The wonderful "and/or" VC conditions.

Stewart

Elder Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2006
Messages
3,597
Reaction score
699
Location
Russia
Country
llRussia
VC:
The French win at Game End if there are <3 GO American Squad Equivalents(SE) in buildings J4 and/or E5.

at Game end: 5 SE in J4/ 1.5 SE in E5.

Note: the condition is for the FRENCH to win.

Who wins?
 

PresterJohn

Elder Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2022
Messages
1,400
Reaction score
879
Location
The Orient
Country
llAustralia
I read it that you have 6.5 GO SE in J4 and E5 and the French lose. I also read it that you have 5 GO SE in J4 or E5 and the French lose again.

I think the only way for the French to win would be for the VC to say "<3 GO American Squad Equivalents(SE) in both buildings J4 and E5". But it doesn't say that.
 

Houtje

Member
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
160
Reaction score
102
Location
Goes
Country
llNetherlands
I'm not sure I agree: I think 'and/or' is supposed to mean that the VC are fulfilled when using either 'and' or 'or'. So, in this case:
Option A (with 'and'): "The French win at Game End if there are <3 GO American Squad Equivalents (SE) in buildings J4 and E5." Not fulfilled, since J4 and E5 do not both have <3 GO American Squad Equivalents (SE).
Option B (with 'or'): "The French win at Game End if there are <3 GO American Squad Equivalents (SE) in buildings J4 or E5." This is fulfilled, since building E5 has <3 GO American Squad Equivalents (SE).

So the French win, I think. But hey man, that's just like, you know, my opinion.

Btw, the formulation of the VC does feel a bit off (for a non-native speaker, I admit).
 
Last edited:

clubby

Elder Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
3,393
Reaction score
1,424
Location
CA
Country
llUnited States
French win. And/or either of two stated possibilities. I think using and/or instead of or eliminates the possibility of having this discussion if both conditions are fulfilled. Or, grammatically, does not include both even if in your mind you think it does. You can have this OR that.
 

SSlunt

Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
471
Reaction score
611
Location
Calgary AB
Country
llCanada
Could it be cumulative? 1.5 SE in each of the Buildings for a total of 3.
The standard VC (if there is such a thing) usually has the and/or to allow you to win with achieving one or both of the objectives. In this case if you have <3 in one of the building or if there are <3 in each of the buildings
The current reading of the VC, from my view does not reference a cumulative total for both buildings.
 

apbills

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2003
Messages
3,589
Reaction score
1,094
Location
Pewaukee, WI
Country
llUnited States
A poorly written VC, however, I do agree that you need to have 3 SE in both, as others have stipulated. It would have been better to make it a positive type condition, i.e., the Americans win if they have >= 3 SE in both J4 and E5. Eliminates the entire and/or language.
 

zgrose

Elder Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2004
Messages
4,488
Reaction score
1,186
Location
Kingwood, TX
First name
Zoltan
Country
llUnited States
Seems like the and/or precludes the "both" sentiment above, but only the publisher could say for sure. I still have my $5 on the sum of <3 in both/either building.
 

clubby

Elder Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
3,393
Reaction score
1,424
Location
CA
Country
llUnited States
And or is not both. It's literally one or the other or both.
 

clubby

Elder Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
3,393
Reaction score
1,424
Location
CA
Country
llUnited States
Greater than or equal to 3 in each would say greater than or equal to 3 in both buildings this and that.
 

zgrose

Elder Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2004
Messages
4,488
Reaction score
1,186
Location
Kingwood, TX
First name
Zoltan
Country
llUnited States
@clubby Don't agree but I'm just going off a reasonable interpretation of the scenario's context. At the end of the day, there are about 100 ways to write VC that all seem like they say the same thing. Sometimes it's best to just go with one's gut (and confirm with the opponent) than trying to get too literal. IMO.
 

PresterJohn

Elder Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2022
Messages
1,400
Reaction score
879
Location
The Orient
Country
llAustralia
When I see the two faces in the VC, it seems to mean "<3 GO American Squad Equivalents(SE) in both buildings J4 and E5" and the French now win.

I hope the game was fun regardless of who won and/or lost.
 

Jwil2020

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2020
Messages
474
Reaction score
614
Location
Baltimore, MD
Country
llUnited States
IMO, the only logical interpretation is that the designer intended that the Americans win if they have a total of at least 3 SE in either or both buildings at game end. IOW, 1.5 in Building A and 1.5 in Building B =win. Or all 3 in Building A, or all 3 in Building B, etc.

To expect them to have 3 GO SE in each, for a total of 6 GO SE, would make American victory nearly impossible. They start the game with only 7.5 SE. Thus the French, with 13.5 SE (and two AFVs that enter on turn 3), would only need to eliminate/trap in Melee/break 2 SE by game end to win as the Americans would not have enough GO troops left to garrison both buildings.

I've seen the scenario played 3 times using the above interpretation and two games came down to a last turn DR, while the 3rd ended early when the French hit their CVP. Seems to me those are the kind of results the designer was expecting.
 

clubby

Elder Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
3,393
Reaction score
1,424
Location
CA
Country
llUnited States
@clubby Don't agree but I'm just going off a reasonable interpretation of the scenario's context. At the end of the day, there are about 100 ways to write VC that all seem like they say the same thing. Sometimes it's best to just go with one's gut (and confirm with the opponent) than trying to get too literal. IMO.
They're the VC. I think the only possible way to read them is literally. I'm not going to go with somebody's gut when I can read English. No offense intended. Also, you seem to agree with jwil who said EXACTLY the same thing I did, so I'm not even sure we disagree.
 

SSlunt

Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
471
Reaction score
611
Location
Calgary AB
Country
llCanada
Greater than or equal to 3 in each would say greater than or equal to 3 in both buildings this and that.
I would absolutely disagree with you on this. I am scheduled to play this scenario and would like to get an answer from the TD if an answer is not available from the designer
 

clubby

Elder Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
3,393
Reaction score
1,424
Location
CA
Country
llUnited States
I would absolutely disagree with you on this. I am scheduled to play this scenario and would like to get an answer from the TD if an answer is not available from the designer
Instead of disagreeing with me why don't you explain what you think it means? I think that's more productive than simply saying you disagree. I've got one guy disagreeing with what I said yet agreeing with somebody else that said the same thing.
 

SSlunt

Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
471
Reaction score
611
Location
Calgary AB
Country
llCanada
Without direction from above I would play it as jwil2020 has stated

And it looks like I would be wrong now. 10 or more CVP of French immediate American win OR >= 3SE Americans in both building and the French lose
 
Last edited:

Jwil2020

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2020
Messages
474
Reaction score
614
Location
Baltimore, MD
Country
llUnited States
FWIW, a quick internet search on the use of the "and/or" clause revealed this:
  • You should use and/or when both options are applicable in its place. "I would like cake and/or pie" means "I would like one or both of the following: cake; pie."
  • The main reason for using and/or is to remove the ambiguity of whether and means "only both" and whether or means "only one." And/or explicitly means "it could be one of these or both of these."
And we all know how trustworthy the internet is. o_O
 
Top