Jump to content

RoyalRook

Members
  • Content Count

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About RoyalRook

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    -
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    Staunton, Virginia, United States
  1. Please submit this to BGG's Civ page in the file section, AND strategic position the links in the Pbf wait list. Finally, remind every Pbf moderators to submit their games.
  2. Wait a minute...how CC could allow you to double dip again? If another player played EoI or Think Tank on you after your turn, then you can no longer change to this new gov till next turn because you are finished with your SoT phase. And you still take no anarchy penalty because if you change to this new found gov at your next turn's SoT, it is the first chance that you have to change to it. So, in essence, there is no rare situation that allow you to double dip, under the one change, one ability, and no change after ability guideline: For Gov Shift in SoT 1. You can't change government during your own SoT after you made use of a government's ability. 2. You can only change gov once 3. You can only use one set of gov ability/benefit. There is no exception. Case 3 (rare): Player B use CC after Player A SOT. Player A's SoT was finished, he can not change his gov out turn. Player A could change to this new found gov penalty (anarchy) free during his next SoT, the first gov changing oppotunity. Result: Only one gov ability/benefit.
  3. Case Study 3 Real game situation when Egypt Pyramid broke the game. http://boardgamegeek...ne-faq-2/page/1
  4. True, I considered all that, and that's why in the end, I allow "doubt dipping" for those rare CC situations.
  5. Case Study 1 Your SOT --> change/no change government --> found city (cities)--> collect benefits from gov/wonder(s) --> culture card (s) --> Your End of SOT After Player A gained assess to Feudalism after last turn's Research phase Case 1: Player B use CC(Knowledge Shared) before/during Player A SOT. Player A have to choose btw Feudalism/Democracy BEFORE inherit the respective gov's ability/benefits. Result: Only one gov ability/benefit. OR Case 2: Player A uses CC during his own SOT and learns Democracy. Player A have to choose btw Feudalism/Democracy BEFORE inherits the respective gov's ability/benefits. Result: Only one gov ability/benefit. OR Case 3 (rare): Player B use CC after Player A SOT. Player A have to choose btw Feudalism/Democracy BEFORE inherits the respective gov's ability/benefits. Return any resource(s) gained from Feudalism and gain two extra trades in this SOT, if Player A decides to switch to the new found democracy. Result: Only one gov ability/benefit. OR Case 4: Player B CC (Citizens are revolting) targets Player A, whom fall into Anarchy. Since CC can be played anytime during SOT, all player A's benefit/ability from his own gov could/should be wiped away. Result: Only one gov (anarchy) ability/benefit. Case Study 2 Case Study 2 (posted by Tibs) consider a situation where (for example) a hypothetical government grants you 2 culture at the start of the turn (or anything that can accumulate). You switch to or already are that government. You collect 2 culture because it says "Start of Turn." Then you change to another government. Then you immediately change back. You collect an additional 2 culture because it says "Start of Turn." Repeat until satiated. Now, I understand that we'll all be quick to say that a player can't do this. But what's truly interesting is why each of us might say that. It will give insight into how we interpret a change of government. "You can't take the same government's bonus more than once!" Why not? You did change away and come back, so it's a different instance of that government. If you think that a single government type can't grant its reward multiple times, then you must admit that multiple government types can't each grant their reward during the same SoT. "You can't switch to the same government twice during the same SoT!" Why not? That's not written anywhere. Switching to Republic to found a city using an army and then switching back to your preferred government seems like a respectable strategy. "The problem is with expansion intermixing." It is true that these issues arise from expansions, so a FAQ that addresses the specific issue may not yet be available. This might mean that it's fair game to repair and that no amount of strict rules analysis might actually produce the "correct" answer. "The designer didn't intend this exploit!" This is of course speculation, but it means that you recognize that there is the potential for trouble, either for your own group or for groups at large. Like the above example, this issue may very well be uncharted territory, and we may be the pioneers. I have previous info to suggest that our interpretation of what should be done will influence how FFG ultimately rules it.
  6. I know, I am so sorry, the discussion got really good in the end, I missed the importance of your post because it was so short and sweet. Btw, I am a huge fan of your work, it was simply genius. If you got anymore from you and your colleagues, please do share with me anytime. As you can see, I love Civ, I think it is a potential masterpiece in the making from FF. It would be sensational if FF ever wish to publish a pro-competitive-fine tuned-ultimate version of the game (in one box perhaps).
