Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
15 Posts

Twilight Struggle» Forums » Rules

Subject: Missile Envy and scoring cards rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
L. Scott Johnson
United States
Columbia
South Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
On CSW, Ananda confirms that scoring cards are not operations cards (and therefore unaffected by Containment and Brezhnev Doctrine), but seems to indicate that they are treated as operations cards for purposes of Missile Envy (possibly, or maybe not -- the post is frustratingly vague).

http://talk.consimworld.com/WebX?14@548.8vZacxIoScu.18@.1dcf...

1) Ananda (or Jason), can you confirm that scoring cards are treated as 0 Op-value operations cards by Missile Envy (like they are in the Headline phase)?

If that's true,

2) Is that intended to be a reversal of the ruling that they are not treated as 0 Ops operations cards by Containment and Brezhnev Doctrine?

Thanks,
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Allen Doum
United States
Orange County
California
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In the context of the full CSW discussion, the response isn't vague, IMO. The cards that modify Ops points, such as Containment, do not give scoring cards an operations value, but they are still cards in the hand and would be effected by Missile Envy.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
brian
United States
Cedar Lake
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
Scoring cards have no operational value, not a value of zero - which is a minor nuance, i agree. But something of no value can't have some value added to it in the context of Containment and Brezhnev Doctrine.

The only time you should even be given a scoring card is if your opponent has no other cards in his hand but scoring cards (which would mean he probably was going to lose the game anyway). If you pull the card out of your opponent's hand, then it is used for the event as stated on Missile Envy.

I guess I don't understand the issue. Sounds like rules lawyering to break a part of the game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
L. Scott Johnson
United States
Columbia
South Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AllenDoum wrote:
In the context of the full CSW discussion, the response isn't vague, IMO. The cards that modify Ops points, such as Containment, do not give scoring cards an operations value, but they are still cards in the hand and would be effected by Missile Envy.


Well, yes. It could mean that.

Or it could be, in context, that he was reversing the previous ruling in favor of your ruling that they are operations cards:

http://talk.consimworld.com/WebX?14@548.8vZacxIoScu.38@.1dcf...

And that his "didn't intend to" phrase indicates a retraction, so as to avoid that outcome (since the ruling that they are not operations cards would mean that Missile Envy wouldn't touch them, which could appear to some as a change or a new procedure).

That's why I asked for clarification.

If it is as you say, then, for the missile envy case, would you treat the scoring card as "an event applicable to both players"? I assume that's the case, since they have they split star icon.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
L. Scott Johnson
United States
Columbia
South Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
BrianMola wrote:
I guess I don't understand the issue. Sounds like rules lawyering to break a part of the game.


The issue is: are scoring cards operations cards or not?

Rules lawyering, perhaps, but certainly not intended to break the game (nor would it break the game, regardless of the answer).

Some players (like me) simply like to have a full set of rules. Especially full and consistent rules.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
brian
United States
Cedar Lake
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
They are cards with no operational value. I don't see how they can be classified as operation cards since no operations can come from them. I understand how they work with things that increase operation points +1 and that they don't receive the bonus (if they had a zero printed on them, then the argument could be made that Containment and such would turn them into 1 op cards).

But in the sense of Missile envy, ME is only (or should only be) calling out the value of the card so that your opponent knows when to hand it to you. The only way a scoring card is passed to you because of ME is when your opponent has no more cards with 1 or more op points. And the only way this would happen is if your opponent was holding on to nothing but scoring cards (which also indicates that he was planning on keeping one as a held card, completed the space race, or played North sea oil this turn).

But even if you grab the scoring card, it is a card where the event (the scroing) effects both of you so it must be played for the event (scored) right then and there. You would never be in a position to use the Scoring card for operation points.

That is why I don't see what the big deal is. And not that you are trying to break the rules, but it seems like a non-issue to me.

The solution doesn't rest in trying to classify scoring cards as "operational card" or "non-operational." Because doing one or the other violates one of the card texts on Containment, et al. or ME. The solutiuon should be in clarifying the text on either of the other cards - mostly - not calling a card an "operations card" but a "card used for operations." Then Scoring cards would be "cards that cannot be used for operations." Therefore, if they cannot be used for operation, Containment cannot add to their value and during ME, they are considered to have the lowest value (i.e "no value") but can still be passed to the phasing player.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
L. Scott Johnson
United States
Columbia
South Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You say you don't see how they can be classified as operations cards. Yet Allen says they are (http://talk.consimworld.com/WebX?7@419.3xd0cAJ9S69.4@.1dcfda... )

And even though you say they are not operations cards, you indicate that Missile Envy can grab them. But Missile Envy only grabs operations cards: "Exchange this card for your opponent's highest value Operations
card in his hand."

