Recommend
5 
 Thumb up
 Hide
36 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

A Few Acres of Snow» Forums » Rules

Subject: Ship symbols in Fort Beausejour and Trois Rivières rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Paolo C
Italy
Padova
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm a happy owner of the first edition of this beautiful game, tht i play with the secn edition rules.
Now i have a question about the following FAQs:


Q: Fort Beausejour does not have a ship symbol. Should it?
A: A ship symbol has two functions, first to indicate connections for the
purpose of supply, and second to allow ship symbols to be used in a siege.
Fort Beausejour should be considered to have a ship symbol for the former,
but not the latter, purpose.

Q: If the British settle Trois Rivieres after a successful siege launched from
Louisbourg, is that settlement in supply?
A: Yes. Trois Rivieres should be treated as Fort Beausejour is described in the
previous answer.


Are these ship symbols printed in the second edition board?
I'm als thinking about purchasing the new edition... whistle

Thanks in advance.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken Dilloo
United States
Bothell
Washington
flag msg tools
Everything is relative to perception, and your perception is limited.
badge
The Ginger Ninja
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Don't have a 2nd Ed., but I doubt it. A ship symbol there would indicate that ships can be used in sieges. Not a trivial difference.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paolo C
Italy
Padova
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for your guessing answer, Ken: this is exactly my point.
Now i'm waiting some kind owner of the second edition.
Paolo
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Coene Peter
Belgium
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I have the 2nd edition and can say that both places do have ship symbols
4 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken Dilloo
United States
Bothell
Washington
flag msg tools
Everything is relative to perception, and your perception is limited.
badge
The Ginger Ninja
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
boedha wrote:
I have the 2nd edition and can say that both places do have ship symbols


Really?!? That fundamentally changes how sieges work there. Is there a special note about not using ships in sieges, in those locations? Is it a different symbol than the rest (Boston, Quebec, Louisbourg....)?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Coene Peter
Belgium
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The ship symbols are all the same. Fort Beausejour is neutral and doesn't have a settler symbol, Trois rivieres is french(blue) and has a settler symbol. None of them have a military strength symbol (two crossed rifles). Cards with ship symbols provide 1 military strenght point when used in a siege. There are no special rules.
Hope this helps you out
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken Dilloo
United States
Bothell
Washington
flag msg tools
Everything is relative to perception, and your perception is limited.
badge
The Ginger Ninja
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
That is a bit shocking, as it is a major departure from 1st edition. Actually makes the Brit military dominance worse by a long shot. Kinda hard to believe, actually.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Łukasz Małecki
Poland
Oława
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Not the best shot, but should clear up any doubts:

7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Coene Peter
Belgium
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
was just about to make some pics myself - you read my mind laugh

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken Dilloo
United States
Bothell
Washington
flag msg tools
Everything is relative to perception, and your perception is limited.
badge
The Ginger Ninja
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, there it is. Can't believe that change was made. Makes the flaws that much worse. Also, hard to believe this hasn't been brought up before. The standard line was the only physical difference was the lack of a French Bateteux. This is not insignificant, at all.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Barry Miller
United States
Saint Charles
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

Sorry, coming to the party late... did the FIRST edition board HAVE ship symbols printed next to Ft Beausejour and Three Rivers?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken Dilloo
United States
Bothell
Washington
flag msg tools
Everything is relative to perception, and your perception is limited.
badge
The Ginger Ninja
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Absolutely not. Kind of a big thing to slip in a 2nd printing......
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jacovis
United States
Las Vegas
Nevada
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
bigloo33 wrote:
Absolutely not. Kind of a big thing to slip in a 2nd printing......


I agree, I'll keep playing it as it was FAQ'd, as that has worked well for a long time now.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Barry Miller
United States
Saint Charles
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
OK, am new to the game, and apparently am a little thick as I'm having trouble understanding the dismay at the presence of the two ship symbols in question.

Confirm:
- The only way to get to Ft Beausejour (for either side) is by ship.
- The British can only reach Trois Rivieres by ship, and the French can get to TR by either ship or bateaux.

As I've only ever owned/seen the 2nd edition, can I assume that the above is the case for the 1st edition as well (as printed on the location cards)?

OK,
So in the 2nd edition, the only way for either side to besiege Ft Beausejour is by ship.
And for the 1st edition, as there were no ship symbols printed next to it, I thusly assume (as supported by the 2011 FAQ) that neither side was able to besiege Ft Beausejour.
So, is this where the dismay comes to play - that in the 2nd ed, Ft Beausejour can now be besieged (by either side)?

Is there also dismay that the British can now besiege Tris Rivieres from Louisbourg where they couldn't in the 1st ed (for the same reasons as above)?


If (and that's a big IF) I'm understanding all the above correctly, then I'm definitely not understanding how it (the addition of the ship symbols) "makes the Brit military dominance worse". Or that it "makes the flaws that much worse", or that it's "shocking" and a major departure from the 1st ed. or is a "slip in a 2nd printing".

Bigloo33, I'm NOT trying to slight your words in any way. You sound like you know the subject matter and ramifications well. But I'm not seeing it and as such am trying to make sense of your reaction... I'm trying to grasp yours (and others') perspective to broaden my understanding.

