Recommend
9 
 Thumb up
 Hide
21 Posts

Virgin Queen» Forums » Rules

Subject: rules rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Mike Metcalf
United States
Raleigh
North Carolina
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Situation: Otts are besieging Cyprus. Venice controlled by Spain. Otts and Spain are at war. HRE (also at war with Otts) plays 'Sultana Safiye' to create diplomatic check on Venice and wins the check. Venice changes allegiance. What happens to Otts siege?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Montgomery
United States
Joliet
Illinois
flag msg tools
Dear Geek: Please insert the wittiest comment you can think of in this text pop-up. Then times it by seven.
badge
The Coat of Arms of Clan Montgomery - Scotland. Yes, that's a woman with the head of a savage in her hand, and an anchor. No clue what it means, but it's cool.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
eaglevet wrote:
Situation: Otts are besieging Cyprus. Venice controlled by Spain. Otts and Spain are at war. HRE (also at war with Otts) plays 'Sultana Safiye' to create diplomatic check on Venice and wins the check. Venice changes allegiance. What happens to Otts siege?


See my post to the ACTs module - there should not be any deactivation of Venice, only activation of the new power. The Deactivation procedure is only used if the Deactivate Power wins the diplomacy roll. Second sentence of Rule 24.4.

Edit: However, see below - it does appear that the rules as written would displace the Ottomans.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joel K
United States
Minnetrista
Minnesota
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Per step 4 of the Diplomatic Status Procedure in 24.6 on page 41, since a new power is gaining control of Venice, it must first be deactivated from its previous ally and then (re)activated for its new ally.

The third bullet of the Deactivation procedure in 24.4 on page 40 will have you displace the Ottoman units that were besieging Cyprus (land units to nearest friendly fortified space, naval units to nearest friendly port).
3 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Metcalf
United States
Raleigh
North Carolina
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: rules on minor power allegiance change
So, even though the Otts are at war with both Spain (previous major Venetian ally) and HRE (new ally) and could care less about who Venice is in bed with, they just pack up and go home? Perhaps an official ruling on this is apt (yes, I see the rule Joel - not questioning your rule sense.)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Montgomery
United States
Joliet
Illinois
flag msg tools
Dear Geek: Please insert the wittiest comment you can think of in this text pop-up. Then times it by seven.
badge
The Coat of Arms of Clan Montgomery - Scotland. Yes, that's a woman with the head of a savage in her hand, and an anchor. No clue what it means, but it's cool.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I now see what everyone is driving at . . . but assuming the Otts are at war with both the out-going power and the incoming power, it truly makes no sense and frankly appears silly, illogical, and incongruent.

But the rules as written do appear to require this outcome, my above post notwithstanding, which I will correct presently.

The only wriggle-room I see is that the rules appear to be in blatant conflict. 24.4 is unambiguous that "minor powers are only deactivated in one way . . ." while Step 4 of Diplomatic Status Procedure is unambiguous that you deactivate the current ally.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven
United States
Spokane
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
"The mystery of life isn't a problem to solve, but a reality to experience"
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
eaglevet wrote:
So, even though the Otts are at war with both Spain (previous major Venetian ally) and HRE (new ally) and could care less about who Venice is in bed with, they just pack up and go home? Perhaps an official ruling on this is apt (yes, I see the rule Joel - not questioning your rule sense.)


Here is what I think: The HRE does not currently control Venice, so it will trigger an activation of Venice (per step 4 of 24.6). You would use the deactivation procedure found in Deactivation (24.4) and then the activation procedure Activation (24.2), because the HRE can activate Venice.

EDIT: Major edits. See Ed's clarification below.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
O. C.
Spain
flag msg tools
blablabla
badge
lololo
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
According to the rules, the Ottomans have to leave Cyprus, but I think it's a ridiculous situation. If Ottomans are at war with Spain and HRE, the siege of Cyprus should not be interrupted.
Ed's opinion would be valuable whistle
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Simon H
United Kingdom
London
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
I could accept this as is.