So perhaps there is some issue in there.

At any rate, it doesn't seem like too much to ask Ananda to clarify what he meant.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
brian
United States
Cedar Lake
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
Rulemonger wrote:
You say you don't see how they can be classified as operations cards. Yet Allen says they are (http://talk.consimworld.com/WebX?7@419.3xd0cAJ9S69.4@.1dcfda... )

And even though you say they are not operations cards, you indicate that Missile Envy can grab them. But Missile Envy only grabs operations cards: "Exchange this card for your opponent's highest value Operations
card in his hand."

So perhaps there is some issue in there.

What is an "Operations card"? There is no definition of one in the rules that I am aware of. Cards can be used for operations or events. But nothing is specifically an operations card because it can always be used as an event.

I believe the intent of Missle Envy is to say, take the card with the highest operations value. I think that is what Ananda is also trying to say. A scoring card has no operation value and cannot be boosted by cards that increase operational values (to satisfy the condition that Containment can't boost it). But a Scoring Card can also be grabbed by Missile Envy if you have no other cards in your hand.

I think it is already clarified by Ananda. It seems to me by pinning him on saying it is an Operation card, then you expect to use scoring cards as Operational cards (and thus avoid a scoring). Or you want them to not be classified as Not an Operational Card and therefore immune from being grabbed by Missle Envy. Either ruling will violate the intent Ananda already stated.

It seems the easier solution, and the one most inline with the intent of the conversation is that cards shouldn't define other cards as "operational cards." This allows the cards to be played as intended without arguing about the semantics.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
L. Scott Johnson
United States
Columbia
South Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
BrianMola wrote:
What is an "Operations card"? There is no definition of one in the rules that I am aware of.


Exactly. Now you see the issue. Missile Envy refers to operations cards, as do Containment and Bre.Doc.

The issue is: what is an operations card?

Quote:
I believe the intent of Missle Envy is to say, take the card with the highest operations value. I think that is what Ananda is also trying to say.


Could be. That's why I'm asking for clarification.

Quote:
A scoring card has no operation value and cannot be boosted by cards that increase operational values (to satisfy the condition that Containment can't boost it). But a Scoring Card can also be grabbed by Missile Envy if you have no other cards in your hand.


Not if it isn't an operations card (barring an as-yet-unstated change in Missile Envy's text).

Quote:
I think it is already clarified by Ananda.


Perhaps, but it would be better to be sure.

Quote:
It seems to me by pinning him on saying it is an Operation card, then you expect to use scoring cards as Operational cards (and thus avoid a scoring).


Not at all. Clearly scoring cards cannot be played except as scoring cards, as indicated in the rules.

Quote:
Or you want them to not be classified as Not an Operational Card and therefore immune from being grabbed by Missle Envy.


I don't "want" one resolution over another. Just a resolution. A clear one.

Quote:
Either ruling will violate the intent Ananda already stated.


No. It could be that Ananda's intent was to override the "they aren't operations cards" (and therefore they are modifiable by Containment). Or that they are operations cards, as Allen said, but are simply "always zero, unmodifiable" by nature.

Neither of these violates what Ananda has said.

Quote:
It seems the easier solution, and the one most inline with the intent of the conversation is that cards shouldn't define other cards as "operational cards." This allows the cards to be played as intended without arguing about the semantics.


Could be, but it's too late for that, since the cards are already printed referring to other cards as "operations cards".

The easiest solution would be to allow Ananda to clarify his statement, instead of filling the thread with second-guesses (which sometimes helps to foster later comments about the length of the thread).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Allen Doum
United States
Orange County
California
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
All of this is another tempest in a teapot.

The term "operations card", as used on Containment, refers to cards played for operations. It is not otherwise defined in the rules.

Perhaps it would have been better if Missile Envy had not used that term, saying just "card" instead, but all that illustrates is that the wording of the rules and cards is not up to your standards of perfection, which I believe has been demonstrated before.

I too wish that the wording in these rules, and all other game rules for that matter, were more exact. But IMO Ananda's response settled this matter, not confused it.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
L. Scott Johnson
United States
Columbia
South Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AllenDoum wrote:
All of this is another tempest in a teapot.

