PP3 Le Viet Relief aka And/Or again

Nineteen Kilo

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2005
Messages
795
Reaction score
323
Location
Fair Oaks CA
Country
llUnited States
I’m sorry to keep asking this question but there is just something about the “And/Or” in the VC that for the life of me I can’t wrap my head around. In a previous question some patient soul explained to me that it is essentially a computer programing term and not an English language term. Ultimately, I just decided to read “and/or” as “or” (the "and" thrown in for a pedantic sore loser decades ago).

So, I am planning to play PP3 Le Viet Relief when I get together with the guys in March and I am trying to get ahead of a debate I know will ensue. Here’s the wording of the VC:

The Germans win at the end of Game Turn 5 if there is > 1 American Infantry unit > 6 hexes from a north edge hex and/or < 14 Exit VP of American units (and/or German prisoners) have exited from the north map edge. Otherwise, the Germans win at game end if they Control > 1 building on board 15.

But in this particular case I read the and/or in red above to mean the Americans can lose on Turn 5 if they do not meet both conditions (can’t stray 6 hexes from north board edge and they must have exited 14 VP from the map). My reasoning is that the VC need to be read from the German POV so it is they that can win if they stop the Americans from doing one "or" the other; thus from the American POV they must achieve one "and" the other.

Do I have this right?
 
Last edited:

volgaG68

Fighting WWII One DR At A Time
Joined
Jun 15, 2012
Messages
3,212
Reaction score
1,549
Location
La Crosse, KS
First name
Chris
Country
llUnited States
In your example, the Germans can win by forcing A or forcing B, or forcing A&B. If the "/or" was not there, the Germans could only win by fulfilling both. If the "and/" was not there, they could win by fulfilling A or B, but a rules-lawyer could then say that by fulfilling both they could not technically win. Make sense?
 

volgaG68

Fighting WWII One DR At A Time
Joined
Jun 15, 2012
Messages
3,212
Reaction score
1,549
Location
La Crosse, KS
First name
Chris
Country
llUnited States
I required this same explanation several times over the years. What really solved troublesome VC for me though was reading it first, then reading it without the "and/", then reading it without the "/or". Then reading it again as printed. It finally made sense to me that way as to exactly what the designer was trying to say, leaving no room for technical legal wiggles.
 

Nineteen Kilo

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2005
Messages
795
Reaction score
323
Location
Fair Oaks CA
Country
llUnited States
both conditions can happen OR one of the two conditions

How's that work for you??
It does actually.

I'm anticipating being the Americans, so I was trying to read the VC from their POV (which is probably a mistake I admit). So, the American can allow neither event to take place - effectively meaning they must achieve both of those conditions.

But I understand what you're saying, the Germans can win by achieving one or the other (or both for that matter).
 

bprobst

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2003
Messages
2,533
Reaction score
1,438
Location
Melbourne, Australia
First name
Bruce
Country
llAustralia
So, a simple OR would suffice.
No, it wouldn't. Did you not read the explanation above? If only (A OR B) succeeds, then (A AND B) fails. Since that's silly, you need (A AND/OR B) to cover all possibilities.

ASL VC are not written in conversational English.
 

Philippe D.

Elder Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
2,132
Reaction score
1,393
Location
Bordeaux
Country
llFrance
I don't agree with Bruce above (A OR B to me includes the possibility of A AND B), but it might be better, when VCs of this type appear, to rewrite them from the other side's point of view. Whenever the VCs say that Side X wins by fulfilling A and/or B, they could equally say that the other side wins by fulfilling (not A) AND (not B).

Doesn't seem to work too well for the above mentioned scenario, where the VCs include both an instant-death condition and a game-end condition.

"The Germans win at the end of turn 5, UNLESS there is no American unit >= 6 hexes from a north edge hex AND >= 15 Exit VP of American units have exited off the north edge; otherwise they win at game end if the control >1 building on board 15."

BTW - these are horribly complex victory conditions; they would probably be enough for me not to play such a scenario. And I like logic probably more than most.
 

sswann

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
2,911
Reaction score
1,379
Location
Middle of Kansas
First name
Steven
Country
llUnited States
I do not understand the problem here.
The use of "and/or" has been used in ASL scenarios from the beginning of ASL.
And this is the first time in my memory that it has become a problem.
If after <30 years and thousands of scenarios it is not understood... then pick a different scenario. ;)
 

Actionjick

Forum Guru
Joined
Apr 23, 2020
Messages
7,468
Reaction score
4,995
Location
Kent, Ohio
First name
Darryl
Country
llUnited States
I do not understand the problem here.
The use of "and/or" has been used in ASL scenarios from the beginning of ASL.
And this is the first time in my memory that it has become a problem.
If after <30 years and thousands of scenarios it is not understood... then pick a different scenario. ;)
Excellent advice!
 

