Recommend
6 
 Thumb up
 Hide
8 Posts

A Distant Plain» Forums » Rules

Subject: Can the Government Eradicate in a space without Warlord Bases? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Vasilis
Greece
Heraklion Crete
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Even if all other requirements are met? {COIN control with Govt cubes}

Just so they can get the Aid and Patronage?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Hill
United States
Wilmington
North Carolina
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I believe to use eradicate all the stipulations must be met, so in addition to Government cubes and COIN control there must be at least one warlord base present.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jakub Glazik
Poland
Poznan
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
The problem is, in rulebook (4.3.3) there is space(s) must be with COIN Control, Government cubes, and any number of Warlord Bases.

But I think the same. You cannot eradicate something that does not exist. Whatsmore, if eradicate would be possible in a space without Warlord base could be too easy way to destroy Coalition victory margin.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Don't Blink
Australia
Brisbane
QLD
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
any number, in GMT, and in these COIN games, means any number from 0 to ∞ infinity. Gaining aid is not conditional on destroying 1 or more Warlord bases. It is a consequence of meeting the conditions of, and peforming, eradication.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ron Lacock
United States
Wylie
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

I agree that 'any number of' includes zero, but it also seems odd to make that a part of the conditions then. If the intent is zero to infinity, then it is not a condition to be met. You could add lines for Coalition, Taliban, and Gov't bases or cubes and say the same thing. It becomes a null requirement.

So, to state the obvious, the requirement is either:

1) in there to clarify that zero is OK since one of the key purposes of the Special Activity is the removal of a Warlord base and if this statement was not there one might logically conclude that you could not do it if no Warlord base existed, or

2) meant to imply that a warlord base has to 'exist' to begin with in order for 'any number of them' to exist.

I could argue either way. It looks like we need Volko to rule on this one.


1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Owens
United States
Chattanooga
Tennessee
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Eradicate is intended to be allowed in spaces with a non-zero number of Warlord bases. (Originally Eradicate was allowed in up to 3 spaces with any Warlord piece, but that needed to be nerfed.)

A better way to read 4.3.3 would be "...take place in 1 or 2 Provinces (not Kabul) with COIN Control, Government cubes, and at least one
Warlord Base."
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Train
Canada
Victoria
British Columbia
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
What Mike said; you're being rules-lawyery.
Think about what is going on here.
A Warlord base represents an area where they have displaced the Government as local authorities; they have become the arbiters of "tax" collection and local commerce (drugs, smuggling, timber theft etc.).
An Eradicate is where the Government is actively muscling in on Warlord operations, to get in on that illicit action (whence the Patronage), and be seen as fighting illegal trade and addressing the drug problem (whence the Aid).
No Warlord base means there isn't enough Warlord organization there worth taking down and exploiting via an Eradicate.

Brian
11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Volko Ruhnke
United States
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'll add a clarification, "at least one" .... Thanks for raising. Volko
8 
 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.