Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
16 Posts

Star Trek: Ascendancy» Forums » Rules

Subject: Doubts Trade agreement rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Marco Marani
Italy
Imola
ITALY
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
How exactly does a trade agreement work?
How do you revoke? (only with betrayal?)

Is it possible to have some examples to see all the possible cases?


Thank
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mattias Elfström
Sweden
Unspecified
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If you play base game rules: trade agreements can be revoked at any time.

If you play unrestricted trade routes (recommended): you can only revoke trade agreements on your turn.

You can give and receive agreements if you have adjacent ships or control nodes.

You can only return trade agreements if you betray the one who gave you the agreement.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Maldus Alver

Washington
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
It is posts like this I wish GF9 would put an F.A.Q. out.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marco Marani
Italy
Imola
ITALY
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Mattias wrote:
If you play base game rules: trade agreements can be revoked at any time.


"any time" : so can i revoke also when i'm not in my turn?
Right?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Charles Boyung
United States
Brookfield
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Marinealver wrote:
It is posts like this I wish GF9 would put an F.A.Q. out.


It's posts like this that make me wish people actually read the rules.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mattias Elfström
Sweden
Unspecified
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
0b1_Ita wrote:
Mattias wrote:
If you play base game rules: trade agreements can be revoked at any time.


"any time" : so can i revoke also when i'm not in my turn?
Right?

Any time means any time, so yes.

The advanced rule is better for the game in my opinion.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Maldus Alver

Washington
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
motoyugota wrote:
Marinealver wrote:
It is posts like this I wish GF9 would put an F.A.Q. out.


It's posts like this that make me wish people actually read the rules.

You cannot argue that the single half-page (first part of page 6 to be exact) with a little blurb on optional rules does not leave things to question.
Yes you have to read the rules, not once or twice but almost several times to get trade into perspective and that is not good rule writing. Nuff said.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Charles Boyung
United States
Brookfield
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Marinealver wrote:
motoyugota wrote:
Marinealver wrote:
It is posts like this I wish GF9 would put an F.A.Q. out.


It's posts like this that make me wish people actually read the rules.

You cannot argue that the single half-page (first part of page 6 to be exact) with a little blurb on optional rules does not leave things to question.
Yes you have to read the rules, not once or twice but almost several times to get trade into perspective and that is not good rule writing. Nuff said.


Sorry, but you're wrong. It's very clear - especially revoking them. How is this not clear?

Quote:

Easily made, easily broken: you can revoke any of your Trade Agreements at any time, for any reason. However to give back a rival's Trade Agreement you hold, you'll have to betray them.


And then the VERY NEXT section is called "BETRAYAL" which covers exactly what it means to betray someone.

Perfectly clear.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lou Lessing
United States
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
They really made these rules quite complicated. In some places for almost no reason.

-To give one of your trade agreements to another player who doesn't already hold one of your trade agreements, you need to have a plastic figure (a ship, fleet, or control node) in a sector adjacent to a sector containing one of the other player's plastic figures.

(In spite of the name trade agreement, there is no requirement that you exchange one of your trade agreements with one of theirs. One-sided trades are perfectly legal.)

-To upgrade or downgrade one of your trade agreements held by another player to a different one of your trade agreements, you don't need adjacency. You can swap out your trade agreements held by other players with your unused trade agreements freely.

-To revoke one your trade agreements held by another player, you don't need adjacency either. You can revoke freely any time you like.

-To return one of another player's trade agreements that you hold, without them deciding to revoke it, you'll need to betray them. When you fight a space battle against a trade partner's ships or invade a planet they control, that's a betrayal, and you have to return their trade agreement. (Hegemonizing their planets isn't mentioned as being a betrayal so presumably it isn't one.)

(Note that there is essentially no circumstance in the entire game where you would want to return another player's trade agreement. Holding it benefits you exclusively. So betrayal's purely a flavor rule.)

-It is important to note that you can't revoke or swap out an exhausted trade agreement.

-And, of course, it is important to note that a player can only have one trade agreement from a given rival at any time (No "I'll give you a 1 and a 2 for your 3" type trades.)

-Unrestricted Trade Routes is a variant rule that adds an additional restriction on when you can revoke trade agreements. With Unrestricted Trade Routes, you can only revoke Trade Agreements on your turn. (Presumably you can still upgrade and downgrade freely.)


That's all the rules for exchanging trade agreements. As for what they do:

-During resource generation, you collect the resources depicted on other player's unexhausted trade agreements that you hold. You never collect resources for your own trade agreements.

-If you hold another player's Trade Agreement (even if it's exhausted) you're "at peace" with that player. Being "at peace" with a player means you can ask them permission to move past their ships or into their space. If they deny permission your move ends there.

-Unrestricted Trade Routes modifies that rule as well. With Unrestricted Trade Routes, you don't have to ask permission. You can always move through peaceful rival ships.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mattias Elfström
Sweden
Unspecified
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Very well put.

I don't agree about exhausted trade agreements though. By definition, exhausted cards have no effect, so you can't be at peace when one is exhausted (which begs the question: can you get another agreement from the same player if the first is exhausted?).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lou Lessing
United States
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If being At Peace were an effect of the card I think I'd agree with that interpretation. Exhausted cards "can't be used" which I believe turns turns off any text or symbols on that card and any special abilities that come from that card.

