Recommend
6 
 Thumb up
 Hide
19 Posts

Triumph & Tragedy» Forums » Rules

Subject: VoN without combat and peace dividends. rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
juerg haeberli
msg tools
Since Craig ruled that VoNing Albania and taking it does not involve combat and therefore the agressor can have a peace dividen next year, I assume the same is true for VoNing a neutral and occupying a part of it without combat ?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Craig Besinque
Canada
New Denver
BC
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Juerg,

That was a bad ruling on my part, not properly thought out.
Your example clearly shows why.

Occupying Albania should be a VoN, even though it is undefended by mustered units.

7.13 somewhat implies that VoNs might cancel a Peace Dividend but this is left unclear. I will work on a better wording.

Perhaps "unless it was involved in Aggression or a Battle during the previous Year."

That work?

Craig

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
juerg haeberli
msg tools
Craig,

Agression or battle should cover it.

Thank you for your answer.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Dworkin
United States
Montpelier
Vermont
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Perhaps it helps to think of it like this:

The violation of Neutrality's principal effect is to generate cards for rivals. Those cards represent either increased international sympathy for non-invading rivals, or increased military preparedness by non-invading rivals. In either case, the spectacle of a powerful Power occupying a neutral power will trigger those reactions, even if the neutral power does not have much troop strength, and even if only part of the neutral is seized.

In other words, I think that Craig's most recent note, above, seems intuitively easy to understand.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Clarke
United States
Hoboken
New Jersey
flag msg tools
badge
Loving Hardcore History with Dan Carlin
Avatar
Microbadge: I play both wargames and eurosMicrobadge: Sierra Madre Games fanMicrobadge: Fan of Formula 1 RacingMicrobadge: Riichi Mahjong fanMicrobadge: 2019 Gold Supporter
I think it's a fascinating element to the game that a country's region can be disputed, but if no battles take place (and no further aggression), peace dividends are received. Very cool.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christian Moura
Australia
Melbourne
Victoria
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
aram12 wrote:
I think it's a fascinating element to the game that a country's region can be disputed, but if no battles take place (and no further aggression), peace dividends are received. Very cool.
This happened in my last game - I rationalised it as being a truce in my local battle of Soviets x Austria.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
juerg haeberli
msg tools
I understand Craigs note the following way.

You VoN ( agress ) a neutral. No dividend next year.
You and an armed neutral have units in the same area. No dividend next year.

You occuppy an armed neutrals area ( Not the capital and VoN not this year ) you will get a dividend next year.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Craig Besinque
Canada
New Denver
BC
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: VoNs / Peace Dividends.
More examples:

1. If you VoN a Neutral (= Aggression), no PD next year.

2. If you occupy a disputed Neutral Land area (ie, are "involved in a Battle" re 7.13) during a Year (whether Active Combat is waged or not), no PD next year.

3. If you occupy an undisputed formerly Neutral land area (ie not a Battle) during a Year, you do get a PD next Year (assuming the VoN/Aggression did not happen in that Year).

IE: no Aggression and no involvement in a Battle in the previous year = you get a PD in the New Year.

Is this proposed revised wording going to be adequate?

Craig
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Clarke
United States
Hoboken
New Jersey
flag msg tools
badge
Loving Hardcore History with Dan Carlin
Avatar
Microbadge: I play both wargames and eurosMicrobadge: Sierra Madre Games fanMicrobadge: Fan of Formula 1 RacingMicrobadge: Riichi Mahjong fanMicrobadge: 2019 Gold Supporter
Aha. I was confusing battles with attacking. I had no trouble distinguishing aggression and attacking, though .


That looks good to me.

I would remind others that due to errata aggression is also entering the territories of neutrals via Partition.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Craig Besinque
Canada
New Denver
BC
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Guys,

Brian pointed out to me that I was perhaps making this more complicated than it need be. Instead of linking PD cancellation to Aggression (which really deals with Territory Ownership and forced Combat), why not just directly link it to VoNs and Battles?

Perhaps it be simplest to modify 7.13 Peace Dividends to say:

Deal one Peace Dividend chit (4.4) to each Faction that is at Peace (15.1) unless it Violated a Neutral (15.4) or was involved in a Battle during the previous year.

