Victory citys and Abyssinia
AlphaAeffchen last edited by
can someone tell me how the objective citys are counted. Do i get points for citys that i own since the start of the game? For example do the USA get 1 Point for Washington when the game ends? I think thats really unfair because the ccp only has one capital city( The axis have 3). It would be much better if you get only points for capturing enemy VC cities not for cities of your home country. It makes no sense for me also remember the allies have 5 VC´s… It would be nice if someone could clarify this because the rules are not clear…
I also have a question about Abyssinia. If italy defeats Abyssinia do they get the VC point in any case at the end of the game or do they have to control the country until the end of the game?
I wish you all a nice weekend
Noneshallpass last edited by
The rules seem clear enough.
In section 3.2 of the Rules (v3.0) it lists all the Victory Cities (VC) : “Each Objective City is worth one Victory Point. These cities are; Berlin, Tokyo, Rome, London, Calcutta, Sydney, Paris, Washington D.C., Nanking and Moscow”. So you get a point for either capturing or keeping them.
According to section 3.1 these VCs must be added to the national objectives found in 3.4. So it’s one point per VC that you alliance owns at the end, even if you had it at the start of the game. Yes, the Allies start with more cities than the Comintern, but this is supposed to be balanced with the possibility of losing territoiries in your Home Country (3.3.) and the difficulty of the other national objectives (3.4).
The Italian victory in Abyssinia courts towards the Expand the Empire objective but you must still possess it at the end of the game : “Score 1 victory objective for each new land zone Italy Possesses at end of game that Italy did not Possess at start of game (regardless of value).” (v3.3 National Reference Sheet or Table 3-1 of the Rules). Therefore, it’s not enough for Italy to win this conflict (easy enough), you must still own it at the end (not so easy).
Yeah, @Noneshallpass is right on all counts. You get a point for each VC that you own by the end of the game, not the start.
Also, the CCP doesn’t have any VC’s to start the game (unless you meant the Comintern and Moscow, in which case I apologize).
I wouldn’t call the discrepancies unfair though, for a couple of reasons.
These are just the cities that were actually important. The game creators can’t help that. So it’s just something each alliance has to live with from a historical standpoint.
I think this is also designed with the realization that a lot of these change in game play. As was pointed out above, there are 10 VC’s. The Allies start with 6; the Axis start with 3; the Comintern start with 1. So yes, the Allies start with an advantage over the others, and the Comintern at a disadvantage. But lets look at gameplay. The Axis very realistically (expectantly) will take Paris and Nanking over the course of the game. So that already swings a bit of an advantage away from the Allies. But it all comes down to who’s playing well and coming out on top. I think if the game is going well for the Comintern, it’s realistic to say they can get Nanking, Berlin, and maybe even Rome. That would give them 4 right there. If the game isn’t going well, then true, they wouldn’t have many, but that wouldn’t really change the outcome of the game at that point, would it?
Tied in to the last sentence of #2, you need to remember the points for VC’s are added to the National Objective points. This is not the only way you win the game. The other things need to happen as well. If you didn’t have many National Objectives obtained, then the number if VC’s isn’t going to matter, because you will have lost the game anyways!
I had a long conversation recently with the guy that wrote the rules and I expressed to him that I didn’t think it was fair that each side started with a different number of victory cities. He explained that after years of extensive play testing that the Russian victory points were easier to obtain then the others and that it balanced the game to have it the way that it is. If you were to eliminate the victory points given for the cities it would skew the game in favour of the Comintern.
@GeneralHandGrenade interesting point GHG! I guess in theory I’d agree with you all. It would seem an even playing field in that regard would be “fair”.
But that said, not the game itself isn’t an “even playing field” though (i.e. not everyone has the same amount of money, territory, starting units, etc.).
But interesting to hear that point on the Comintern. I think our group has still been trying to figure out how best to play the Comintern, but I’ve long wondered if it was “easier” to get their National Objectives overall. If the Comintern can really get going, there isn’t a whole lot to stop them from attaining basically all their goals.
I wonder if the changed rules for V3, where it’s now easier for the Allies and Comintern to go to war against each other, changes this at all? I think in V2, you could argue that what I mention above almost guarantees a Comintern victory if they get really strong. The Allies wouldn’t be able to stop them much, barring a massively early Axis defeat.
But now, the Comintern can potentially be “put in check” a bit more if they’ve gotten too powerful.
AlphaAeffchen last edited by
thx to all of you for clarification. Im drivin to my hometown today. Have a nice weekend.