Soldier Kings FAQ and Alternate Rule suggestions FAQ: 1. Rule 10.8 Panama canal. Why does this rule exist? >The Panama Canal rule is the result of a playtester's insistence he could skip the Horn since Guatemala bounds on the Pacific "and the rules say ..." One of those that seems self-obvious, but does no harm to spell out. It's actually a very, very mild example of such. 2. Rule 10.41 indicates that the interception of moving fleets take place after all naval movement is complete. 10.45 states that moving units that were intercepted and did not retreat may continue moving. 10.43 is probably the worst rule in the book. It is contradictory within itself, and, unfortunately, deals with the limits on interception attempts. I read it to mean that the first sentence is correct, a fleet or group may make only one interception attempt per action phase. >Fleet intercepts are attempted during movement. A fleet or group that is intercepted and does not retreat may keep moving. 3. The rules on leader casualties (13.5) is supported by the land combat example, but contradicted by the naval combat example. I took it that the naval combat example was wrong. >Naval combat example wrong. 4. The rule on Interception by Non-moving fleets (10.42 and 10.43) is also confusing. The rule says that "a player's fleets may attempt to intercept enemy fleets which enter the area they occupy...". Clear enough. But then in 10.43 comes: "Note that a British fleet in the Southern England coastal area can attempt to intercept enemy fleets in all three adjoining sea areas...". But nowhere in the rules does it say that a fleet in a coastal area can intercept in adjacent sea areas, as this example implies. So can they or can't they? >Coastal areas are considered as part of the adjoining sea zones for interception purposes. 5. Map Key Graphic. Is this correct? Or should it be 3 Manpower and 2 Resource (graphic says 2 Manpower and 4 Resource)? >3 manpower, 2 resource (number of coins and soldiers) 6. 4.1 Purchase Phase. In what order do players decide what they purchase? How about board placement for new units, where the order is VERY important? >Simultaneously in a friendly game, write-and-reveal in a cutthroat game. 7. 6.2 Purchasing new units. The example in 6.2 shows new armies cost 2 Resource and 4 Manpower while the Player Aid Chart shows 2 Resource and 5 Manpower. Which is correct? >5 manpower 8. 6.4 Recovery. I assume this is the same as "Repair" on the Player Aid Chart? >yes, and on a couple of cards as well. 9. 9.6 Combat across Mountain Route. Does the defender add one to his rolls during ALL rounds, or only during the first combat round? Is this interpretation the same for sieges? >All; yes. 10. 12.5. Lifting Sieges Example: Prussian units are besieging a space neutral to both Prussia and Austria. The fortification strength started at 3 and has been reduced to 1. Austrians enter the space and the Prussians leave. Does the fortification level stay at 1 or does it go back to 3 if the Austrians decide to immediately besiege? >1, if it is not allied to Austria (nothing is "neutral" in this game). 11. 15.1 Territorial Transfer. Can the power accepting surrender take less areas than the rule stipulates (such as deciding to take 0 in Europe or 0, 1, or 2 elsewhere)? >No, provided they are available. 12. 15.2 Force Reparation. Must the surrendering power move his units out of the victorious powers areas, as well? >yes 13. 15.3 Duration of Peace. Since one can\'t be attacked during winter turns, should winter turns be included in the duration of the die roll or just campaign turns? >All turns (Winter campaign turns are allowed by card play, though they appear rarely). 14. 15.3 Duration of Peace. Can the player SURRENDERING attack the victorious player during this time? If so, does this let the victorious player attack back, even if peace is being enforced? >Yes, and yes. 15. 18.6 Papal States. If France, Spain, or Austria pay 2 Resources to besiege, is this IN ADDITION to normal siege costs? >yes 16. 18.6 Papal States. If France, Spain, or Austria take the Papal States from another player, do they get double resources (and victory points) for the remainder of the time they hold the Papal States or just for the turn they took them? >Remainder of the time they hold them. The papacy views things in the very long term. 17. 18.8 and 18.7. Example: Let\'s say France controls Saxony and Prussia conquers Saxony. France keeps 1 Saxon unit in play per 18.7. Later on, Austria takes Saxony from a Prussian surrender. Can both Austria and France have a Saxon unit in play? What if France and Austria are enemies? >Unlikely, but yes and yes. Much as mercenaries from Holy Roman Empire areas could fight one another. 18. Scenarios. Are Event cards dealt before or after set-up? >Before (see 3.0) 19. Scenarios. Does the Austrian side get to see what units the Prussian side has drawn prior to setting up? >Yes, as does the Prussian (draw units, then set up). Alternate Rules: **** One thing that I disliked : you can automatically retreat before battle. It would feel better if the retreat resulted from a die roll, modified by a leader. If you add the retreat before battle to the impossibility of overrun, you can block enemy armies with a few crappy units without even losing them. Not much of a problem considering the importance of holding every home provinces but still... **** Naval Rules These need some help... I'm trying to fool around with the Campaign Scenario (so I can teach others), and I keep running into (unintentional) naval blockades. I sure hope Avalanche does rewrite this entire section. Here are some ideas for the naval movement/interception: 1. Naval fleets/groups have a movement allowance of 3 (and there's a card that can reduce this to 2 or up it to 4). Why not have the naval moves come in "impulses?" That is, the 1st impulse, you use 1 movement point (and this point is used even if a fleet doesn't move). All naval units in the same area after each impulse can be intercepted as a group (prevents the gamey tactic Andy Maly discovered of moving fleets units one at a time so they'd be harder to intercept -- plus, the way the rules are written, only one intercept is allowed!). Then go to impulse 2, with new interception possibilities, etc. The non-moving player can make 1 interception attempt vs. each enemy fleet/group after each impulse. This forces the intercepting player to choose who intercepts, but gives flexibility in that each fleet/group could theoretically make 3 interception attempts each Action Phase (instead of artificially limiting it to 1). I think that would solve all kinds of problems, and it works (I've tried it). 2. Interception in areas -- the rules (10.41) indicate that you can intercept only with fleets that are in the sea area being entered. The "Note" in 10.43 shows that you can intercept from coastal areas. I assume that interception is allowed from coastal areas? (I would play yes, as this makes sense.) 2a. I played that fleets can only be interecpted by other fleets in the same sea area when declaring a blockade. I think that makes sense. 3. Armies retreating from battle by sea -- can they be intercepted? I played yes, what do y'all think? I really like how point #1 above works. As far as I can tell, it will prevent gamey tactics while letting the naval game play out. Of course, I'm sure I missed something... ;-) >You have a lot of good ideas there. let me toy around with them a bit. Original intent for naval interception was as follows: 1. The phasing fleet gets to intercept once (i.e. select a target and attack if it intercepts the target). 2. On defense, the non-phasing fleet gets to attempt one intercept per fleet/group that enters the sea area that the non-phasing fleet ocupies. 3. Non-phasing fleets in areas adjacent to a sea area(s) may attempt to intercept fleet/goups that enter those areas with the one per sea area rule in place.