Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

My views on Perikles, and rules update

Expand Messages
  • jmalmolda
    Hi all, after a very interesting game of Perikles yesterday, and seeing that this is problably the current top game in the club, I want to write a post about
    Message 1 of 7 , Jan 14, 2008
      Hi all, after a very interesting game of Perikles yesterday, and
      seeing that this is problably the current top game in the club, I want
      to write a post about it.

      My main complain about the game is that luck factor is too important,
      in the tile selecting phase and of course in the dice rolls for the
      battles, but I found a few minor mistakes we made with the rules that
      in my opinion will make this a better game if played right.

      - Tile phase: the actual rule says you cannot have two tiles of the
      same colour in one round, as we played it was you cannot take two
      tiles of the same colour consecutively.
      I think the original rule is much better, as you are only allowed 3
      cubes per round in one city (2 for a tile and one for Any City) and
      taking one tile with a dagger or a promotion is more tricky, as it
      prevents you from taking a 2 cubes tile later in that city.
      Basically this means same amount of tiles, but evenly divided in all
      the cities, and makes special cards as "Perikles" much more
      interesting, as that's the only way to have more than 3 cubes in a
      city in the same round.

      - Combat phase dice roll table: the side with higher strength can
      choose the column they want to use only from the possible ones, as an
      example if forces are 12 vs 7 , the player with 12 will choose the
      "+2" column, as it's the highest possible one, 2:1 cannot be used, as
      12 is not enough to be 7x2.
      The way we did it made the number of forces involved less important,
      as having the upper hand was enough to get doubles or triples, with
      the right rule more troops will have to be added to have such odds in
      the battle, thus making placement of troops more critical.

      - Non battle resolution: defending a battle that is not attacked
      doesn't get you the marker for the battle, no one gets those victory
      points, instead the defender(s) get to place 2 cubes of influence in
      that city.
      This rule will favour more aggressive battles (good for Bob ;)) as
      defending all your villas wont give you those easy points, all points
      have to be won fighting.
    • Founder.
      Good points. I think that all 3 of those changes/corrections could make it a better game. I don t have a set myself (yet!), nor a copy of the rules to refer
      Message 2 of 7 , Jan 14, 2008
        Good points. I think that all 3 of those changes/corrections could
        make it a better game.

        I don't have a set myself (yet!), nor a copy of the rules to refer to,
        but I'm surprised about the first point. I'm 95% sure that I read out
        from the rules, where it said that you couldn't take a tile of the
        same colour/city consecutively; nothing about only one tile of a
        colour per round. Neil?? Probably better "your" way, but debatable:
        it might mean they are TOO tightly-contested to form a plan?

        I prefer "your" version on combat. But I'm surprised (Neil and I got
        it wrong?!) Me, yes, but Neil?!

        It is odd, though, and you may have missed the designer's conundrum?
        Your way has the "limit" that, if it falls between two columns, the
        higher-strength side cannot go beyond their odds ... You realise that
        this means that the lower-strength side therefore CAN and does go
        beyond ITS odds? You can't say that neither can go beyond the limit
        of the odds from THEIR POV; you have to give the benefit of choosing
        the column beyond the "real" odds to one side or the other
        ...higher-strength, or Lower-strength, or Attacker, or Defender. Are
        you saying the Rules you've seen give it to the Lower-strength side?

        Hey, maybe Neil (and JamesW) got their copies for £9.99 because they
        were remaindered to TKMax because they had earlier-version rules??!

        Neil?

        Glad you liked the game. I must update the league table, following me
        coming last ...
        Bob