But (at least as I understand it) exhausted cards still don't stop existing, stop being cards, or lose their basic traits. Holding an exhausted Federation trade agreement still counts as holding a Federation trade agreement. It doesn't do anything because it's exhausted, but it's still a trade agreement, it's still in your possession, it's still owned by the Federation.

This means that the restriction of one trade agreement per rival can't be bypassed by making a second trade while the first one is exhausted. You can't give someone who holds one of your exhausted TAs another TA, because they already hold one of your TAs.

Likewise, this means that you're still "at peace" if you hold an exhausted trade agreement with another player. This is because "At Peace" is a game rule that says you're at peace if you hold another player's TA -- it isn't a rule on the TA cards that says "you are at peace with [the faction who gave you this TA]" which would be automatically voided by exhausting the TA. In order to work the way you're saying, I'm pretty sure "at peace" would have to specifically say that you have to hold an unexhausted trade agreement.






The rulebook does not say that exhausted cards do nothing, or that exhausted Trade Agreements do nothing. The glossary says that exhausted cards and tokens "can't be used," which is very vague (I don't think "used" has any specific meaning in ST:A.) The rules specific to exhausted TAs say that they don't generate resources and can't be exchanged or revoked. It is my belief that these should be understood to be the only differences between exhausted and unexhausted trade agreements. I think "can't be used" is just a very general shorthand to remind you that in general exhausted things are non-functioning. I don't think it means that exhausted things do absolutely nothing.

Now, because that exhausted rule's quite vague, perhaps I should not claim perfect authority. This is my interpretation. But, if exhausted trade agreements just ceased to exist entirely, that definitely causes some problems. You could double-up on trade agreements, forming a new one on top of an exhausted one. More minorly, it also allows Trade Agreements to sneak past effects that break them, like Writ of Accountability, or potentially even the elimination of the player whose TA it is. (Your TAs go away when you're eliminated, right? I'm not making that up?) In an extreme reading, it might even break the mechanism that refreshes exhausted cards -- if they really had no effect on the game at all, the refresh phase wouldn't be able to "see" them to refresh them.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mattias Elfström
Sweden
Unspecified
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Your arguements are very good.

I have two counter arguements (one fairly weak, but interesting):

My best arguement has to do with how the game works and what is interesting from a game perspective. If you allow the exhausting of TAs to break the peace you have a way to stop players from cooperating. Let's say you are the Ferengi and you face two opponents that are trying to attack you one after the other. By using your Whisper Your Way to Success advancement, you can exhaust their TAs and stop them from flying past each other.

The weaker arguement has to do with another GF9 game that uses the same mechanism and terminology. In their Spartacus game an exhausted card "may not be used in any way – they [the exhausted cards] are effectively out of the game until they are refreshed".

I realise the rules of one game of course have no bearing on another, but in this case I'll use this arguement as an indication of design intent.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Charles Boyung
United States
Brookfield
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Mattias wrote:
Your arguements are very good.

I have two counter arguements (one fairly weak, but interesting):

My best arguement has to do with how the game works and what is interesting from a game perspective. If you allow the exhausting of TAs to break the peace you have a way to stop players from cooperating. Let's say you are the Ferengi and you face two opponents that are trying to attack you one after the other. By using your Whisper Your Way to Success advancement, you can exhaust their TAs and stop them from flying past each other.

The weaker arguement has to do with another GF9 game that uses the same mechanism and terminology. In their Spartacus game an exhausted card "may not be used in any way – they [the exhausted cards] are effectively out of the game until they are refreshed".

I realise the rules of one game of course have no bearing on another, but in this case I'll use this arguement as an indication of design intent.


I would argue that his reasonings are a much stronger case for design intent than yours here. The intent is definitely that your rival can never have two of your trade agreements, but if it were to be interpreted the way you state, then that would be very easy to have happen, especially since all trade agreements Romulans receive start out exhausted.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mattias Elfström
Sweden
Unspecified
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'll throw in my thematic arguements then: In the example above isn't it very thematic that the Ferengi can sow suspicions among trade partners? And also why would the Romulan drawback be named "suspicious" if they immediately became peaceful but refused to receive trade goods?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
William Hardy
United States
Idaho
flag msg tools
I just wanted to thank Lou for the best summary of TAs that I've seen yet, and the number of times this has been addressed in the fora is testimony to how confusing the RAW really are. For example, to a newbie, carefully reading the rules for the first time, Betrayal seems like something important, but is actually totally meaningless. GF-9's rules really need the parenthetical explanations that Lou provided.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lou Lessing
United States
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
whardy wrote:
I just wanted to thank Lou for the best summary of TAs that I've seen yet, and the number of times this has been addressed in the fora is testimony to how confusing the RAW really are. For example, to a newbie, carefully reading the rules for the first time, Betrayal seems like something important, but is actually totally meaningless. GF-9's rules really need the parenthetical explanations that Lou provided.


modest

(In all seriousness: the RAW are real bad. Mattias' comprehensive rules are much better.)
2 
 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.