Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
6 Posts

Thirty Years War: Europe in Agony, 1618-1648» Forums » Rules

Subject: VPs for control of an area rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Tony Hamen
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Music sucks now....
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I am completely confused now. What happens when the catholic player controls enough cities so that the protestant player doesn't control the area, but the catholic player doesn't control it either. Say an area has 4 cities of which 3 need to be controlled to control the area, and one player takes two thereby rendering the area uncontrolled. Does this affect VPs?

If yes: Does this mean the VP track is adjusted twice in these regions? Once for losing control, and the twice for the player then gaining control in a later action? Does this mean that some areas like ones that can never have ties like an area with 5 spaces and 3 needing control don't have this double vp effect?

If no: Why would it matter if the player even controls the region when there is a tie, and the rule not state: If one player gains control of enough cities in an area to then control the area, the other player AT THAT POINT loses control and VPs are adjusted accordingly.

The reason why this is confusing me is that this would make some of the regions score twice (once for losing control, and then once for the opposing player gaining control) and some only score once (the other player gaining control). And if this isn't the case, (because nowhere in the rules does it say you lose points for losing control and players only gain points when gaining control), then I don't see why it would matter if you have to hold control in a region because there are no additional benefits to having control other than vps. Therefore, if vps aren't affected by losing control and the other player NOT gaining control, then losing control in this instance would have no purpose.

Here is a scenario: Austria has 6 spaces. A player needs to control all 6 spaces in order to gain control of the area. If the protestant player gains control of 1 of these 6 areas, then the catholic player no longer has control of enough spaces to control Austria. Does this mean he loses 5 victory points? Does this also mean if the protestant player takes control of all 6 spaces the catholic player loses ANOTHER 5 victory points? If the catholic player DOESN'T lose 5 victory points when the protestant player takes control of one austrian city, then what is the difference between austrian becoming uncontrolled by both players as opposed to retaining catholic control?

Also I am confused about 9.22. "When an Area enters the game
on the Protestant side (for example,
event P28), if the Area is already
Catholic controlled, any unoccupied
Catholic-controlled city immediately
switches to Protestant control upon
play of the Event. Catholic-occupied
cities do not switch control. If all cities in the Area are Catholic-occupied,
the Event may not be played.

Is this to mean that if the Catholic player doesn't control the area then they do NOT lose their unnoccupied controlled cities? If this is the case, this would conflict with 3.13:

"Whenever a player gains control of an Area, remove enemy control markers
from all Non-Independent Cities in the
Area except for those in Cities occupied
by enemy units. The player that controls
the Area (as shown in the Control Box) is
considered to control unmarked Cities.
Cities that are occupied by enemy units
don’t switch control in this fashion—the
enemy units must be removed from the
City first."

Thanks for any help ahead of time!!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt & Laurel
United Kingdom
Harrogate
flag msg tools
mb
Hi Tony,

It's been a little while since I played the game last and I had to think on what you've written for a couple of minutes before remembering how it works; or at least how I've always played it.

gentlegiantglass wrote:
I am completely confused now. What happens when the catholic player controls enough cities so that the protestant player doesn't control the area, but the catholic player doesn't control it either. Say an area has 4 cities of which 3 need to be controlled to control the area, and one player takes two thereby rendering the area uncontrolled. Does this affect VPs?


The way that I've always played it, is that an area controlled by the Protestant or Catholic player remains under their control until the opposing player takes control of enough spaces for control of the area to change. So, using your example, if the area has 4 cities of which 3 need to be controlled to control the area, and the player not currently in control takes 2 of those cities, overall control does not change and the VP track is not altered.

gentlegiantglass wrote:
If yes: Does this mean the VP track is adjusted twice in these regions? Once for losing control, and the twice for the player then gaining control in a later action? Does this mean that some areas like ones that can never have ties like an area with 5 spaces and 3 needing control don't have this double vp effect?