        --- In lbgc@..., "jmalmolda" <jmalmolda@...> wrote:
        >
        > Hi all, after a very interesting game of Perikles yesterday, and
        > seeing that this is problably the current top game in the club, I want
        > to write a post about it.
        >
        > My main complain about the game is that luck factor is too important,
        > in the tile selecting phase and of course in the dice rolls for the
        > battles, but I found a few minor mistakes we made with the rules that
        > in my opinion will make this a better game if played right.
        >
        > - Tile phase: the actual rule says you cannot have two tiles of the
        > same colour in one round, as we played it was you cannot take two
        > tiles of the same colour consecutively.
        > I think the original rule is much better, as you are only allowed 3
        > cubes per round in one city (2 for a tile and one for Any City) and
        > taking one tile with a dagger or a promotion is more tricky, as it
        > prevents you from taking a 2 cubes tile later in that city.
        > Basically this means same amount of tiles, but evenly divided in all
        > the cities, and makes special cards as "Perikles" much more
        > interesting, as that's the only way to have more than 3 cubes in a
        > city in the same round.
        >
        > - Combat phase dice roll table: the side with higher strength can
        > choose the column they want to use only from the possible ones, as an
        > example if forces are 12 vs 7 , the player with 12 will choose the
        > "+2" column, as it's the highest possible one, 2:1 cannot be used, as
        > 12 is not enough to be 7x2.
        > The way we did it made the number of forces involved less important,
        > as having the upper hand was enough to get doubles or triples, with
        > the right rule more troops will have to be added to have such odds in
        > the battle, thus making placement of troops more critical.
        >
        > - Non battle resolution: defending a battle that is not attacked
        > doesn't get you the marker for the battle, no one gets those victory
        > points, instead the defender(s) get to place 2 cubes of influence in
        > that city.
        > This rule will favour more aggressive battles (good for Bob ;)) as
        > defending all your villas wont give you those easy points, all points
        > have to be won fighting.
        >
      • Garner
        Bob, The combat rules we played were wrong. The point of falling between two columns only applies to the +2/-2 columns, that you can choose that column or the
        Message 3 of 7 , Jan 14, 2008
          Bob,

          The combat rules we played were wrong. The point of falling between two columns only applies to the +2/-2 columns, that you can choose that column or the 2:1/1:2 but only if you qualify for it.

          And the uncontested defence is a very interesting rule change. And works well with the limited placement of cubes according to the proposed reading of city tiles here.

          I really enjoyed this game. Sure it helped that I won. But I do want to play it again soon, as I've some tactics forming in my head for future play.

          --
          Brian
          http://bofarrell.blogspot.com/
          http://viewingsport.blogspot.com/
        • Neil Parker
          Strangely i don t remember reading about 2 influence cubes being granted to the defenfer if a location isn t attacked - anyway notwithstanding i ll check
          Message 4 of 7 , Jan 15, 2008

            Strangely i don't remember reading about 2 influence cubes being granted to the defenfer if a location isn't attacked - anyway notwithstanding i'll check later, here is a response from Martin Wallace to a post on BGG about various battles scenarios :

            In a two-round battle there are a number of possibilities depending on which units have been deployed to fight. However, it seems to me that some of the possibilities are not adequately covered by the rules and require clarification or a House-rule just to make sure rules lawyers don't interupt the game.

            Assume we are talking about a two-round battle defended by Sparta, that triremes will fight in the first round and that there are no intrinsic defenders or rebels in the battle. (Where triremes fight second, just swap trireme for hoplite to get the same 16 possibilities.)

            Here is my understanding/interpretation of the rules as they apply to each situation. Units can be placed in the following 16 combinations:


            1) No Attackers or Defenders
            No battle, tile removed, Defender gets 2 influence cubes in City

            YES

            2) Attacker trireme and no other units
            Attacker wins and gets tile

            YES

            3) Defender trireme and no other units
            No battle, tile removed, defender gets 2 cubes in City

            YES

            4) Attacker trireme and Defender trireme
            Fight one round and winner gets tile

            NO - DEFENDER WINS THE TILES ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE ATTACKER IS UNABLE TO OCCUPY THE TERRITORY. TRIREME BATTLE SHOULD STILL BE FOUGHT.