Nineteen Kilo

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2005
Messages
795
Reaction score
323
Location
Fair Oaks CA
Country
llUnited States
I do not understand the problem here.
The use of "and/or" has been used in ASL scenarios from the beginning of ASL.
And this is the first time in my memory that it has become a problem.
If after <30 years and thousands of scenarios it is not understood... then pick a different scenario. ;)
Steve if you take a look at the scenario that Hutch kindly attached to his post you'll see the scenario effectively has three sides: German, American (for the first 5 turns), and Free French (who enter on turn 4 and remain until the end of the game). We are going to play it as a three-player scenario; I will be the Americans for those 5 turns.

A good chunk of my confusion stems from my reading the VC with the attitude of "What do I need to do as the Americans?" not caring about the overall VC of the Free French (or Germans). So, I effectively went off the rails before I ever read the VC. I know better, but there it is.
 

volgaG68

Fighting WWII One DR At A Time
Joined
Jun 15, 2012
Messages
3,212
Reaction score
1,549
Location
La Crosse, KS
First name
Chris
Country
llUnited States
A good chunk of my confusion stems from my reading the VC with the attitude of "What do I need to do as the Americans?" not caring about the overall VC of the Free French (or Germans). So, I effectively went off the rails before I ever read the VC. I know better, but there it is.
Not knowing offhand what the terrain is on those particular map halves, except for board 2, I'm making this guess on where each 'side' sets up, where they will be moving towards, and when the reinforcements arrive. As the US player, it would seem your goal would be to slowly perform a fighting withdrawal off the North edge of the playing map. If you do set some of your units up on/south of hexrow 'F', be sure they are on/north of hexrow 'E' before the end of Game Turn 5. Also, while lending your withdrawing FP to help the Partisans hold the Germans back until the FF reinforcements arrive, make sure you are gradually exiting some off of the north playing edge; at least 15 EVP of them before the end of Game Turn 5. Considering that the US has 20 EVP plus whatever the EVP amount of the Jeep is (NRBH), you want to have very little US forces left on map by that time. It seems you are only to help delay the German advance until the FF arrive. That, in my view, is what the US needs to do to contribute to the Allied win, and at least not contribute to an Allied defeat.
 

Jazz

Inactive
Joined
Feb 3, 2003
Messages
12,188
Reaction score
2,739
Location
The Empty Quarter
Country
llLithuania
A good chunk of my confusion stems from my reading the VC with the attitude of "What do I need to do as the Americans?" not caring about the overall VC of the Free French (or Germans). So, I effectively went off the rails before I ever read the VC. I know better, but there it is.
Well, if you are worrying about determining VC for 3 players in a scenario designed for 2 players you and your opponents are on your own. Figure out amongst yourselves as to what VC you want to play to as you are already beyond the pale of the scenario and it's VC as designed.

The rules of logic don't care what your opinions are. They are very strict and very clear. You're free to disagree, but it won't make you right.
<shrug> I do not recall where in the rulz does it say that VC are to be read as strict logical syllogisms instead of conversational English? I think most rational non-logicians would not read those VC as an XOR? Indeed a number of posts in this thread indicate that at least a few people do not.

Of course, consenting adults can read and play with whatever rulz and/or VC they see fit.
 
Last edited:

Larry

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2003
Messages
5,383
Reaction score
1,735
Location
Guada La Habra
Country
llUnited States
Or can be conjunctive or disjunctive. That's English.

In ASL, certain terms have adopted a status as a term or phrase of art. In ASL, or is disjunctive, and is conjunctive, and and/or is conjunctive or disjunctive. As Jim Bishop pointed out last year, the / or virgule means (M-W (slash)):

a mark / used typically to denote "or" (as in and/or), "and or" (as in straggler/deserter), or "per" (as in feet/second).
Philippe is correct that ASL violates proper use of English by using or as less inclusive than and/or. M-W:

used in logic as a sentential connective that forms a complex sentence which is true when at least one of its constituent sentences is true.
We become Humpty Dumpty as this point and the words mean what the ASLRB means, nothing more and nothing less.
 

bprobst

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2003
Messages
2,533
Reaction score
1,438
Location
Melbourne, Australia
First name
Bruce
Country
llAustralia
I do not recall where in the rulz does it say that VC are to be read as strict logical syllogisms instead of conversational English?
The rules don't work as "conversational English", and it's certainly not how they are written. Any scenario VC (or SSR) written vaguely is going to be difficult, if not impossible, to interpret correctly. I sure hope that you are not advocating that scenarios need to be written vaguely?

I'll grant that there are frequently different ways to write the same rule, and more than one of those ways can be as precise as is required. Once a VC (or other rule) has been written in any particular way, though, it must be read as precisely as it allows. In ASL, OR is Exclusive; if it wasn't, there would never be a need for AND/OR. As mentioned above, this has been part of the ASL rules since Day 1. Silly to start complaining about it now; even sillier to claim that it doesn't exist at all.
 
Top