Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
7 Posts

Star Trek: Fleet Captains» Forums » Rules

Subject: Influence Mission: Morale Blow? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Christopher Beller
United States
Michigan
flag msg tools
mb
Here is the card text:

"Remove all enemy Control Tokens from one location to the role of location tiles closest to your opponent's Command Post. If your opponent does not control any locations here you cannot complete the mission."

How do I determine where the locations are to complete this mission?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Barry Miller
United States
Saint Charles
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

Well, assuming that when you typed "role", it was a typo, as the card actually says, "row". If that be the case, then the best answer I have is it's the same as saying the three tiles adjacent to your opponent's Command Post. That would be the row closest to a Command Post.



Let's look at Kevin Burkhardsmeier's image below (I hope he doesn't mind if we use it here):



Those three tiles that are adjacent to the Klingon Command Post, in this picture, are what I would consider the "row of Location Tiles closest" to the command post.

So this Mission Card instructs you to remove all enemy Control Tokens from one of those three locations! But why the card doesn't more simply say, "Adjacent to" instead of "row of tiles closest to" leaves me scratching my head, unless I'm wrong. And if I am, I hope someone will jump in to correct me!

(Note: The following is all conjecture):
And also note that the Control Tokens you remove don't necessarily have to belong to the opponent who owns that Command Post! This is the reason for the last sentence of the card, which would otherwise be nonsensical. For instance, in a three player game using the Romulan expansion, opponent "A" may own the command post, but opponent "B" may control one of the locations adjacent to it. Well, to satisfy this mission, if you're going to remove opponent "B"'s tokens, then opponent "A" must control one of the other two locations. Again, this is the purpose of the last sentence of the mission objective, IMHO.


2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave, or "Phineas" or "Tolstoy" or,
United States
Mount Holly (Gastonia / Charlotte)
North Carolina
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I would say that the Command Post, and the Tokens to be removed from a Location nearest to it, need to belong to the same opponent.

Barry is correct that the 3 hexes closest to the Command Post are where the opponent's Tokens need to be removed from. (And yeah, "adjacent to" would be better wording on the card.) Because losing control of a hex right next to your Command Post would be a "Blow to Morale," that is why I think that both the Tokens and the Command Post need to belong to the same opponent.

The reason for the last sentence is simply to make clear that if none of your opponents have their Tokens in any hex nearest their Command Post, you cannot complete this Mission, and might as well cycle it out.

Nice use of pics, by the way!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Barry Miller
United States
Saint Charles
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

Hoya wrote:
The reason for the last sentence is simply to make clear that if none of your opponents have their Tokens in any hex nearest their Command Post, you cannot complete this Mission, and might as well cycle it out.

OK, I can easily agree with the case you're making. Sounds good to me. But if this be the case, then the last sentence is 100% redundant, isn't it? And therefor, nonsensical? Obviously, if your opponent doesn't have any control tokens on any of the three adjacent tiles, there's no possible way you van accomplish the mission. So why state the innate and intuitive obvious?

OK.. I'm thinking it through a little more... putting myself in the shoes of an obnoxious extreme rules lawyer who likes playing on the edge of rulings... I suppose that a player could try to claim the Mission as a success on an empty tile by saying, "They [control tokens] are Removed, aren't they?"

But no... sorry... can't go there. Even that's too much to expect from anybody. I mean, how can anyone misconstrue or argue the word, "remove"?

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave, or "Phineas" or "Tolstoy" or,
United States
Mount Holly (Gastonia / Charlotte)
North Carolina
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I can't really say why that last sentence is there. It does seem unneeded. I just can't read it any other way, I guess. Maybe it was one of the first Mission ideas they came up with, and thought they better put that wording in there to avoid confusion? Search me!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Barry Miller
United States
Saint Charles
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

Yeah, agreed.

As far as I could reason, the only time it would make sense is in a three or four faction game, hence my interpretation in my first reply. I'm "wishfully" thinking that WizKids foresaw the expansions when they wrote this card. I'll modify my initial reply to state that my take is conjecture only.

Otherwise, the 2nd sentence is exactly as you surmise.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Beller
United States
Michigan
flag msg tools
mb
Thanks for the replies!

I was thinking that the locations were the 3 locations right next to the enemy command post, but wasn't sure that those 3 locations would have been considered a "row".
1 
 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.