Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
12 Posts

Inis» Forums » Rules

Subject: Attack Maneuver - Iron Mine & Hills rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Bees Wax
Canada
Bradford
Ontario
flag msg tools
In the midst of a very tight game yesterday a situation came up that we could not definitively make a ruling for. Was hoping someone could clear it up.


Player One invades the Hills and performs an attack maneuver while also playing the Iron Mine card.

Player Two uses the Hills to ignore the attack.


For the sake of moving the game along we decided to let the Iron Mine effect go through, while allowing the other player to keep the Hills card. Based on the wording of the Hills card --"Ignore the attack"-- my thought was that the attack is nullified and Player Two would then continue the clash by performing the next maneuver.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Erik Webb
United States
Edmonds
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If the player wanted to use the hills(assuming there was not enough time given to react to the attack before Irn Mine was played), they could have, but the player with Iron Mine would have kept the card.

The hills would need to be played before the Iron Mine. The attack maneuver would be ignored, so there would be nothing to attach the Iron Mine to. Now if people are not waiting a significant amount of time that is a separate issue.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christian
France
Lyon
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yes, if the Hills card is played then the Iron Mine card cannot be played.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bees Wax
Canada
Bradford
Ontario
flag msg tools
So Hills only works if played before the Iron Mine. This is the general rule - the attacked player always has the first opportunity to play a Triskel card, followed by the attacker?

We'll try to hammer that point down when explaining the rules from now on, I see big potential for table talk feuding otherwise.


ps. The game is awesome, really digging the giant cards.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christian
France
Lyon
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In the Hills vs Iron Mine situation it's not really a matter of priority but of how the 2 effects interact.

Case 1
Attack maneuver is declared
Iron Mine is played (instead of losing a clan or a card do both)
Hills is played (attack has no effect)
-> Attack has no effect, both cards are discarded

Case 2
Attack maneuver is declared
Hills is played
-> Attack has no effect, no need to play Iron Mine, wouldn't have any effect.

So if you attack in the hills and you have Iron Mine you better let your opponent use hills and yourself use Iron Mine on a subsequent attack.

Hope that's clear.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Niall Smyth
Japan
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Kris wrote:
In the Hills vs Iron Mine situation it's not really a matter of priority but of how the 2 effects interact.

Case 1
Attack maneuver is declared
Iron Mine is played (instead of losing a clan or a card do both)
Hills is played (attack has no effect)
-> Attack has no effect, both cards are discarded

Case 2
Attack maneuver is declared
Hills is played
-> Attack has no effect, no need to play Iron Mine, wouldn't have any effect.

So if you attack in the hills and you have Iron Mine you better let your opponent use hills and yourself use Iron Mine on a subsequent attack.

Hope that's clear.


That's logical, but in play how do you work things? When I played recently, we had a lot of takebacks caused by timing issues, and it was a problem.

I decided that next time I would make sure we said 'Done' after we were finished playing Triskel cards, but with this example that wouldn't be sufficient.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Olli Juhala
Finland
Turku
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
poshniallo wrote:
Kris wrote:
In the Hills vs Iron Mine situation it's not really a matter of priority but of how the 2 effects interact.

Case 1
Attack maneuver is declared
Iron Mine is played (instead of losing a clan or a card do both)
Hills is played (attack has no effect)
-> Attack has no effect, both cards are discarded

Case 2
Attack maneuver is declared
Hills is played
-> Attack has no effect, no need to play Iron Mine, wouldn't have any effect.

So if you attack in the hills and you have Iron Mine you better let your opponent use hills and yourself use Iron Mine on a subsequent attack.

Hope that's clear.


That's logical, but in play how do you work things? When I played recently, we had a lot of takebacks caused by timing issues, and it was a problem.

I decided that next time I would make sure we said 'Done' after we were finished playing Triskel cards, but with this example that wouldn't be sufficient.


I don't see why not, there's a specific moment in the sequence for the cards to be played so both players should indicate they won't play the card at that moment. You know who has the cards, so it should not become as a surprise for the Iron Mine owner if they are countered with the Hills.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Niall Smyth
Japan
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shader10 wrote:
poshniallo wrote:
Kris wrote:
In the Hills vs Iron Mine situation it's not really a matter of priority but of how the 2 effects interact.

Case 1
Attack maneuver is declared
Iron Mine is played (instead of losing a clan or a card do both)
Hills is played (attack has no effect)
-> Attack has no effect, both cards are discarded

Case 2
Attack maneuver is declared
Hills is played
-> Attack has no effect, no need to play Iron Mine, wouldn't have any effect.

So if you attack in the hills and you have Iron Mine you better let your opponent use hills and yourself use Iron Mine on a subsequent attack.

Hope that's clear.


That's logical, but in play how do you work things? When I played recently, we had a lot of takebacks caused by timing issues, and it was a problem.

I decided that next time I would make sure we said 'Done' after we were finished playing Triskel cards, but with this example that wouldn't be sufficient.


I don't see why not, there's a specific moment in the sequence for the cards to be played so both players should indicate they won't play the card at that moment. You know who has the cards, so it should not become as a surprise for the Iron Mine owner if they are countered with the Hills.


Well, the attacker plays Iron Mines, the defender plays Hills. Then the attacker has to say 'Oh OK I don't play Iron Mines.'

But the defender (who may be expecting to fight for multiple maneuvers, with the same player opponent) says 'well that's why I played Hills! Otherwise I would have saved it!'

That's not an ideal situation at all. And that's just one example. With the Epic cards, there are countless more.

If there is a simple order or priority timing breakdown, it all works fine. If it's about 'interaction' then I don't understand.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Niall Smyth
Japan
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Perhaps I'm just not understanding the clarification from Christian?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
JermEx Machina
msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Card laid is a card played. There is no takesies-backsies.

I'm confused about your confusion.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christian
France
Lyon
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ok,I get it.

If you play a card, you don't have the right to take it back if plans don't go your way.
Taking back the Iron Mine if your opponent plays hills is not allowed.

A clearer example, if I play New Alliance and you play Geis, I cannot take back my card! Etc, there are many examples.

EDIT: spelling
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Olli Juhala
Finland
Turku
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
poshniallo wrote:
Perhaps I'm just not understanding the clarification from Christian?


See Kris below: Like with Geis, if you play a card knowing it can be countered and wasted, you should not be able to take the card back. It's even more straightforward, since you *know* who has the Iron MIne and who has the Hills.
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.