  7. Once again, and this is the final time I am going to say this, you are arguing with yourself, if you read my post you will see that I painstakingly point out the CC exception, until the next FAQ. I am willing to settle on those rare situation because CC are designed to overwrite core rules. Regarding to your 2 gov card new mechanics, I don't know why you are so obsessed to introduce house rules to the official rule. It does not matter how you try to pretty it up, in the end of the day, I count 2 gov cards, which is a violation of the core rule. You are trying to have it both ways, gain benefit/ability on one gov, and reaping the benefit of the other for the next SOT, without the penalty of anarchy. It is simply as that. You are so confused about the Pyramid, which allow you to change gov as many time as you want during the entire game, but it doesn't mean you can reap all the benefit of every single gov in one SOT. In SOT, only one form of gov can unleash its ability/benefit because the moment you change it, it give away those power to the next one. It's like you are trying to block someone's combat bonus by blockade his barrack with an army figure, and trying to attack the city at the same time with the same army figure. It can't be done, because the moment you lift up the army figure, the other player regain the combat bonus. The moment you change to another gov (except in rare CC situations, which is what cc are designed for, to break the core rules) and reaping the new set of benefit/ability, you also "lift up" your benefit/ability from your previous gov.
  8. You are playing two gov cards in one SOT, benefit/ability or not, it is against the core rules. On top of that, you suggest to rotate one of the card to keep record. You can play your own house rule or suggest this as a weird variant, but this is definitely against everything on gov according to the core rule book. I have explained your suggestion's obvious conflict with the core rules (see my last post). But in summary: it is not allowed to have two gov per SOT at the same time, whether in waiting or not, you have to choose one or face the potential future penalty. You can't have it both ways.
  9. Or follow this simple guideline for SOT actions: Your SOT --> change/no change government --> found city (cities)--> collect benefits from gov/wonder(s) --> culture card (s) --> Your End of SOT
  10. I don't support this because it introduces a new game mechanic to the core rules. Which is always a no no. I think at this point, before FF address this issue, we should settle on stoodster's latest rule suggestion, simply because it addresses all critical issues without introducing unofficial and moderately confusing new game mechanics. Furthermore, rotating card is not very elegant nor conforming for Civilization because of its mechanism. Secondly, highly rare CC situations aside, it is utmost important to enforce the rule that only one gov could effect/benefit a civ per turn. Culture Cards abilities are designed to overwrite base rule anyway, but even facing the rare CC scenario, if the player have the option to choose more than one of the newly available gov(s), then he/she still have to take the risk of later anarchy into consideration when making the decision, when the newly acquired gov was not implemented (why I love stoodster's rule so much). It is in conformity with a vital and undisputed part of the core game rules. When choosing gov you can't have both ways, either you adopt it the turn immediately after the latest Research phase , or face the penalty or anarchy if the player chosen to adopt the gov(s) in a later turn. Finally, in the end, I truly believe serious players should be done away with double dipping all together, with reasons I have listed in detail in my earlier posts. But, as I have said, before new official FAQ, I can't find any fault in stoodster's stance on this matter, I believe it is the best solution, because of its simplicity on top of its conformity with the core rules without the introduction of a new game mechanic like card rotation.
  11. This is the rule that we come up with in the end of the discussion: (Thanks to Stoodster from BGG.com) Each player may only change his or her government once during his or her Start of Turn phase. Benefits of this change: *Avoids the abuse of Pyramids. *Simple and easy to remember. *Consistent with the rules and the FAQ. *No need to keep track of which government you have already gotten a bonus from. *Allows some "double dipping" through card play in rare cases. Please give us a official statement regarding to this matter either here, or in the next official FAQ. But for now, this is how everyone will be playing.
  12. Why make think complicated for yourself? One form of gov after SOT --> One set of benefit/ability for civ --> No exceptions. DONE. All the variations have to conform to this Constitution, may it be CC or Wonder abilities. Obviously, even yourself are not 100% comfortable with double dipping govs. It is clear to me, the concept does not make any sense what so ever. It is a blatant and lazy attempt of exploit, and I can not wait to hear back from FF regarding to this matter. I have explained the reasons in details in my latest post.
