Recommend
3 
 Thumb up
 Hide
7 Posts

Here I Stand» Forums » Rules

Subject: War Winner VP for Foreign War? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Chester
United States
Temple
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I apologize if I missed the answer elsewhere, but I don't see it in the FAQ. I assume the only negative for being in a foreign war is that you have units tied up. If a power successfully eliminates the enemy units, do they receive a War Winner VP? (I assume no, or it would have said to, but thought I'd ask. There seems very little incentive to attack.)
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Rubin
United States
Trenton
New Jersey
flag msg tools
badge
"It may be doubted whether so small a number of men ever employed so short a space of time with greater or more lasting effects upon the history of the world.” — Sir George Otto Trevelyan on the Battles of Trenton and Princeton
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
No War Winner VP is awarded. The only reward is the return of any surviving units, so it makes no sense to prosecute the war except if it you need more units and it is more efficient than building them (or you cannot build them). And leaving the War going has the further advantage of keeping the card out of the draw deck.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Seoul
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
It seems to me that there is room for a house rule that causes something bad to happen if the "fight foreign war" action isn't used at least once per turn. Just having a bunch of units off map sitting around seems a bit weak to me.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt Davis
United States
New Concord
Ohio
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't think it needs it. The sudden jolt of losing 4 guys off the map is pretty harsh - it doesn't need to be worse.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Johns
United States
Unspecified
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Nordican wrote:
It seems to me that there is room for a house rule that causes something bad to happen if the "fight foreign war" action isn't used at least once per turn. Just having a bunch of units off map sitting around seems a bit weak to me.


I agree. I think that it should be something like -1VP per full turn that elapses without an attack or something like that.


coolpapa wrote:
I don't think it needs it. The sudden jolt of losing 4 guys off the map is pretty harsh - it doesn't need to be worse.


IMO it's more than useless. For Turkey that's ONE counter for one war and 2 counters for the other one and the English war. Too easy by half. Besides, as stated above there's even less incentive to attack, because if you do the doggone card goes back in the deck.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Philip Thomas
United Kingdom
London
London
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hmm. Maybe the target loses a VP the turn after the Foreign war is played and gains a VP when the war is over? Losing a VP every turn is harsh but currently it is easy to ignore them.

But they shouldn't generate War Winner Vps, since the Ottoman's bonus would be too good then.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Forster
United States
Pleasant Prairie
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
badge
"When playing a game, the goal is to win, but it is the goal that is important, not the winning" - Dr. Reiner Knizia
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This has been extensively discussed before:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/3801112

Scroll down to the fourth or fifth message, where the thread goes off-topic into a discussion of how to create incentives to fight foreign wars. There a lot of possible ways to tinker with it.
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.