The wonderful "and/or" VC conditions.

Stewart

Elder Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2006
Messages
3,597
Reaction score
699
Location
Russia
Country
llRussia
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.
I think the concept of the scneario is that the Americans have to counterattack if they lose a building which is just about guaranteed instead of just concentrating all FP in one location...it's a 5 turn attack Counterattack game.

OR the VC are just Jacked.
 

Stewart

Elder Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2006
Messages
3,597
Reaction score
699
Location
Russia
Country
llRussia
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.
This would be the case IF the VC had "American " vs "French" in the VC.
The American win if they get 10CVP...there isn't any way the French can take both buildings without losing 5 squads to that OB.
 

Jwil2020

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2020
Messages
474
Reaction score
614
Location
Baltimore, MD
Country
llUnited States
This would be the case IF the VC had "American " vs "French" in the VC.
The American win if they get 10CVP...there isn't any way the French can take both buildings without losing 5 squads to that OB.
I'm not sure we are in disagreement. Any VC which states how one side can win, also implies how one side can lose. And the VC does not state that the French need to 'take' both buildings to win. They only have to ensure that the Americans do not have enough GO SE remaining to meet the VC requirements. Granted, avoiding the 10 CVP cap is a real challenge for the French. However, the American player is equally challenged by needing to maintain a sufficient GO garrison in either (or both) building(s) while avoiding encirclement and getting rout paths cut off, especially after the French AFVs roll in on turn 3.

IMO, this is a fun and quick-playing scenario that gives both sides multiple options in defense and attack. According to ROAR and the SA, it is an almost perfect 50:50 balance. Which tells me the designer hit a home run. :)
 
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
231
Reaction score
156
Location
Paris area
Country
llFrance
I have checked the French website "Cote1664" about this scenario; it is this:
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.
It would have been better put like this. Therefore the US has two ways to win, either with GO units in these 2 buildings or CVP cap.
 

Larry

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2003
Messages
5,556
Reaction score
1,920
Location
Guada La Habra
Country
llUnited States
Testing the language presented with "and" compared to the meaning of "or" leads to the correct result. Stating the VC in the positive as opposed to the negative is clearer/less debatable.

It would have been better put like this. Therefore the US has two ways to win, either with GO units in these 2 buildings or CVP cap.
 

SSlunt

Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
471
Reaction score
611
Location
Calgary AB
Country
llCanada
This would be the case IF the VC had "American " vs "French" in the VC.
The American win if they get 10CVP...there isn't any way the French can take both buildings without losing 5 squads to that OB.
Only personal cvp. Kiill the Ht and no crew survived you get only 2 cvp. If the crew survives no cvp
 

Stewart

Elder Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2006
Messages
3,597
Reaction score
699
Location
Russia
Country
llRussia
I'm not sure we are in disagreement. Any VC which states how one side can win, also implies how one side can lose. And the VC does not state that the French need to 'take' both buildings to win. They only have to ensure that the Americans do not have enough GO SE remaining to meet the VC requirements. Granted, avoiding the 10 CVP cap is a real challenge for the French. However, the American player is equally challenged by needing to maintain a sufficient GO garrison in either (or both) building(s) while avoiding encirclement and getting rout paths cut off, especially after the French AFVs roll in on turn 3.

IMO, this is a fun and quick-playing scenario that gives both sides multiple options in defense and attack. According to ROAR and the SA, it is an almost perfect 50:50 balance. Which tells me the designer hit a home run. :)
Exactly, THe French WIN if the Americans HAVE less than 3 GO in either building.
Therefore, the Americans LOSE if they have <3 in either building.

The Americans can get the INSTA Win with CVP the French cannot. American CVP are meaningless only to the extent of eliminating most of the Americans, but they don't have to as the CVP aren't part of the French WIN condition only GO MMC in buildings
The Americans can lose every unit it has in the attempt to gain 10CVP.
They literally can get the 10th CVP at the lastCC Phase of the Game...NOTICE: the Americans get to move last. This means they counterattack to kill. The French are wholly ineffective as the attacker in CC...yet the Americans have that advantage...thus the CVP incentive to slaughter the Frenchies. For a 5 turn scenario, its a double attack posture for the sides involved.
 

Stewart

Elder Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2006
Messages
3,597
Reaction score
699
Location
Russia
Country
llRussia
I have checked the French website "Cote1664" about this scenario; it is this:

It would have been better put like this. Therefore the US has two ways to win, either with GO units in these 2 buildings or CVP cap.
Yes, the Americans need GO in both buildings or the CVP cap.
The French have one way to win...<3 GO in 1+ buildings.
The VC say exactly that as written
 
Top