            5) Attacker hoplite and no other units
            Attacker wins and gets tile

            YES

            6) Attacker trireme and hoplite and no Defenders
            Attacker wins and gets tile

            YES

            7) Attacker hoplite and Defender trireme
            Defender wins first round, Attacker wins second round. Attacker wins and gets tile

            YES



            8) Attacker trireme and hoplite and Defender trireme

            Fight first round and winner gets Battle Token, Attacker then wins second round and gets tile

            YES



            9) Defender hoplite and no other units

            No battle, tile removed, defender gets 2 cubes in City

            YES


            10) Defender hoplite and Attacker trireme

            Attacker wins first round and Defender wins second round. Defender wins and gets tile

            YES


            11) No Attackers and Defender hoplite and trireme

            No battle, tile removed, defender gets 2 influence cubes in City

            YES


            12) Attacker trireme and Defender hoplite and trireme

            Fight first round and winner gets Battle Token. Defender wins second round and gets tile

            YES


            13) Attacker hoplite and Defender hoplite

            There will be a second round of combat with the winner getting the tile. But what happened in the first round where there were no units? My guess is that nothing happened and that the second round is fought with both sides needing to win 2 Battle Tokens to win the tile. But it might also be argued that both sides only need 1 Battle Token to win as this is the second round of combat and someone (both sides?) should have won a Battle Token. This is ambiguous and needs an official answer or an agreed House-Rule to cover the situation. The best rule seems to be that no first round happened and everything is decided by the second round with 2 Battle Tokens required for a win.

            ONLY SECOND ROUND OF COMBAT OCCURS, WITH BOTH SIDES REQUIRING TWO BATTLE TOKENS.


            14) Attacker trireme and hoplite and Defender hoplite

            Attacker wins first round and gets Battle Token. Normal second round with Attacker having an advantage, winner gets the tile

            YES


            15) Attacker hoplite and Defender trireme and hoplite

            Defender wins first round and gets Battle Token. Normal second round with Defender having an advantage, winner gets the tile

            YES


            16) Attacker trireme and hoplite and Defender trireme and hoplite

            Two rounds of combat with the winner of the first round getting a Battle Token to take into the second round as an advantage. Winner of the second round gets the tile

            YES


            --- In lbgc@..., "jmalmolda" <jmalmolda@...> wrote:
            >
            > Hi all, after a very interesting game of Perikles yesterday, and
            > seeing that this is problably the current top game in the club, I want
            > to write a post about it.
            >
            > My main complain about the game is that luck factor is too important,
            > in the tile selecting phase and of course in the dice rolls for the
            > battles, but I found a few minor mistakes we made with the rules that
            > in my opinion will make this a better game if played right.
            >
            > - Tile phase: the actual rule says you cannot have two tiles of the
            > same colour in one round, as we played it was you cannot take two
            > tiles of the same colour consecutively.
            > I think the original rule is much better, as you are only allowed 3
            > cubes per round in one city (2 for a tile and one for Any City) and
            > taking one tile with a dagger or a promotion is more tricky, as it
            > prevents you from taking a 2 cubes tile later in that city.
            > Basically this means same amount of tiles, but evenly divided in all
            > the cities, and makes special cards as "Perikles" much more
            > interesting, as that's the only way to have more than 3 cubes in a
            > city in the same round.
            >
            > - Combat phase dice roll table: the side with higher strength can
            > choose the column they want to use only from the possible ones, as an
            > example if forces are 12 vs 7 , the player with 12 will choose the
            > "+2" column, as it's the highest possible one, 2:1 cannot be used, as
            > 12 is not enough to be 7x2.
            > The way we did it made the number of forces involved less important,
            > as having the upper hand was enough to get doubles or triples, with
            > the right rule more troops will have to be added to have such odds in
            > the battle, thus making placement of troops more critical.
            >
            > - Non battle resolution: defending a battle that is not attacked
            > doesn't get you the marker for the battle, no one gets those victory
            > points, instead the defender(s) get to place 2 cubes of influence in
            > that city.
            > This rule will favour more aggressive battles (good for Bob ;)) as
            > defending all your villas wont give you those easy points, all points
            > have to be won fighting.
            >

          • jmalmolda
            points 1, 3 & 9 match the rules I read about cubes instead of VP, and being Mr Wallace himsef he is probably right...
            Message 5 of 7 , Jan 15, 2008
              points 1, 3 & 9 match the rules I read about cubes instead of VP, and
              being Mr Wallace himsef he is probably right...

