matt Logan wrote:
In response to what Remy said, if my army is not fit to support a province, how is my princess able to at the end of the phase?

I think there are two ways to look at this.

The simplest one is that your Princess crossed the border to the other Province and she was able to convince the locals to join your cause through diplomacy.

The alternative is that the locals were already on your side and that they are more than happy to welcome you back to rule them after you kicked out the Barbarians in the area that were enslaving them. After all, part of the "story" of W&T is to unite the Provinces around the Capital into one kingdom. Of course, this second argument doesn't make a lot of sense if you were moving a Princess into a Province that is not part of your country. In that case, it'd be back to the simpler argument above where your Princess crossed the borders and talked the locals out of their current ruler to join you.

Quote:
An alternative rule would be that a player cannot enter a barbarian controlled province unless he can defeat them, or is willing to be defeated. In other words, remove the possibility of a vacant province.

You could always playtest this with your gaming group and if that's what everyone prefers, play it that way. The most important thing is to have fun. I've actually only played the game once myself so I don't know which I'd prefer really. laugh
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Georg D.
Germany
Höxter
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Stony wrote:
I just experienced a slightly different situation, but along the same lines.

One player attacked two neighbouring barbarian areas. But I wasn't certain about how to resolve. In both areas one footman would send the barbarian unit fleeing, and the footman would die. But where would the barbarian units go?
If one region is resolved before the other, the I suspect the second barbarian would flee into the now vacant region, that was resolved first...?


reading this thread again I don't find a satisfying answer to this question. supposed both regions under attack are the last barbarian region in that country. So when I reolve battle in region 1 does the retreating army retreats to region 2 as it is the only adjacent barbarian region of the same country or to a third region of another country?

I can think abou several ways to deal with it:

1) both battles are resolved at the same time. In both regions the players armies are destroyed and the barbarians ae forced to retreat. So barbarian 1 retreats to region 2 and barbarian 2 t region 1.

2) we first resolve region 1. the retreating army retreats to region 2 as it still is a barbarian region. then we resolve region 2 and the barbarian retreats to region 1. (effectively the same result as in 1) )

3) we first resolve region 1. As long as region 2 is under attack is it not considered a placeto retreat and the barbarian retreats to a third region of a different country. after that region 2 is reolved and the barbarian retreats to region 1.

What is the correct way? And what will be different if the attacking units aren't destroyed?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrei Novac
Belgium
Brussels
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
mbmbmbmbmb
I will try to make this clear, I hope with better luck than last time

When a province is under siege, a player attacking Barbarians (also attacking other players), that province stops being Barbarian. The province is disputed until after retreating takes place.

The rules state that Barbarians must retreat to a Barbarian or free province. Also, all battles are solved at the same time.

This two combined will not allow Barbarians from one battle to retreat
where another battle took place. as they're resolved simultaneously.

Fluxx wrote:
Stony wrote:
I just experienced a slightly different situation, but along the same lines.

One player attacked two neighbouring barbarian areas. But I wasn't certain about how to resolve. In both areas one footman would send the barbarian unit fleeing, and the footman would die. But where would the barbarian units go?
If one region is resolved before the other, the I suspect the second barbarian would flee into the now vacant region, that was resolved first...?


reading this thread again I don't find a satisfying answer to this question. supposed both regions under attack are the last barbarian region in that country. So when I reolve battle in region 1 does the retreating army retreats to region 2 as it is the only adjacent barbarian region of the same country or to a third region of another country?

I can think abou several ways to deal with it:

1) both battles are resolved at the same time. In both regions the players armies are destroyed and the barbarians ae forced to retreat. So barbarian 1 retreats to region 2 and barbarian 2 t region 1.

2) we first resolve region 1. the retreating army retreats to region 2 as it still is a barbarian region. then we resolve region 2 and the barbarian retreats to region 1. (effectively the same result as in 1) )

3) we first resolve region 1. As long as region 2 is under attack is it not considered a placeto retreat and the barbarian retreats to a third region of a different country. after that region 2 is reolved and the barbarian retreats to region 1.

What is the correct way? And what will be different if the attacking units aren't destroyed?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Georg D.
Germany
Höxter
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
anovac wrote:
I will try to make this clear, I hope with better luck than last time

When a province is under siege, a player attacking Barbarians (also attacking other players), that province stops being Barbarian. The province is disputed until after retreating takes place.

The rules state that Barbarians must retreat to a Barbarian or free province. Also, all battles are solved at the same time.


OK, that is absolut clear. Thank you!
2 
 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.