[still maintaining the distinction between being involved in a Battle and participating in Active Combat.]

In addition, this makes the modification to 11.54 Aggression (as per Errata) to include entry into Enemy/Neutral Territory as Aggression unnecessary (as neither Ownership nor forced Combat is implicated in such moves).

Anyone see a problem with this simpler formulation?

Craig
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Clarke
United States
Hoboken
New Jersey
flag msg tools
badge
Loving Hardcore History with Dan Carlin
Avatar
Microbadge: I play both wargames and eurosMicrobadge: Sierra Madre Games fanMicrobadge: Fan of Formula 1 RacingMicrobadge: Riichi Mahjong fanMicrobadge: 2019 Gold Supporter
I don't see a problem with the new definition except to clarify one point. If you enter a neutral via partition, the RAW tells us there is no VoN penalty. Does this mean that the movement (or attack of the neutral) is NOT a VoN?

Thus if you enter a neutral via partition, do you get a PD?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Craig Besinque
Canada
New Denver
BC
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
No it is NOT a VoN.

The Partition rule says that Rival faction entry into a Violated Neutral's territory suffers no VoN penalties. The rule would be better stated that it does not constitute a VoN. Will address next update.

Craig
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
juerg haeberli
msg tools
Craig,

You are right it is not a VoN.
I believe the question was do you get dividend if you enter armed neutral territory in case of partition.

2 cases:
Entering neutral territory and ensueing battle. No dividend.
Entering territory whithout ensueing battle.
This is still agression. ( you enter territory that belongs to someone else ) So no dividend.

This leads to a third case.

Interventtion:

Here you tecnically agress ( enter territory that belongs to someone else ) but with the beginning next combat phase it becomes your territiry.

Dividend ?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
juerg haeberli
msg tools

Deal one Peace Dividend chit (4.4) to each Faction that is at Peace (15.1) unless it Violated a Neutral (15.4), comitted agression or was involved in a Battle during the previous year.

That would be my proposal.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Clarke
United States
Hoboken
New Jersey
flag msg tools
badge
Loving Hardcore History with Dan Carlin
Avatar
Microbadge: I play both wargames and eurosMicrobadge: Sierra Madre Games fanMicrobadge: Fan of Formula 1 RacingMicrobadge: Riichi Mahjong fanMicrobadge: 2019 Gold Supporter
I believe Craig is proposing to rid the rules of the Errata regarding aggression. Therefore entering via Partition allows you a PD. It is not aggression (if we remove the errata), and it is not a VoD.

cbesinque wrote:

Deal one Peace Dividend chit (4.4) to each Faction that is at Peace (15.1) unless it Violated a Neutral (15.4) or was involved in a Battle during the previous year.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christian Moura
Australia
Melbourne
Victoria
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
What if I Violated Neutrality in 1937, and in 1938 I still haven't conquered the minor, am disputing the territory with the minor's capital, but have not played any action cards to start combat - would I get a peace dividend in 1939?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Clarke
United States
Hoboken
New Jersey
flag msg tools
badge
Loving Hardcore History with Dan Carlin
Avatar
Microbadge: I play both wargames and eurosMicrobadge: Sierra Madre Games fanMicrobadge: Fan of Formula 1 RacingMicrobadge: Riichi Mahjong fanMicrobadge: 2019 Gold Supporter
If by disputing, you mean to say that a territory of the violated neutral contains both your units and the neutrals units, then no, you do not get a PD. You are by definition in a battle. Disputed territory = battle.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geoff C
Canada
Victoria
BC
flag msg tools
Avatar
Microbadge: Triumph & Tragedy - "No peace in our time"Microbadge: Here I Stand fanMicrobadge: Canadian WargamerMicrobadge: Battlestar Galactica - I am a CylonMicrobadge: Space Empires: 4x fan
That is how we played it recently Craig. VON or a battle in a neutral gave no PD. Sitting in a neutral without going further or causing battle was 'at peace' and thus got a PD.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Craig Besinque
Canada
New Denver
BC
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Talonz wrote:
That is how we played it recently Craig. VON or a battle in a neutral gave no PD. Sitting in a neutral without going further or causing battle was 'at peace' and thus got a PD.
Exactly.

Craig
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls