-
Roman forts are limited, right?
We had someone run out for the first time ever the other day (the Romans went too far north and the Welsh submitted late). All the players, except yellow, agreed it made sense that if the Romans run out of forts they have to try to convince their submitted nations to move into the vacant areas they created. Couldn't find it in the rules so we, the majority, went with it.
-
United States
Danbury
Connecticut
-
Man, I remember reading this exact question. Not here on BGG; possibly CSW or even Web-Grognards. I believe Lewis Pulsipher himself chimed in with his opinion, but I cannot remember what it was!!!
I think he said forts were NOT limited to the countermix, but that was regarding the AH and Gibsons editions.
-
-
No way, you mean we may have done it wrong? Don't tell yellow!!
-
Halesowen Boardgamer
United Kingdom
Halesowen
West Midlands
-
FFG rules page 3 wrote: Note: The Romans are not limited by the components in
the number of forts they may have.
I can't say I've ever seen this happen though.
-
-
The Romans went really far north and the Welsh wouldn't submit so they ran out of forts. And yellow ended up losing the game so if he ever finds out we denied him forts he was due he'd be really mad. No one say anything.
-
-
DaveD wrote: FFG rules page 3 wrote: Note: The Romans are not limited by the components in
the number of forts they may have. I can't say I've ever seen this happen though.
Thanks, by the way, for that.
I rechecked my rules and, in my defense, I have the older edition of the rules where the note about Roman forts not being limited is listed under the Saxon Burhs section, where I didn't think to look.
-
Lewis Pulsipher
United States
Linden
North Carolina
-
For reasons known only to FFG, they did not provide enough forts. It was not my intention to limit the available number of forts.
Of course, in Epic Brit (should it ever be published) the Romans have many fewer forts, and have control markers for areas where there aren't actual forts.
Lew Pulsipher
-
|
|
