Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
12 Posts

Pursuit of Glory» Forums » Rules

Subject: New Save Tiflis Question rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Tom Slizewski
United States
Aiken
South Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Can't see that this has been addressed.

Save Tiflis is played and there's a Ru corps in Teheran. Kazvin is enemy occupied so can't get closer that way. Does the Ru corps have to retreat to E. Persia or does it stay put?

The underlying question is how regions are counted for "closer to Tiflis." Is a region one space, or is it a full movement turns worth of spaces for these purposes?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brad Stock
United States
Elsah
Illinois
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't think the unit should retreat EAST, since that is farther away. Logically, anyway. I haven't counted actual spaces. But the idea is this: IF a unit can get closer geographically to Tiflis, it should. If not, there is no penalty. Going east would run contrary to the basic logic, so don't worry about the details -- just go with the spirit of the idea.

Does that work?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom Slizewski
United States
Aiken
South Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm fully behind you on going with the spirit of rules rather than rules-lawyering but at times you'll play with people who want definitive answers as the spirit of the rules can often be interpreted two very different ways.

This is a good example. While East Persia is further away from Teheran by land movement a case could be made that certain locations are closer "as the crow flies" over the Caspian since East Persia is not exactly defined.

The easy fix for this would be to say that for this card units never retreat if in (already the rule) or into regions (I can't see where the second part applies except for this situation.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Borat Sagdiyev
Spain
Madrid
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
But, going with the spirit of the rule, shouldn't the Russian unit retreat west and get eliminated if running into an enemy unit?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom Slizewski
United States
Aiken
South Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Can't agree with Borat's interpretation of the rules' spirit. A general call by HQ to fall back on a location wouldn't cause units to eliminate themselves if their path is blocked. They're semi-rational people after all, not lemmings.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Borat Sagdiyev
Spain
Madrid
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, precisely because they are semi-rational people they might surrender to the enemy if their retreat was cut by the enemy instead of staying on their own in a position that their high command is ordered them to abandon.

In any case, I wasn't talking about the simulational aspect of the rule but the rule itself. If the Russians can avoid fulfilling what Save Tiflis requires them to do so easily I think the card becomes kind of superfluous.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Philip Thomas
United Kingdom
London
London
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
btw, shouldn't you be calling yourself Bruno now? Borat was so 2006.



(reference to promotional posters of new film, don't know if it has reached Spain yet).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom Slizewski
United States
Aiken
South Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The card states that if they can't legally make the move/retreat (due to overstacking etc.), they can ignore it. The situation wasn't dire for the units involved, rather for the rear area command who thought they were about to be knee-deep in Turks.

If a unit surrendered every time it couldn't meet an order from higher command, WW 2 would of been much shorter.

Borat/Bruno joke is lame so entirely appropriate given the source material.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brad Stock
United States
Elsah
Illinois
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
The unit is Teheran is NOT required to retreat if it would be harmed -- that is the existing rule.

I am pretty sure East Persia is farther away from Tiflis, so wouldn't be required to retreat there either (that would be an "advance").
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Borat Sagdiyev
Spain
Madrid
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
IQTom wrote:
The card states that if they can't legally make the move/retreat (due to overstacking etc.), they can ignore it. The situation wasn't dire for the units involved, rather for the rear area command who thought they were about to be knee-deep in Turks.


That sounds logical. I guess it is open to interpretation.

Quote:
If a unit surrendered every time it couldn't meet an order from higher command, WW 2 would of been much shorter.


Well, the military history of WW2 is plenty with units that surrendered to the enemy when not being able to find a retreat path.

But that has very little to do with this thread.cool
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Yan P.
Canada
Calgary
Alberta
flag msg tools
What happens if Kazvin is open? Counting spaces, going to East Persia is "closest" to Tiflis, but of course one unit could get to Tiflis much faster by moving west than east.

Can I get a definitive answer?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Philip Thomas
United Kingdom
London
London
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Save Tiflis does not force retreat along green lines. If a unit is in Teheran and Kasvin is open, it must retreat to Kasvin.
3 
 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.