              --- In lbgc@..., "Neil Parker" <vedantananda@...> wrote:
              >
              >
              > Strangely i don't remember reading about 2 influence cubes being granted
              > to the defenfer if a location isn't attacked - anyway notwithstanding
              > i'll check later, here is a response from Martin Wallace to a post on
              > BGG about various battles scenarios :
              > In a two-round battle there are a number of possibilities depending on
              > which units have been deployed to fight. However, it seems to me that
              > some of the possibilities are not adequately covered by the rules and
              > require clarification or a House-rule just to make sure rules lawyers
              > don't interupt the game.
              >
              > Assume we are talking about a two-round battle defended by Sparta, that
              > triremes will fight in the first round and that there are no intrinsic
              > defenders or rebels in the battle. (Where triremes fight second, just
              > swap trireme for hoplite to get the same 16 possibilities.)
              >
              > Here is my understanding/interpretation of the rules as they apply to
              > each situation. Units can be placed in the following 16 combinations:
              >
              > 1) No Attackers or Defenders
              > No battle, tile removed, Defender gets 2 influence cubes in City
              >
              > YES
              >
              > 2) Attacker trireme and no other units
              > Attacker wins and gets tile
              >
              > YES
              >
              > 3) Defender trireme and no other units
              > No battle, tile removed, defender gets 2 cubes in City
              >
              > YES
              >
              > 4) Attacker trireme and Defender trireme
              > Fight one round and winner gets tile
              >
              > NO - DEFENDER WINS THE TILES ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE ATTACKER IS UNABLE
              > TO OCCUPY THE TERRITORY. TRIREME BATTLE SHOULD STILL BE FOUGHT.
              >
              > 5) Attacker hoplite and no other units
              > Attacker wins and gets tile
              >
              > YES
              >
              > 6) Attacker trireme and hoplite and no Defenders
              > Attacker wins and gets tile
              >
              > YES
              >
              > 7) Attacker hoplite and Defender trireme
              > Defender wins first round, Attacker wins second round. Attacker wins and
              > gets tile
              >
              > YES
              >
              >
              >
              > 8) Attacker trireme and hoplite and Defender trireme
              > Fight first round and winner gets Battle Token, Attacker then wins
              > second round and gets tile
              >
              > YES
              >
              >
              >
              > 9) Defender hoplite and no other units
              > No battle, tile removed, defender gets 2 cubes in City
              >
              > YES
              >
              >
              > 10) Defender hoplite and Attacker trireme
              > Attacker wins first round and Defender wins second round. Defender wins
              > and gets tile
              >
              > YES
              >
              >
              > 11) No Attackers and Defender hoplite and trireme
              > No battle, tile removed, defender gets 2 influence cubes in City
              >
              > YES
              >
              >
              > 12) Attacker trireme and Defender hoplite and trireme
              > Fight first round and winner gets Battle Token. Defender wins second
              > round and gets tile
              >
              > YES
              >
              >
              > 13) Attacker hoplite and Defender hoplite
              > There will be a second round of combat with the winner getting the tile.
              > But what happened in the first round where there were no units? My guess
              > is that nothing happened and that the second round is fought with both
              > sides needing to win 2 Battle Tokens to win the tile. But it might also
              > be argued that both sides only need 1 Battle Token to win as this is the
              > second round of combat and someone (both sides?) should have won a
              > Battle Token. This is ambiguous and needs an official answer or an