A change in the diplomatic state of affairs could have resulted in the Ottomans lifting the siege. Taking it right down past the game mechanics and into the historical possibilities level, any number of events linked with the diplomatic change could have had this effect. It's not like Cyprus becomes part of the Holy Roman Empire territorially.

Since each impulse presumably takes days, weeks or more in 'real time', it is quite possible that the Ottomans were recalled due to the Venetians going neutral, only to find a couple of days later that they had thrown their lot in with the HRE.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Metcalf
United States
Raleigh
North Carolina
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Does anyone know how to change the header (I blew it) to read something like 'Rule Question regarding Minor's allegiance change and affect on ongoing siege'?

Secondly, this is a question of importance for an ongoing game but has implications for other games as well. So, Ed, sorry to bother you but if you see this post, could we get an official answer?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ed Beach
United States
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
You still follow the activation procedure as most of the posters here have surmised. There is no special provision for not doing so based on secondary checks of Allied or At War statuses between powers that might be at conflict in this minor's territory.

If you think the current minor power rules are convoluted, I can't imagine a system that accounted for this as well.

And as for how to explain this based on the history, Simon's answer just a few posts above is as good as any.
6 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven
United States
Spokane
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
"The mystery of life isn't a problem to solve, but a reality to experience"
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ed Beach wrote:
You still follow the activation procedure as most of the posters here have surmised. There is no special provision for not doing so based on secondary checks of Allied or At War statuses between powers that might be at conflict in this minor's territory.


Just to clarify Ed, if the HRE would win the activation of Venice in the OP's example: would you use only Activation (24.2) to change ownership from Spain to the HRE, or would you use Deactivation (24.4) and then Activation (24.2)?

With the errata, it seems like there is no need to use 24.4, unless England or the Ottomans win a diplomatic status check of Ireland or Venice. Which is how I think it was intended to only be used for (based on the parts I quoted above).

EDIT: I was incorrect. See Ed's post below.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Metcalf
United States
Raleigh
North Carolina
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Thank you Ed for the timely answer (though not the one I might have hoped for). Basically need to learn from this that besieging a minor's space while the minor is controlled by a major is quite risky - the wastage in cards and resources is fairly high if allegiance switches. Particularly true for the Ottoman vis a vis Venice since the Ott dares not try to deactivate Venice (can't besiege then) and has no way to influence the diplomacy check - the siege needs to be lifted no matter what the diplomatic check outcome is.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ed Beach
United States
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
SW_Cygnus wrote:

Just to clarify Ed, if the HRE would win the activation of Venice in the OP's example: would you use only Activation (24.2) to change ownership from Spain to the HRE, or would you use Deactivation (24.4) and then Activation (24.2)?

With the errata, it seems like there is no need to use 24.4, unless England or the Ottomans win a diplomatic status check of Ireland or Venice. Which is how I think it was intended to only be used for (based on the parts I quoted above).


Which errata are you referencing? I don't think there is any errata changing Step 4 of the Diplomatic Status Procedure, which says:

"If the winner is listed as an Activate power and does not currently have this power as an ally, then deactivate the power from its current ally (if any) and then activate it as an ally of the winning power."

So you would use 24.4 and then 24.2.
6 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ed Beach
United States
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
eaglevet wrote:
Thank you Ed for the timely answer (though not the one I might have hoped for). Basically need to learn from this that besieging a minor's space while the minor is controlled by a major is quite risky - the wastage in cards and resources is fairly high if allegiance switches. Particularly true for the Ottoman vis a vis Venice since the Ott dares not try to deactivate Venice (can't besiege then) and has no way to influence the diplomacy check - the siege needs to be lifted no matter what the diplomatic check outcome is.


The same was true of Genoa in HIS if you didn't know where the Andrea Doria card lay. But this case comes up more often in VQ.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven
United States
Spokane
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
"The mystery of life isn't a problem to solve, but a reality to experience"
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ed Beach wrote:
Which errata are you referencing? I don't think there is any errata changing Step 4 of the Diplomatic Status Procedure, which says:

"If the winner is listed as an Activate power and does not currently have this power as an ally, then deactivate the power from its current ally (if any) and then activate it as an ally of the winning power."