  13. Link: http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1032878/goverment-shift/page/1 Please give us an official ruling of the matter. My opinion: Simple guideline for SOT actions: Your SOT --> change/no change government --> found city (cities)--> collect benefits from gov/wonder(s) --> culture card (s) --> Your End of SOT Once Player A switch to democracy from feudalism during the SOT, he forfeited the right to harvest resource at the SOT, and chosen to gain a coin and 2 trades instead. Feudalism was out of power along with its associated benefits for the entirety of the turn, because it failed to rule the civ during the SOT. Go through the same line of thinking with Pyramid, the Player who owns the Pyramid have to choose one gov per start of the turn, EVEN when he/she has all the options in the world without the penalty of anarchy. The rest of non-in-power gov has no effect on the player's civ, as though they have never existed, and gave away the chosen gov the authority to effect/benefit the player's civ for the duration of the turn. All the switching around is simply part of Player A's decision process as he gained more and more options with the flow of the game, not necessary means his final decision before the end of the SOT phase. The resulting gov is his final decision. Another case to clear the same line of thinking: after Player B canceled Player A's city management(CM) action with the Writing resource ability (spy), (according to FAQ) Player A get back all the resource and culture card(CC) that was used for the canceled city action by Player B. Player A's city action "happened," resource was "used", and CC was "discarded," but because of the final decision via Player B's spy was the cancellation of the city action -- it's as though nothing happened, because all player A's initial actions before the cancellation became only part of the decision process NOT the final action. Only one action "cancellation of Player A's city action" had any effect in the flow of the game. Therefore, because the final chosen gov, and only the final chosen gov of Player A's SOT will has any effect in the flow of the game. the cancellation of the resource gathering under Feudalism, will give away to the gaining of a coin, and two extra trade under Democracy for Player A, at the end of his decision process for the end of the SOT phase. Case Study 1 After Player A gained assess to Feudalism after last turn's Research phase Case 1: Player B use CC(Knowledge Shared) before/during Player A SOT. Player A have to choose btw Feudalism/Democracy BEFORE inherit the respective gov's ability/benefits. Result: Only one gov ability/benefit. OR Case 2: Player A uses CC during his own SOT and learns Democracy. Player A have to choose btw Feudalism/Democracy BEFORE inherits the respective gov's ability/benefits. Result: Only one gov ability/benefit. OR Case 3 (rare): Player B use CC after Player A SOT. Player A's SoT was finished, he can not change his gov out turn. Player A could change to this new found gov penalty (anarchy) free during his next SoT, the first gov changing oppotunity. Result: Only one gov ability/benefit. OR Case 4: Player B CC (Citizens are revolting) targets Player A, whom fall into Anarchy. Since CC can be played anytime during SOT, all player A's benefit/ability from his own gov could/should be wiped away. Result: Only one gov (anarchy) ability/benefit. Case Study 2 (posted by Tibs) consider a situation where (for example) a hypothetical government grants you 2 culture at the start of the turn (or anything that can accumulate). You switch to or already are that government. You collect 2 culture because it says "Start of Turn." Then you change to another government. Then you immediately change back. You collect an additional 2 culture because it says "Start of Turn." Repeat until satiated. Now, I understand that we'll all be quick to say that a player can't do this. But what's truly interesting is why each of us might say that. It will give insight into how we interpret a change of government. "You can't take the same government's bonus more than once!" Why not? You did change away and come back, so it's a different instance of that government. If you think that a single government type can't grant its reward multiple times, then you must admit that multiple government types can't each grant their reward during the same SoT. "You can't switch to the same government twice during the same SoT!" Why not? That's not written anywhere. Switching to Republic to found a city using an army and then switching back to your preferred government seems like a respectable strategy. "The problem is with expansion intermixing." It is true that these issues arise from expansions, so a FAQ that addresses the specific issue may not yet be available. This might mean that it's fair game to repair and that no amount of strict rules analysis might actually produce the "correct" answer. "The designer didn't intend this exploit!" This is of course speculation, but it means that you recognize that there is the potential for trouble, either for your own group or for groups at large. Like the above example, this issue may very well be uncharted territory, and we may be the pioneers. I have previous info to suggest that our interpretation of what should be done will influence how FFG ultimately rules it. Case Study 3 Real game situation when Egypt Pyramid broke the game. http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1034878/civilization-pbf-game-88-fame-and-fortune-faq-2/page/1 This is the rule that we come up near the end of the discussion: Each player may only change his or her government once during his or her Start of Turn phase. You can't change government during your own SoT after you made use of a government's ability. Benefits of this change: *Avoids the abuse of Pyramids. *Simple and easy to remember. *Consistent with the rules and the FAQ. *No need to keep track of which government you have already gotten a bonus from. *Immune to anarchy + unlocking all gov + Double Dipping actions every other turns for an ancient wonder(pyramid) is absurd. **the player can only take 1 gov's bonus per turn. So, in summery, there is no rare situation that allow you to double dip, under the one change, one ability, and no change after ability guideline: For Gov Shift in SoT 1. You can't change government during your own SoT after you made use of a government's ability. 2. You can only change gov once 3. You can only use one set of gov ability/benefit. There is no exception.
  14. Mysticism allow you to draw two culture card and choose one to keep, does it function with great persons as well?
  15. the battle work just like before, but counting the remain health point plus combat bonus to decide the victor. Only the city state square itself is considered as part of the capital's city skirts. I guess that means that you can build figures directly onto the controlled city state.
×
×
  • Create New...