              > agreed House-Rule to cover the situation. The best rule seems to be that
              > no first round happened and everything is decided by the second round
              > with 2 Battle Tokens required for a win.
              >
              > ONLY SECOND ROUND OF COMBAT OCCURS, WITH BOTH SIDES REQUIRING TWO BATTLE
              > TOKENS.
              >
              >
              > 14) Attacker trireme and hoplite and Defender hoplite
              > Attacker wins first round and gets Battle Token. Normal second round
              > with Attacker having an advantage, winner gets the tile
              >
              > YES
              >
              >
              > 15) Attacker hoplite and Defender trireme and hoplite
              > Defender wins first round and gets Battle Token. Normal second round
              > with Defender having an advantage, winner gets the tile
              >
              > YES
              >
              >
              > 16) Attacker trireme and hoplite and Defender trireme and hoplite
              > Two rounds of combat with the winner of the first round getting a Battle
              > Token to take into the second round as an advantage. Winner of the
              > second round gets the tile
              >
              > YES
              >
              >
              > --- In lbgc@..., "jmalmolda" <jmalmolda@> wrote:
              > >
              > > Hi all, after a very interesting game of Perikles yesterday, and
              > > seeing that this is problably the current top game in the club, I want
              > > to write a post about it.
              > >
              > > My main complain about the game is that luck factor is too important,
              > > in the tile selecting phase and of course in the dice rolls for the
              > > battles, but I found a few minor mistakes we made with the rules that
              > > in my opinion will make this a better game if played right.
              > >
              > > - Tile phase: the actual rule says you cannot have two tiles of the
              > > same colour in one round, as we played it was you cannot take two
              > > tiles of the same colour consecutively.
              > > I think the original rule is much better, as you are only allowed 3
              > > cubes per round in one city (2 for a tile and one for Any City) and
              > > taking one tile with a dagger or a promotion is more tricky, as it
              > > prevents you from taking a 2 cubes tile later in that city.
              > > Basically this means same amount of tiles, but evenly divided in all
              > > the cities, and makes special cards as "Perikles" much more
              > > interesting, as that's the only way to have more than 3 cubes in a
              > > city in the same round.
              > >
              > > - Combat phase dice roll table: the side with higher strength can
              > > choose the column they want to use only from the possible ones, as an
              > > example if forces are 12 vs 7 , the player with 12 will choose the
              > > "+2" column, as it's the highest possible one, 2:1 cannot be used, as
              > > 12 is not enough to be 7x2.
              > > The way we did it made the number of forces involved less important,
              > > as having the upper hand was enough to get doubles or triples, with
              > > the right rule more troops will have to be added to have such odds in
              > > the battle, thus making placement of troops more critical.
              > >
              > > - Non battle resolution: defending a battle that is not attacked
              > > doesn't get you the marker for the battle, no one gets those victory
              > > points, instead the defender(s) get to place 2 cubes of influence in
              > > that city.
              > > This rule will favour more aggressive battles (good for Bob ;)) as
              > > defending all your villas wont give you those easy points, all points
              > > have to be won fighting.
              > >
              >
            • jmalmolda
              first of all I want to clarify that all my points are in the actual rules that I have, i didnt make anything up :) about combat, Brian has already explained
              Message 6 of 7 , Jan 15, 2008
                first of all I want to clarify that all "my" points are in the actual
                rules that I have, i didnt make anything up :)

