Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
6 Posts

1936: Guerra Civil» Forums » Rules

Subject: Generalissimo and other questions rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Choubi Gogs
France
flag msg tools
badge
My avatar is from the chilren's game Monster Mash
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I finally got to play this game and I have a few questions:

1) If I want to elect a leader that is mobilized, do I need to desmobilize him before or not?

I see a leader is considered as in the rearguard but it diesn't say if he needed to be there in the first place.

It could matter as, if I have a militares nacionales character with leadership mobilized. I name him as leader. I suppose that if he has been demobilized first, he won't be able to use his mando and his bonus for combat this turn (demobilized = 1 action, participating = a second military action...). If he doesn't need to be demobilized, I guess he could still use his mando in this turn too.

So what's the case?

2) Rules often talk about unit type (land, water or air), whether for the objectives they can be mobilized to, against what kind of army they can defend...

I do not have one single card that is of something else than land units. Is this normal?


3) After declaring combat, I can do other actions before the combat takes place (just once both players have passed right?). Can I do other actions after the combat has taken place?


4) I'm not sure I got the turn sequence right (at least for the principal phase):

Nationalists are the active side.

Nationalists play a card / use a card / name a leader ...

-Republicans can respond by playing a management card or using a card in play (no mobilizing).

Nationalists play a card / use ....

-Republicans respond

Nationalists act

-Republicans choose not to respond

Nationalists act

-Republicans respond this time...

Nationalists pass

-Republicans can't do anything...

Is that it?

5) I didn't see anywhere that active side was changed from turn to turn but I suspect this is the case, right?

6) Armies don't count for the conditions required to name a leader right?


I think I know answers to questions 2 through 6... But hey, while I'm at it...

Thanks

(loved the game by the way, but my girlfriend has a little problem understanding how the fighting works and she doesn't speak spanish so she's having a hard time understanding all her cards...)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Arturo García

Madrid
msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi Choubi,

1) First of all, the only leader where your question makes sense is -as you suggest in your topic- the Generalísimo one because the rest of possible leaders are non-military ones, and therefore would not be abled to be mobilized.

My first reaction to your question is that he would need to be in the rearguard to be appointed leader. Mobilized he could not be appointed leader. But reading the rules, it doesn't specifically say so, so I'll have to give it a thought, because there are consecuences, as you point out.

2) Unfortunately yes. I designed the game with more than 1000 cards, and ir order to make it "publishable", I had to take some things out. But I decided to leave the icons for two reasons:
- To show I had worked on these concepts
- To be on the safe side regarding possible expansions

And, actually in Alea magazine, a small air-focused expansion is on the way, featuring the Guernica objective and eight air military units.

In the published game you can ignore the little brown squares and all references to air and naval units. In the future, when mixing air units from the Alea expansion, they will have to be taken into account.

3) Right. The sequence is: you declare combat, your opponent has the right to reply. Now combat is entered. Before actually declaring attacking groups, there's a "strategy" phase where you can do different actions, and it's over when you both pass. But not all actions can be done once combat has begun: no more playing characters or armies, no activation of objectives, no mobilizing/demobilizing, no leader appointing.

4) Yes, I think you got it right. The idea is: alternate actions, one for each side and all are "atomic". Contrary to Magic, where actions go to a pool that will be solved in reversed order, here it's pretty straight forward. Every action is resolved before moving to the next one.

Suggestion: if you pass, you don't need to explicitly say so. The most practical approach for the active player is to keep doing actions, one by one, and the other player will have the chance of speaking his mind after each of them. Replying is a right you always have, but which you will seldom use. But, when you do use it, it's probably important.

5) Yes, that's the case. I think it's mentioned in page 16: "Cada turno es un bando el que lleva la iniciativa" / "El bando activo es aquel que tiene el turno y es el que lleva la iniciativa".

6) No, they don't. Therefore, if you want a leader, you need to have characters. A deck built with just armies will have therefore some weakness

I'm glad you liked the game kiss

As for understanding combat, it may seem tricky (I won't elaborate here, maybe in another post), but it's really simple. Maybe in the case of artillery involved it can get a little bit more confusing. In any case, you can see examples of and issues around combat in the forum of website of the game. It's in Spanish, but if I'm not mistaken you understand the language.