Based on my comment above there won't, therefore, be a situation in which the VP track is adjusted twice. Also, because of this the issue of tie vs. no tie is not relevant.

gentlegiantglass wrote:
If no: Why would it matter if the player even controls the region when there is a tie, and the rule not state: If one player gains control of enough cities in an area to then control the area, the other player AT THAT POINT loses control and VPs are adjusted accordingly.


Unfortunately, the rulebook is not the best worded or laid out. This was my first wargame and I certainly had difficulty negotiating some of the explanations in it!

gentlegiantglass wrote:
The reason why this is confusing me is that this would make some of the regions score twice (once for losing control, and then once for the opposing player gaining control) and some only score once (the other player gaining control). And if this isn't the case, (because nowhere in the rules does it say you lose points for losing control and players only gain points when gaining control), then I don't see why it would matter if you have to hold control in a region because there are no additional benefits to having control other than vps. Therefore, if vps aren't affected by losing control and the other player NOT gaining control, then losing control in this instance would have no purpose.


Overall control of an area is only lost if the other player takes control of enough cities for it to assume overall control. It's important to remember that in Thirty Years War, VPs are gained at the other player's expense (the Protestant player wants to move the VP marker downwards towards 0 and the Catholic player upwards towards 50).

gentlegiantglass wrote:
Also I am confused about 9.22. "When an Area enters the game on the Protestant side (for example, event P28), if the Area is already Catholic controlled, any unoccupied Catholic-controlled city immediately switches to Protestant control upon play of the Event. Catholic-occupied cities do not switch control. If all cities in the Area are Catholic-occupied, the Event may not be played."

Is this to mean that if the Catholic player doesn't control the area then they do NOT lose their unnoccupied controlled cities? If this is the case, this would conflict with 3.13:


I've always taken this example to mean that Catholic controlled, but not occupied, cities change to Protestant control regardless of whether the area is controlled by them or not. Therefore it does not conflict with the statement below.

gentlegiantglass wrote:
"Whenever a player gains control of an Area, remove enemy control markers from all Non-Independent Cities in the Area except for those in Cities occupied by enemy units. The player that controls the Area (as shown in the Control Box) is considered to control unmarked Cities. Cities that are occupied by enemy units don’t switch control in this fashion—the enemy units must be removed from the City first."

Thanks for any help ahead of time!!


I hope my explanation makes some sort of sense. I also hope it's correct, so perhaps if someone else would like to comment, that would be helpful.

Cheers,

Matt
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Hamen
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Music sucks now....
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for the response. That is the way I played initially. My girlfriend and I set the game up yesterday, and I was reading through the rules and this is what confused me.

2.42 states: "The Control rating is the number of Cities in the Area that a player must control in order to control the Area."

Now I thought I was reading to much into this, then I searched the forums and found this thread. If you look at his first question, everyone seems to agree that if you do not hold enough cities than you do NOT control the area. Now if 2.42 had stated "the control rating is the number of cities in the area that a player must TAKE CONTROL of in order to control the area, I would have no problem here.

Unfortunately, the game remained set up and didn't get played last night as I was frustrated with the rulebook and this seemed like it would make a significant change in the rules. The rulebook really isn't so bad, it is just a few poorly worded paragraphs like this, and unfortunately it isn't covered in the living rules nor the errata or clarifications page on the GMT webpage. ADD TO THAT, no one seemed to play the game that much when it was released, and certainly not now 10 years or so post release.

The reason I was confused with the second question is that it states "IF THE AREA IS CATHOLIC CONTROLLED". I'm not sure why it includes that specific statement as it goes against what I mentioned later.

Thanks for the response though, I guess I will continue to play it the way I was, although it does bother me a bit if I have a small nagging feeling I might be playing a game completely incorrect.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Welker
United States
Steubenville
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Victory point values are awarded to a player when they gain control of an area. Does it say anywhere in the rules that VP values are detracted from a player when they lose control of an area?