                about combat, Brian has already explained better than I did how the
                table works, you cannot pick a column if you dont qualify for it.

                the other combat point is very clear in the 16 possible outcomes Neil
                has posted from Martin Wallace.

                Im surprised about the tile colour bit, we were very sure about not
                having the same colour in two consecutive tiles, but I found some
                posts in the BGG forum, in Rules and Strategy sections, and all them
                agree with the rules I read. Neil, are the ones we are using wrong?

                --- In lbgc@..., "Founder." <bobroscow@...> wrote:
                >
                > Good points. I think that all 3 of those changes/corrections could
                > make it a better game.
                >
                > I don't have a set myself (yet!), nor a copy of the rules to refer to,
                > but I'm surprised about the first point. I'm 95% sure that I read out
                > from the rules, where it said that you couldn't take a tile of the
                > same colour/city consecutively; nothing about only one tile of a
                > colour per round. Neil?? Probably better "your" way, but debatable:
                > it might mean they are TOO tightly-contested to form a plan?
                >
                > I prefer "your" version on combat. But I'm surprised (Neil and I got
                > it wrong?!) Me, yes, but Neil?!
                >
                > It is odd, though, and you may have missed the designer's conundrum?
                > Your way has the "limit" that, if it falls between two columns, the
                > higher-strength side cannot go beyond their odds ... You realise that
                > this means that the lower-strength side therefore CAN and does go
                > beyond ITS odds? You can't say that neither can go beyond the limit
                > of the odds from THEIR POV; you have to give the benefit of choosing
                > the column beyond the "real" odds to one side or the other
                > ...higher-strength, or Lower-strength, or Attacker, or Defender. Are
                > you saying the Rules you've seen give it to the Lower-strength side?
                >
                > Hey, maybe Neil (and JamesW) got their copies for £9.99 because they
                > were remaindered to TKMax because they had earlier-version rules??!
                >
                > Neil?
                >
                > Glad you liked the game. I must update the league table, following me
                > coming last ...
                > Bob
                >
                > --- In lbgc@..., "jmalmolda" <jmalmolda@> wrote:
                > >
                > > Hi all, after a very interesting game of Perikles yesterday, and
                > > seeing that this is problably the current top game in the club, I want
                > > to write a post about it.
                > >
                > > My main complain about the game is that luck factor is too important,
                > > in the tile selecting phase and of course in the dice rolls for the
                > > battles, but I found a few minor mistakes we made with the rules that
                > > in my opinion will make this a better game if played right.
                > >
                > > - Tile phase: the actual rule says you cannot have two tiles of the
                > > same colour in one round, as we played it was you cannot take two
                > > tiles of the same colour consecutively.
                > > I think the original rule is much better, as you are only allowed 3
                > > cubes per round in one city (2 for a tile and one for Any City) and
                > > taking one tile with a dagger or a promotion is more tricky, as it
                > > prevents you from taking a 2 cubes tile later in that city.
                > > Basically this means same amount of tiles, but evenly divided in all
                > > the cities, and makes special cards as "Perikles" much more
                > > interesting, as that's the only way to have more than 3 cubes in a
                > > city in the same round.
                > >
                > > - Combat phase dice roll table: the side with higher strength can
                > > choose the column they want to use only from the possible ones, as an
                > > example if forces are 12 vs 7 , the player with 12 will choose the
                > > "+2" column, as it's the highest possible one, 2:1 cannot be used, as
                > > 12 is not enough to be 7x2.
                > > The way we did it made the number of forces involved less important,
                > > as having the upper hand was enough to get doubles or triples, with
                > > the right rule more troops will have to be added to have such odds in
                > > the battle, thus making placement of troops more critical.
                > >
                > > - Non battle resolution: defending a battle that is not attacked
                > > doesn't get you the marker for the battle, no one gets those victory
                > > points, instead the defender(s) get to place 2 cubes of influence in
                > > that city.
                > > This rule will favour more aggressive battles (good for Bob ;)) as
                > > defending all your villas wont give you those easy points, all points
                > > have to be won fighting.
                > >
                >
              • Neil Parker
                I think this may answer the problem: From BGG: 1) Stony wrote: The latter. You are only restricted from choosing the same color twice right after each other. I
                Message 7 of 7 , Jan 15, 2008

                  I think this may answer the problem:

                  From BGG:

                  1) Stony wrote:
                  The latter.
                  You are only restricted from choosing the same color twice right after each other.

                  I am sorry but I've got to contradict here. There are two reasons that make me think different about the interpretation of that rule.
                  The rules are provided in English/German/French; I can read those too :).
                  First (and direct)
                  The German wording for that part states clearly that you may not own two influence tiles of the same color at the end of this phase.

                  So you have to choose always one of a different color (if possible).
                  Second (and indirect)
                  We talk about a max. of 3 or 8 cubes to be placed in one city.
                  The design of a city on the map allows only to place 6 cubes in a row between those columns. Therefore the rule of max. of 8 seems very unlikely.
                   
                  2)
                  I would like to confirm Dan's answer to this query.

                  You cannot end up with two Influence tiles of the same colour at the end of the Influence phase, thus the maximum number of cubes you could place in a city in one turn is 3.

                  I hope that is clear.

                  Martin Wallace
                   
                  It seems the English rules are not fully complete then - so that changes everything. Start the league again yeah - using the proper rules?? ;) 