Arturo
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Choubi Gogs
France
flag msg tools
badge
My avatar is from the chilren's game Monster Mash
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for your answers,

I had it right yesterday, I leave you now, I'm off to play another game!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Choubi Gogs
France
flag msg tools
badge
My avatar is from the chilren's game Monster Mash
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I have two more questions for you that arose in last night's game:

1) I'm the active player, there are no political objectives activated.
I want to use one card that has an obligated effect that makes me lose one diplomacy (card n°113)

Can I use this effect, even though I cannot lose diplomacy?

2) General Davila, card 216:
Intervencion: 1 ejercito sin mando de su grupo se separa y ataca en solitario. Ese ejercito se considera ne defendido.

As I understand, I made a group of armies with 2 armies and General Davila, Only one army has the bonus. If I pay for the intervention, the other card can finally go alone and attack alone undefended.

Can I have one character in a group and force him not to give his bonus (no army in his mando)?

And if yes, can I therefore, put just one army in the same group without the mando and detach him, leaving the character alone...?

(Ok, now that I'm asking the question it seems obvious that no, but I don't know why, it didn't seem this obvious last night...)

Again, thanks for the answer!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Javi Hernández
Spain
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

Salut Choubi,

Waiting for Arturo to answer I believe I can help you with your first question.

Sure you can use this effect, the problem is you can lose diplomacy. This is the only circumstance under which the pasive player can activate an objective (it is only possible with political objetives) owing to your lost of diplomacy for using the effect of the card.

As for the second one, I think no military character can stand alone in combat.

À la prochaine, bonne chance!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Arturo García

Madrid
msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks, Javi, for a first reply, I'll go into some more depth now,

Choubi wrote:

1) I'm the active player, there are no political objectives activated.
I want to use one card that has an obligated effect that makes me lose one diplomacy (card n°113)

Can I use this effect, even though I cannot lose diplomacy?


The golden rules for this are:
- If you WIN diplomacy and there's nowhere to spend it, you waste it.
- If you LOSE diplomacy and there's nowhere to -spend it, the other player has the right to activate in that moment any political objective, even if
* it's not his turn
* he doesn't fulfill the activation condition
There has to be room for it, though. If two political objectives are set to be resolved for the end of the turn and you do something that would make you lose diplomacy, there'd be nowhere to apply that loss, but no other objective would have room to be activated.

The idea with diplomacy is that it's to a great extend a war of image at an international level. If you do something nasty (Furor, ...) but there is no-one around to see it, you get away with it. Makes sense, I think.

But there are some scenarios where the other player activating an objective could be a bit inconvenient: when he activates one with a number of victory points that don't add up well to the ones you have (for example, you need 8 more victory points and activates one of 7) or when he activates an objective and starts to gain points on it from this same turn instead of having to wait until the next one.

If the other player just activates the objective he was going to activate on his next turn anyway, and doesn't start to move the diplomacy marker on it until then, you have gotten away with your diplomacy loss.

Choubi wrote:

2) General Davila, card 216:
Intervencion: 1 ejercito sin mando de su grupo se separa y ataca en solitario. Ese ejercito se considera ne defendido.

As I understand, I made a group of armies with 2 armies and General Davila, Only one army has the bonus. If I pay for the intervention, the other card can finally go alone and attack alone undefended.

Can I have one character in a group and force him not to give his bonus (no army in his mando)?

And if yes, can I therefore, put just one army in the same group without the mando and detach him, leaving the character alone...?


You understand correctly what his intervention is. It's a way to make an army unstopable and perhaps doing the last damage you need to win an objective. However, the group where G Dávila stays, will become weaker after you dettach that army. Which you can do after the defending player has stablished how to defend, so you can calculate if it's worth it.

As to your question, a character may participate in combat only with at least an army under his wing. That his, giving it a bonus and grouping with it. Characters capable of giving their bonus to more than one army may have all but one of them in different groups and still give them his bonus, if they have Discipline. But at least one will have to stay with the character.

That's why G Dávila specifies an army without command, to prevent that situation from happening (a character in combat with no armies under his command) and why management cards cannot be played in combat once attacking groups have been formed.

Arturo
 
 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.