If the Prot player controls an area like Munster [3/2] and then the Cath player moves into this region and gains control of 2 cities, the Prot player still has control, technically. Control will be lost once the Cath player has a 3rd city under control. Once this happens, the Cath player is awarded 2 VP. Remove any Prot control markers from this area... place a Cath control marker in the control box.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt & Laurel
United Kingdom
Harrogate
flag msg tools
mb
gentlegiantglass wrote:
Thanks for the response. That is the way I played initially. My girlfriend and I set the game up yesterday, and I was reading through the rules and this is what confused me.


No problem. As I mentioned in my previous response, this is the first wargame that I bought and my then girlfriend (now wife) and I also had trouble with some of the rules.

gentlegiantglass wrote:
2.42 states: "The Control rating is the number of Cities in the Area that a player must control in order to control the Area."

Now I thought I was reading to much into this, then I searched the forums and found this thread. If you look at his first question, everyone seems to agree that if you do not hold enough cities than you do NOT control the area. Now if 2.42 had stated "the control rating is the number of cities in the area that a player must TAKE CONTROL of in order to control the area, I would have no problem here.


I quickly checked the relevant sections of the rulebook, including section 2.42, before posting my initial response. However, having read through the thread that you provided to link to, I think that there are two separate eventualities that need to be addressed:
1) An Area changing control from neutral to either Catholic or Protestant.
2) An Area changing control from one player to another.

1) If an Area is neutral, a player taking control of the requisite number of non-independent cities in that Area assumes control of that Area and gains the VP.

2) I can't agree with the interpretation in the other thread. If it's done that way, then we're back to the confusing situation that you outlined in your original post; i.e. that in Areas with an even number of cities, you could end up with one player losing control of half of the cities to the other player and therefore losing the VP for control of that Area, and then losing the same number of VP a second time when the other player captures another city (to give them control). Given that some Areas don't have an even number of non-independent cities - and therefore one player must always be 'in control' - that would mean that some Areas are effectively worth 'double' their printed VP value. Also, some Areas like Austria and Bavaria, that start the game Catholic-controlled, require all non-independent cities to be controlled to gain the VP. However, I think this is a demand placed on the Protestant player, otherwise the Protestants could take control of one city in each Area and deny the Catholic player 9 VP (which also means gaining the Protestant player 9 VP), which seems rather a lot. Apart from that, does the fact that the Protestant player controls one city in each Area really mean that the rulers of Austria and Bavaria have now lost control of their respective territories? That doesn't make sense to me.

gentlegiantglass wrote:
Unfortunately, the game remained set up and didn't get played last night as I was frustrated with the rulebook and this seemed like it would make a significant change in the rules. The rulebook really isn't so bad, it is just a few poorly worded paragraphs like this, and unfortunately it isn't covered in the living rules nor the errata or clarifications page on the GMT webpage. ADD TO THAT, no one seemed to play the game that much when it was released, and certainly not now 10 years or so post release.


The game received a lot of criticism on its release, partly because critical sections of the rulebook were poorly worded; hence the fact that it is one of the least well played card driven wargames. Despite that, it is still one of my favourites. The section of the rulebook that caused me particular grief was Leader activation.

gentlegiantglass wrote:
The reason I was confused with the second question is that it states "IF THE AREA IS CATHOLIC CONTROLLED". I'm not sure why it includes that specific statement as it goes against what I mentioned later.


I agree that its a confusing statement and should have been qualified.

gentlegiantglass wrote:
Thanks for the response though, I guess I will continue to play it the way I was, although it does bother me a bit if I have a small nagging feeling I might be playing a game completely incorrect.


As long as you're enjoying playing the game, I wouldn't worry about it too much!

Cheers,

Matt
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Hamen
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Music sucks now....
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks a lot for the responses. It looks as though I have been playing correctly the whole time, but I wanted to make sure as this is a complex game with a lot of systems. I am not a game designer, so I am not sure what balances a game and what breaks one. I wouldn't have given it a second thought, except that under the revolts section the player DOES lose vps when losing control of a region, hence the "double whammy" wording in the rulebook.

Anyways, thanks for the responses, especially from Mr. Welker! It is much appreciated.
 
 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.