                  --- In lbgc@..., "jmalmolda" <jmalmolda@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > first of all I want to clarify that all "my" points are in the actual
                  > rules that I have, i didnt make anything up :)
                  >
                  > about combat, Brian has already explained better than I did how the
                  > table works, you cannot pick a column if you dont qualify for it.
                  >
                  > the other combat point is very clear in the 16 possible outcomes Neil
                  > has posted from Martin Wallace.
                  >
                  > Im surprised about the tile colour bit, we were very sure about not
                  > having the same colour in two consecutive tiles, but I found some
                  > posts in the BGG forum, in Rules and Strategy sections, and all them
                  > agree with the rules I read. Neil, are the ones we are using wrong?
                  >
                  > --- In lbgc@..., "Founder." bobroscow@ wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Good points. I think that all 3 of those changes/corrections could
                  > > make it a better game.
                  > >
                  > > I don't have a set myself (yet!), nor a copy of the rules to refer to,
                  > > but I'm surprised about the first point. I'm 95% sure that I read out
                  > > from the rules, where it said that you couldn't take a tile of the
                  > > same colour/city consecutively; nothing about only one tile of a
                  > > colour per round. Neil?? Probably better "your" way, but debatable:
                  > > it might mean they are TOO tightly-contested to form a plan?
                  > >
                  > > I prefer "your" version on combat. But I'm surprised (Neil and I got
                  > > it wrong?!) Me, yes, but Neil?!
                  > >
                  > > It is odd, though, and you may have missed the designer's conundrum?
                  > > Your way has the "limit" that, if it falls between two columns, the
                  > > higher-strength side cannot go beyond their odds ... You realise that
                  > > this means that the lower-strength side therefore CAN and does go
                  > > beyond ITS odds? You can't say that neither can go beyond the limit
                  > > of the odds from THEIR POV; you have to give the benefit of choosing
                  > > the column beyond the "real" odds to one side or the other
                  > > ...higher-strength, or Lower-strength, or Attacker, or Defender. Are
                  > > you saying the Rules you've seen give it to the Lower-strength side?
                  > >
                  > > Hey, maybe Neil (and JamesW) got their copies for £9.99 because they
                  > > were remaindered to TKMax because they had earlier-version rules??!
                  > >
                  > > Neil?
                  > >
                  > > Glad you liked the game. I must update the league table, following me
                  > > coming last ...
                  > > Bob
                  > >
                  > > --- In lbgc@..., "jmalmolda" <jmalmolda@> wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > > Hi all, after a very interesting game of Perikles yesterday, and
                  > > > seeing that this is problably the current top game in the club, I want
                  > > > to write a post about it.
                  > > >
                  > > > My main complain about the game is that luck factor is too important,
                  > > > in the tile selecting phase and of course in the dice rolls for the
                  > > > battles, but I found a few minor mistakes we made with the rules that
                  > > > in my opinion will make this a better game if played right.
                  > > >
                  > > > - Tile phase: the actual rule says you cannot have two tiles of the
                  > > > same colour in one round, as we played it was you cannot take two
                  > > > tiles of the same colour consecutively.
                  > > > I think the original rule is much better, as you are only allowed 3
                  > > > cubes per round in one city (2 for a tile and one for Any City) and
                  > > > taking one tile with a dagger or a promotion is more tricky, as it
                  > > > prevents you from taking a 2 cubes tile later in that city.
                  > > > Basically this means same amount of tiles, but evenly divided in all
                  > > > the cities, and makes special cards as "Perikles" much more
                  > > > interesting, as that's the only way to have more than 3 cubes in a
                  > > > city in the same round.
                  > > >
                  > > > - Combat phase dice roll table: the side with higher strength can
                  > > > choose the column they want to use only from the possible ones, as an
                  > > > example if forces are 12 vs 7 , the player with 12 will choose the
                  > > > "+2" column, as it's the highest possible one, 2:1 cannot be used, as
                  > > > 12 is not enough to be 7x2.
                  > > > The way we did it made the number of forces involved less important,
                  > > > as having the upper hand was enough to get doubles or triples, with
                  > > > the right rule more troops will have to be added to have such odds in
                  > > > the battle, thus making placement of troops more critical.
                  > > >
                  > > > - Non battle resolution: defending a battle that is not attacked
                  > > > doesn't get you the marker for the battle, no one gets those victory
                  > > > points, instead the defender(s) get to place 2 cubes of influence in
                  > > > that city.
                  > > > This rule will favour more aggressive battles (good for Bob ;)) as
                  > > > defending all your villas wont give you those easy points, all points
                  > > > have to be won fighting.
                  > > >
                  > >
                  >
                Your message has been successfully submitted and will be delivered to recipients shortly.