Also, if the "flaws" you mentioned have anything to do with the "HH" crack in the game... I'm aware of the strategy, but am staying away from becoming "smart" on it as I'm having fun now playing the Brits as an expansionist power instead of a crushing power...if that makes sense.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken Dilloo
United States
Bothell
Washington
flag msg tools
Everything is relative to perception, and your perception is limited.
badge
The Ginger Ninja
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It has nothing to do with the connections, and everything to do with siege reinforcement. In first edition, and on Yucata, you cannot reinforce, in those two locations, with ships. Since the Brits generally have a ship advantage, especially after sacking PR, Halifax, and Louisbourg, this is not insignificant. In first edition, these sieges can be a bit dicey, for the Brits. Having ships makes them just another local to siege and win.

My apparent dismay is this is the first I am hearing about it. Seems like this would have come up somewhere else, and it isn't a trivial difference, as it affects game play significantly.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clyde W
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Red Team
badge
#YOLO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So which version of the board is being used on Yucata? Assuredly, it's the 1st, right? Otherwise we'd have known about this much earlier.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken Dilloo
United States
Bothell
Washington
flag msg tools
Everything is relative to perception, and your perception is limited.
badge
The Ginger Ninja
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yeah, 1st edition. It is surprising that it hasn't come to light sooner. Very odd. Guess 2nd edition owners don't play online and post here.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Dearlove
United Kingdom
Chelmsford
Essex
flag msg tools
SoRCon 11 23-25 Feb 2018 Basildon UK http://www.sorcon.co.uk
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It's on my list to ask Martin about, but both he and I have been busy since this came up.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Genghis Ahn
United States
San Clemente
California
flag msg tools
Sometimes You Are Wrong !
badge
Coolest Promo Ever ! Stonewall Lives
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Have either the British or French connection cards changed as a result of this change?

If so and if the French connection cards have ship symbols and the British do not then this is probably no big deal.

However if the connection cards remain the same then yes it is a huge change to the game and I concur would greatly favor the British.

I think the biggest "fix" is simply to have a successful siege of Quebec simply be another end the game and score condition. Then you can bid for sides and no further modification to the base game are required.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Barry Miller
United States
Saint Charles
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
bigloo33 wrote:
It has nothing to do with the connections, and everything to do with siege reinforcement. In first edition, and on Yucata, you cannot reinforce, in those two locations, with ships. Since the Brits generally have a ship advantage, especially after sacking PR, Halifax, and Louisbourg, this is not insignificant. In first edition, these sieges can be a bit dicey, for the Brits. Having ships makes them just another local to siege and win.

My apparent dismay is this is the first I am hearing about it. Seems like this would have come up somewhere else, and it isn't a trivial difference, as it affects game play significantly.


OK, thanks... as it turns out I was being a little thick. Your explanation is great and I appreciate it. I experienced a "senior moment" for each of the 15 minutes it took to type my above post... my mind took the rule about using cards with ship symbols for sieges, and somehow, inexplicably extended that to also think that ships couldn't be used for initial transport to besiege a location unless the location had a ship symbol. Even though I knew better and clearly understood the besiege rules, I still posted wrong assumptions in my above post. So thanks for clearing me up.

Now I understand where you're coming from, and I totally agree. Makes me want to put a piece of tape over those ship symbols on my 2nd ed board, now!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Barry Miller
United States
Saint Charles
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Genghisx wrote:
Have either the British or French connection cards changed as a result of this change?


Don't know what the 1st ed. cards had on them, but the 2nd ed. cards that connect to either Ft B or TR are listed below. Though I think the answer to your question is more expansive than this list, I hope it helps.

Card connections TO Fort Beausejour:
French Cards
- From Gaspe via Ship (Card Resources: Fur)
- From Halifax via ship (Card Resources: Ship & Fur)
- From Louisbourg via ship (Card Resources: Ship)
- From Pemaquid via ship (Card Resources: Fur)
- From Port Royale via ship (Card Resources: Ship & 1 Money)

British Cards
- From Gaspe via Ship (Card Resources: None)
- From Halifax via ship (Card Resources: Ship & Fur)
- From Louisbourg via ship (Card Resources: None)
- From Pemaquid via ship (Card Resources: Fur)
- From Port Royale via ship (Card Resources: Ship)


Card connections TO Trois Rivieres:
French Cards
- From Louisbourg via ship (Card Resources: Ship)
- From Montreal via Bateaux (Card Resources: Bateaux, Military, Fur, & 1 Money)
- From Quebec via Bateaux (Card Resources: Ship, Military, Settlers, & 2 Money)


British Cards
- From Louisbourg via ship (Card Resources: None)

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Smith
United Kingdom
Wigton
Cumbria
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Actually both the sea connection Louisbourg to Trois Rivieres (1st and 2nd editions) and the ship symbol (2nd only) make no sense! A Quebec in French hands could make British large-scale naval and amphibious operations upriver tricky to perform (they raided upriver in 1759 with small forces but it took difficult warping operations past the French batteries at Quebec). Its both historically better, and better against the Halifax Hammer, to scrub that connection off the Louisbourg card.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
N S.
United States
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Dearlove wrote:
It's on my list to ask Martin about, but both he and I have been busy since this came up.


Now I'm really curious. Did anyone ever find out if these ship symbols on the 2nd ed. board were a printing error or a deliberate change?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff M
United States
Lafayette
California
flag msg tools
mb
Still no word?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
N S.
United States
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Still no word. Maybe if enough people contact Martin Wallace through the Treefrog website we can get an answer.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
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.