The term "operations card", as used on Containment, refers to cards played for operations. It is not otherwise defined in the rules.

Perhaps it would have been better if Missile Envy had not used that term, saying just "card" instead, but all that illustrates is that the wording of the rules and cards is not up to your standards of perfection, which I believe has been demonstrated before.

I too wish that the wording in these rules, and all other game rules for that matter, were more exact. But IMO Ananda's response settled this matter, not confused it.


Perfection isn't a matter of standards, mine or otherwise, so I'm not sure what the snide remark is supposed to accomplish.

Nor do I understand the defensiveness -- what, exactly, is wrong with asking for clarification? I didn't say Ananda's response confused the issue, I just said it remains open to interpretation.

Teapot or no.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
brian
United States
Cedar Lake
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
Rulemonger wrote:
I just said it remains open to interpretation.

Teapot or no.

And that's where we disagree with you.

Ananda wrote:
Allen's antipathy to "new procedures" is well taken. We did not intend for the ruling that scoring cards are not operations cards (and therefore are unaffected by Containment, Brezhnev Doctrine, etc) to affect how Missile Envy currently works, or to create a new procedure.


I think Allen's post 2nd from top on this thread summarized it perfectly:
1. Scoring cards are not use for Ops and cannot get a bonus from other cards that add ops points. (This was the previous ruling)
2. Scoring cards are cards that can be removed from your opponent's hand during Missile Envy. (I believe most everyone played that if you pulled ascoring card, you played it. If now you had to give back the scoring card, then you are creating a new procedure - and that was not the designers' intent.)

I have understood your point from the very beginning, I just don't understand the fuss. It seems pretty clear cut to me. bvasically "oops! We mean that Scoring cards aren't Operation cards but we didn't realize we worded it that way on Missile Envy. So Scoring cards aren't exempt from Missile Envy because then we would hav eto define a new procedure on how to return Scoring Cards to the non-phasing player and a re-draw by the phasing player."

My last question of "What is an Operations card?" was not finally being enlightened to your dilemma. It was saying - show me where an Operation card is defined! Show me where the statement above is contradicting some pre-conceived notion that you have. You seem to be hung up on the fact that there is something in there that needs further clarification when it does not.

I have no problem with you asking Ananda for further clarification except that, in this particualr case, I feel it was answered. I would much rather see him work on new designs or answer other unanswered questions than to repeat an answer until it is worded in such a way that you can sleep at night.

And furthermore, if you don't want a discussion, then don't post a question in the forums! If you wanted us to all mind our own business while you patiently wait for a response, then e-mail or PM Ananda and then post your question and his answer when it is all over. To post a question and then basically tell us not to discuss it is assinine.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
L. Scott Johnson
United States
Columbia
South Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
BrianMola wrote:
I just don't understand the fuss. It seems pretty clear cut to me. bvasically "oops! We mean that Scoring cards aren't Operation cards but we didn't realize we worded it that way on Missile Envy. So Scoring cards aren't exempt from Missile Envy because then we would hav eto define a new procedure on how to return Scoring Cards to the non-phasing player and a re-draw by the phasing player."


Yes. I understand your interpretation of Ananda's post.

I just don't understand the fuss.

Quote:
And furthermore, if you don't want a discussion, then don't post a question in the forums! If you wanted us to all mind our own business while you patiently wait for a response, then e-mail or PM Ananda and then post your question and his answer when it is all over. To post a question and then basically tell us not to discuss it is assinine.


Asking for an official public response (for reference) is best done in a public forum.

Constructive discussion, official or not, would be welcome, of course.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Philip Thomas
United Kingdom
London
London
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Erm, there couldn't be a re-draw by the phasing player. Well, there could, but it would only produce another Scoring card (or the one just drawn.

In order to draw a Scoring card with Missile Envy at all, you need there to be no non-Scoring cards in the target's hand. So re-drawing isn't an option. I suppose the procedure (in a hypothetical world in which Missile Envy can't draw scoring cards) would be the same as if some fool played Missile Envy on an opponent with no cards left (perhaps due to earlier Terrorism etc). I.e, nothing happens on his action phase and then his opponent has to spend the 2 Ops from Missile Envy- unless he has to play a Scoring Card instead because of the held scoring cards rule...

Of course, its all speculation at this point.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ananda Gupta
United States
Los Angeles
CA
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmb
Brian and Allen's interpretation is correct.
 
 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.