Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
2 Posts

Battle for Baghdad» Forums » Rules

Subject: Some more questions arose in our latest game rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Jordi Cairol
Australia
Brisbane
QLD
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Not usual situations but possible:

1)At the end of the coalition phase three US units occupy the Green Zone, so they control it and benefit from fortification protection.
At the movement step of the action phase of the Jihadists, these cause a defection converting all three US units into Jihadists. Although it is supposed that they are the same three units changing sides, Jihadists cannot claim the fortification protection, as they did not control the Green Zone at the end of the coalition phase. Moreover, the US move after the Jihadists and some US troops enter the Green Zone to fight the three Jihadists there. The US did control the Green Zone at the end of the coalition phase but I suppose they cannot claim fort protection. In our game both players tried to claim the benefits of the Green Zone. Which one is right in terms of fortification bonus?
a) Jihadists, as the troops are "the same" that controled the Green Zone at the end of the coalition phase. (Same boots although changing allegiance)
b) US, as the rules say that the bonus of the Green Zone goes to the faction that controls it at the end of the coalition phase and this was the US.
c) none of them (Jihadists, as a faction did not control the Green Zone at the end of the coalition phase, and the US troops, although retaining control at the end of the coalition phase, did not have a single friendly troop when they moved there)
d) other

I would say c.

2) An InfoWar was played after a combat, thus doubling PPs. Then the loosing faction played Collateral Damage to gain PPs.

a) Loosing side gains double de PPs caused for loses and both cards are discarded.
b) Loosing side gains the basic PPs. The InfoWar is not applicable as it was played by the winning side. The wining side gets InfoWar back to hand.
c) other

I would say a.

3) Does a negated card come back to playing side's hand? For instance an InfoWar that negates another InfoWar, an Intelligence that negates another Intelligence or Command Control that negates any card.

a) No, in any case
b) Yes, always
c) it all depends on the situation created

I would say a but with an exception c for combat. In our game one player played the Command Control to negate the Attacking card in a combat. What happens with the attacking card?

a) as it is negated, its effects are nullified for this combat and returns hands whatever the result of the combat is.
b) card is nullified but played, so discarded if in the loosing side or returning hands if in the winning side (or discarded at will of the winner).

I would say b here

Of course I'm posting this because all of the choices here explained were discused and backed with arguments by players in our last game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jon Compton
United States
La Plata
Maryland
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Peacekeepers preventing through movement
A question arose about whether the presence of peacekeeping NGO units forced units from another faction to stop their move when they entered an area.

NGO units in a Zone force non-NGO units to stop when entering that Zone.

IED/Artillery card
The card states: The moving Faction loses one unit.
The card does not specify that the unit lost has to be from the Moving stack.

The unit lost must be from the moving stack.

NGO Peacekeeping: no need for declarations
We played that NGOs are just assumed to be peacekeeping until they decide to attack.

The Peacekeeping capability of NGO units operates at all times for all NGO units. The basic effects of Peacekeeping are that NGO units do not challenge Control of a Zone they occupy — ever — and that NGO units are not forced to engage, or be engaged by, hostile units occupying the same Zone in Combat. If Combat does transpire, the NGO units are still Peacekeeping — they simply weren’t required by the rules to shoot.

NGO building Infrastructure
We played that the only time an NGO would be able to build Infrastructure was if they were alone in a Zone at the start of their Action Phase.

The NGO player may Spawn Infrastructure in any Airport Zone regardless of Control, or any Zone the NGO player Controls and occupies with at least on Security unit. Control need only be in place at the time of Spawning, so for normal Spawning during the Recruit Step, you are correct.

At the end of the coalition phase three US units occupy the Green Zone, so they control it and benefit from fortification protection.

At the movement step of the Jihadist action phase, the Jihadist player plays two cards to force a Defection. This effect is used to convert all three US units into Jihadists. Although it is supposed that they are the same three units changing sides, Jihadists cannot claim the fortification protection, as they did not control the Green Zone at the end of the coalition phase. Moreover, the US move after the Jihadists and some US troops enter the Green Zone to fight the three Jihadists there. The US did control the Green Zone at the end of the coalition phase but I suppose they cannot claim fort protection. In our game both players tried to claim the benefits of the Green Zone. Which one is right in terms of fortification bonus?
a) Jihadists, as the troops are "the same" that controled the Green Zone at the end of the coalition phase. (Same boots although changing allegiance)
b) US, as the rules say that the bonus of the Green Zone goes to the faction that controls it at the end of the coalition phase and this was the US.
c) none of them (Jihadists, as a faction did not control the Green Zone at the end of the coalition phase, and the US troops, although retaining control at the end of the coalition phase, did not have a single friendly troop when they moved there)
d) other

First, never leave three units in the Green Zone. Leave four.

Second, unfortunately, “b” is correct because it best aligns with the literal interpretation of the rules. The US Faction units entering the Green Zone later in the turn would gain the defensive bonus, and the Jihadist units would not.

This is actually easy to imagine if you think about how the card play would have to work. US units would not pick up Korans and join the Jihadist cause. They would be fooled into thinking that Jihadist forces are actually friendly locals of some kind, and US command is misled into thinking some of the security and SWET responsibility should be offloaded onto these units. These units would not actually take over US bases, artillery, social networks, etc. in the short time of a fraction of a turn. The Jihadi units would reveal themselves for who they are as soon as they take positions, and the US would respond, availing itself of the Fortifications. Note that if the US did not respond on the same turn, the Jihadis would have entrenched themselves and would be able to take advantage of the Fortifications while the US could not.

An InfoWar was played after a combat, thus doubling PPs. Then the losing faction played Collateral Damage to gain PPs.

a) Losing side gains double de PPs caused for loses and both cards are discarded.
b) Losing side gains the basic PPs. The InfoWar is not applicable as it was played by the winning side. The winning side gets InfoWar back to hand.
c) other

The answer is “in depends.” The InfoWar card’s effect doubles the number of PP the player of the InfoWar card receives from one source. This source is the Combat. The Collateral Damage card redirects the PP from the winner of the Combat to the loser of the Combat. So if the Loser played BOTH cards, that player would gain double PP and the winner would score zero. If the winner played the InfoWar, it is discarded and the winner gains no PP while the losing player would gain the normal PP score — no doubling. Why? The source hasn’t changed, but the Faction who gains the PP has. The winner now scores two times zero and the loser scores one times X.

Does a negated card come back to playing side's hand?

No. Negated cards are always discarded.
 
 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.