So you would use 24.4 and then 24.2.


The errata I was referring to deals with Activation (24.2), it was added in the June 28th, VQ errata. You are right that it does not change 24.6 (the Diplomatic status procedure)

It just seems confusing, because the rules state:

Quote:
24.4 Deactivation

Changing a power from active to inactive is called “deactivation”.

Minor powers are only deactivated in one way:
• An event has caused the diplomatic status of the minor power
to be evaluated and the power listed as the “Deactivate” power
at the bottom of the Diplomatic Influence Table won that evaluation.


I suppose there is a difference between a "state of deactivation" and the "procedure for deactivation". It does make sense, because the minor power units are forced back to their minor power spaces, before control is switched.

In either case, thank you for clarifying. I will edit my earlier post.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joel K
United States
Minnetrista
Minnesota
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
eaglevet wrote:
Does anyone know how to change the header (I blew it) to read something like 'Rule Question regarding Minor's allegiance change and affect on ongoing siege'?

Hit the "Edit" link in the lower right of your initial post, then the Subject line should be available to edit as you see fit.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven
United States
Spokane
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
"The mystery of life isn't a problem to solve, but a reality to experience"
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
eaglevet wrote:
Thank you Ed for the timely answer (though not the one I might have hoped for). Basically need to learn from this that besieging a minor's space while the minor is controlled by a major is quite risky - the wastage in cards and resources is fairly high if allegiance switches. Particularly true for the Ottoman vis a vis Venice since the Ott dares not try to deactivate Venice (can't besiege then) and has no way to influence the diplomacy check - the siege needs to be lifted no matter what the diplomatic check outcome is.


Or you could look at it another way: its only dangerous if you take too long. If the Ottomans declare war on Venice they need to ensure that they can take the Venetian key or Cyprus before that minor has a chance to be reactivated by another major power.

Once the Ottomans take over Venetian spaces, they do not have to relinquish them.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ed Beach
United States
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
SW_Cygnus wrote:

I suppose there is a difference between a "state of deactivation" and the "procedure for deactivation". It does make sense, because the minor power units are forced back to their minor power spaces, before control is switched.


Yes, exactly true. I don't think this is the only time in the game a procedure gets stepped through because of something else triggering it from elsewhere in the rules or cards.
4 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Ferguson
Ireland
Cork
Cork
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
shaldon wrote:
Since each impulse presumably takes days, weeks or more in 'real time'

I'd say many months, on the basis of the relatively small number of them that take place in a multi-year turn, and the distances that armies and navies are potentially able to travel in one.

Quote:
it is quite possible that the Ottomans were recalled due to the Venetians going neutral, only to find a couple of days later that they had thrown their lot in with the HRE.

It's certainly possible, but it's a little artificial to assume this is what happens in every such instance.

Obviously what Ed says about complexity is very correct. In order to anticipate this situation without simply slathering on separate special cases is to replace the existing one-parameter deactivation procedure and one-parameter activation procedure, with a two-parameter deactivation/activation procedure. This would then be able to directly compare the dip state of the old controller with the new. Obviously, that's easier said than done -- and frankly, just saying it is bad enough.
 
 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
shaldon wrote:
Since each impulse presumably takes days, weeks or more in 'real time', it is quite possible that the Ottomans were recalled due to the Venetians going neutral, only to find a couple of days later that they had thrown their lot in with the HRE.


I have this vision of the Cypriots peeking over the ramparts and sniggering as they watch the Ottomans go. A month later the sultan opens a diplomatic communique from Cyprus that begins, "Haw haw!"
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Metcalf
United States
Raleigh
North Carolina
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Well Greg, snickering is right. This is how it all turned out. We had to backtrack in our game and I had to reroll the whole Cyprus attack (after retroactively playing the Grand Vizier card to stop the whole Venetian allegiance switch to begin with). I had rolled the first time and had taken Cyprus with no losses but ... backtrack so that assault was deleted. 2 Cards left: assault one: 4 Ott dice to 2 Venetian - all misses. Last card (assault 2) all misses. Snickering indeed. I'm off to the pub!
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.