Slitherine

Morbio wrote:

Blathergut wrote:

hidde wrote: Alas...the only offspring left is my son Cacaanido

Marry them...start a trend that will last for centuries!

...and a blood line that will last 0 generations

Damm - I'll need to write a whole new rules chapter if that marriage goes ahead!

Blathergut wrote:PG:

What happens if I call on a blood ally to come to my aid and the evil army attacking me is from SoA but the blood ally only runs RoR?

Edit: They could use an SoA army from any of the 4 allies??

No different to any other battle - if your opponent only uses RoR for example please check with him if he is happy for you to use SoA or IF or Swifter than Eagles or Swords & Scimitars or ...... do I need to go on?

As a result of the recent battle between the forces of Egypt and davouthojo's clan...the Egyptians retreat into the city of Barren Cliffs and call upon all three of their blood allies and any of their treaty allies to come to their aid.

Hopefully one of them makes it in time!!

Blathergut wrote:As a result of the recent battle between the forces of Egypt and davouthojo's clan...the Egyptians retreat into the city of Barren Cliffs and call upon all three of their blood allies and any of their treaty allies to come to their aid.

Hopefully one of them makes it in time!!

Sorry but you may only call upon one ally (you have to select one).

First Cut Maybe Not the Deepest

Merely days after the tragic news of the dead of a princess of Canaan, an assassin's blade has struck at the heart of the Canaanite royal family, killing the son and recently married husband of a princess of the Covenanter Empire. Surely someone must be at the centre of such an evil web of intrigue. With another blood alliance dissolved the 3rd and final one must be creating bricks without mud & straw.

Rumour has it that the grief stricken ruler of the Canaanites will pay hansomely for a clue to the identity of this evil-doer.

Additional Rule - if an invader is beaten off, i.e. leaves the defender's area, the defender has the opportunity to declare a counter invasion before the invader may try to attack again.

For those good at algebra that means if A attacks B and after a battle or two A leaves B's area, than B may select to invade A before A could invade B again.

I'll add this to the player guide. My thanks to morbio for helping to write the algebra! We'd discussed a concern about the campaign favouring the attacker too much.

k...calls up Mouser and his Romans or whatevers!!!!

petergarnett wrote:Additional Rule - if an invader is beaten off, i.e. leaves the defender's area, the defender has the opportunity to declare a counter invasion before the invader may try to attack again.

For those good at algebra that means if A attacks B and after a battle or two A leaves B's area, than B may select to invade A before A could invade B again.

I'll add this to the player guide. My thanks to morbio for helping to write the algebra! We'd discussed a concern about the campaign favouring the attacker too much.

What happens in the case where the defender would not have a path to the original attacker's country due to being non-adjacent and not having allies or neutrals willing to let them pass?

Chris

petergarnett wrote:First Cut Maybe Not the Deepest

Merely days after the tragic news of the dead of a princess of Canaan, an assassin's blade has struck at the heart of the Canaanite royal family, killing the son and recently married husband of a princess of the Covenanter Empire. Surely someone must be at the centre of such an evil web of intrigue. With another blood alliance dissolved the 3rd and final one must be creating bricks without mud & straw.

Rumour has it that the grief stricken ruler of the Canaanites will pay hansomely for a clue to the identity of this evil-doer.

You'll bet
On the other hand it might solve the akward situation the first assassination created. Cacaanido will be offered to the house of Deadtorius instead, next diplomacy phase.

batesmotel wrote:

petergarnett wrote:Additional Rule - if an invader is beaten off, i.e. leaves the defender's area, the defender has the opportunity to declare a counter invasion before the invader may try to attack again.

For those good at algebra that means if A attacks B and after a battle or two A leaves B's area, than B may select to invade A before A could invade B again.

I'll add this to the player guide. My thanks to morbio for helping to write the algebra! We'd discussed a concern about the campaign favouring the attacker too much.

What happens in the case where the defender would not have a path to the original attacker's country due to being non-adjacent and not having allies or neutrals willing to let them pass?

Chris

Peter , doesnt this change the game back toward how it was the ist season where if you were attacked you just counterattacked? As it stands , the attacker , rarley, is able to blitz thru mulitiple enemy territories, especially with all the allies , cities they can hide in, and mostly the plentitude of darn reinforcment cards...

Chris: I would imagine if the attacker has a path to B and withdraws after a battle, B cannot counter invade if he has no valid path.....

Blathergut wrote:k...calls up Mouser and his Romans or whatevers!!!!

You call, we shall come....
(although it is really cramping up mulitple long term goals, you warmonger )

TheGrayMouser wrote:

batesmotel wrote:What happens in the case where the defender would not have a path to the original attacker's country due to being non-adjacent and not having allies or neutrals willing to let them pass?
Chris

Peter , doesnt this change the game back toward how it was the ist season where if you were attacked you just counterattacked? As it stands , the attacker , rarley, is able to blitz thru mulitiple enemy territories, especially with all the allies , cities they can hide in, and mostly the plentitude of darn reinforcment cards...
Chris: I would imagine if the attacker has a path to B and withdraws after a battle, B cannot counter invade if he has no valid path.....

1. You still need a path so without one the original defender cannot invade his attacker.

2. No - before we had counter-attacks whilst the first attack was going on. This is just to prevent a player who has failed to win an invaded area from declaring another invasion before the defender has a chance to counter invade. It's not happened so far but I wanted to rule on it just in case.

sounds good Peter, i though you meant an attacker couldnt keep going to invade/conquer area # two unless the defender 'allowed it" ie by not counter invading....

As usual I'm as clear as FOG

There are now 3 sieges in progress with relief armies dispatched.

So this might be a good time to remind players that if you are under siege, having an inspired leader left over from your battle makes quite a difference to the city holding out.

None of the 3 existing armies under siege have such a leader so assaults, treachery attempts and just holding out for a relief army becomes harder.

Starts parading his guy around the city defenses making him look inspired.

Adds a trio of bubblettes for effect.

Parthia Falls

The parthians are no more after their last city was stormed by the army of Morbius. This now confirms those rumours that he really would kick a bloke when he's down!


Relief for Kappadokia

After traitors within the city of Mytilene were caught trying to open the gates more good news for the beleagued army as the relief army from Phanagoria reaches the city and promptly attacks the besieging army. However the Tuaminites have a good size army left in the field so the result is in the balance.


Fingers and Bubbles Crossed

Meanwhile after their defeat in battle by the Clan of the Bravehearts, the Egyptians withdraw into their city of the Barren Cliffs and call to Rome for aid. One can only hope that the bubbles signals were in Latin.

The Senate orders flags at half mast for our fallen ally .....

batesmotel wrote:

petergarnett wrote:Additional Rule - if an invader is beaten off, i.e. leaves the defender's area, the defender has the opportunity to declare a counter invasion before the invader may try to attack again.

For those good at algebra that means if A attacks B and after a battle or two A leaves B's area, than B may select to invade A before A could invade B again.

I'll add this to the player guide. My thanks to morbio for helping to write the algebra! We'd discussed a concern about the campaign favouring the attacker too much.

What happens in the case where the defender would not have a path to the original attacker's country due to being non-adjacent and not having allies or neutrals willing to let them pass?

Chris

Simples... he can't counter-invade to try to win back his province.

TheGrayMouser wrote:Peter , doesnt this change the game back toward how it was the ist season where if you were attacked you just counterattacked? As it stands , the attacker , rarley, is able to blitz thru mulitiple enemy territories, especially with all the allies , cities they can hide in, and mostly the plentitude of darn reinforcment cards....

No, the counter-invasion can only happen after the 1st invasion is over. These do not happen at the same time.