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

Pirate and Navy Placement

Expand Messages
  • MarkSullv
    I m not sure why I m confused on this, but I have a couple questions. The following expanions and rule variants are in effect and relevant: Warlords & Pirates
    Message 1 of 7 , Apr 15, 2005
      I'm not sure why I'm confused on this, but I have a couple questions.

      The following expanions and rule variants are in effect and relevant:
      Warlords & Pirates of the Neutral Zone
      Random Open

      So, superpowers and foreign territories are chosen. Superpowers
      receive a navy in each sea zone they have a home port on, in which no
      other superpower has an adjacent port. Then, pirates are placed in
      any sea which has no adjacent territories (with a port) occupied by a
      superpower.

      A couple questions:

      1) SUPERPOWER NAVIES
      So, if South America starts with Turkey, for example, does this mean
      that USSR will not get a navy in the Black Sea? Or should the
      superpowers ALWAYS get navies in their sea zones with no conflict
      with another superpower's home territories?

      2) PIRATE PLACEMENT
      I think I read somewhere about placing pirates in sea zones in which
      the number of warlord-controlled ports outnumbered any single
      superpower-controlled ports? For example, South America draws
      Arabia, North America drew Iran, and warlords were placed in Pakistan
      and Iraq. Should I place a pirate in the Arabian Sea then?

      Many thanks in advance,

      Mark
    • aka_tom_w
      How about this: Place Armies and Navies Each player receives (in the corresponding color to that of his superpower) his armies and navies. They may place one
      Message 2 of 7 , Apr 17, 2005
        How about this:

        "Place Armies and Navies
        Each player receives (in the corresponding color to that of his superpower) his armies and
        navies. They may place one army on each of their home territories as well as any foreign
        territory they have resources. A player may also place one basic navy in a light blue sea
        next to each of his home territories with a port. However, a player may NOT place a navy
        in a sea next to any territory that is occupied by an opponent, unless that territory does
        not have a port in the same sea. An example of this is the Barents Sea; Kola has a port on
        that sea but Scandinavia does not. This means place navies in uncontested light blue sea
        zones bordering your home country, in the event of a contested light blue sea, this means
        a light blue sea on which players both have a port, that light blue sea remains empty,
        neither player is permitted to deploy there.
        Place one navy on Resource Card seas you were dealt. In the event of a dispute over
        possession of a light blue sea zone the player dealt the resource card in the sea zone
        places his navy there.
        Navies are not placed in light blue seas bordering their foreign neutral territories they
        occupy that contain resources.
        "



        --- In Supremacy@yahoogroups.com, "MarkSullv" <Mark.V.Sullivan@g...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > I'm not sure why I'm confused on this, but I have a couple questions.
        >
        > The following expanions and rule variants are in effect and relevant:
        > Warlords & Pirates of the Neutral Zone
        > Random Open
        >
        > So, superpowers and foreign territories are chosen. Superpowers
        > receive a navy in each sea zone they have a home port on, in which no
        > other superpower has an adjacent port. Then, pirates are placed in
        > any sea which has no adjacent territories (with a port) occupied by a
        > superpower.
        >
        > A couple questions:
        >
        > 1) SUPERPOWER NAVIES
        > So, if South America starts with Turkey, for example, does this mean
        > that USSR will not get a navy in the Black Sea? Or should the
        > superpowers ALWAYS get navies in their sea zones with no conflict
        > with another superpower's home territories?
        >
        > 2) PIRATE PLACEMENT
        > I think I read somewhere about placing pirates in sea zones in which
        > the number of warlord-controlled ports outnumbered any single
        > superpower-controlled ports? For example, South America draws
        > Arabia, North America drew Iran, and warlords were placed in Pakistan
        > and Iraq. Should I place a pirate in the Arabian Sea then?
        >
        > Many thanks in advance,
        >
        > Mark
      • MarkSullv
        Tom, Ok, I guess I just feel that Russia is at a major disadvantage there, since it is real hard for them to support their few sea zones, if they are shared.
        Message 3 of 7 , Apr 17, 2005
          Tom,

          Ok, I guess I just feel that Russia is at a major disadvantage there,
          since it is real hard for them to support their few sea zones, if they
          are shared. Well.. namely Black Sea. oh well...

          Any thoughts on pirates? I notice when I play random with 4 nations,
          there are VERY few pirates when I say pirates only inhabit seas with NO
          owned ports on them. And I thought I saw something about if warlord
          (or neutral) ports outnumbered superpowers, then a pirate could take
          that sea.

          Without that, I just feel like pirates are basically an afterthought...
          even though warlords would play a large role.

          Mark
        • Jim Boyd
          You are correct Mark. The Rules read that starting control of a light blue sea is based on the number of ports controlled at the start. If more are nuetral
          Message 4 of 7 , Apr 17, 2005
            You are correct Mark. The Rules read that starting control of a light blue
            sea is based on the number of ports controlled at the start. If more are
            nuetral then it starts as a pirate.

            Jim

            -----Original Message-----
            From: Supremacy@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Supremacy@yahoogroups.com]On
            Behalf Of MarkSullv
            Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2005 9:57 PM
            To: Supremacy@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [Supremacy] Re: Pirate and Navy Placement






            Tom,

            Ok, I guess I just feel that Russia is at a major disadvantage there,
            since it is real hard for them to support their few sea zones, if they
            are shared. Well.. namely Black Sea. oh well...

            Any thoughts on pirates? I notice when I play random with 4 nations,
            there are VERY few pirates when I say pirates only inhabit seas with NO
            owned ports on them. And I thought I saw something about if warlord
            (or neutral) ports outnumbered superpowers, then a pirate could take
            that sea.

            Without that, I just feel like pirates are basically an afterthought...
            even though warlords would play a large role.

            Mark









            Yahoo! Groups Links
          • aka_tom_w
            I believe Jim is correct in his Official Rule interpretation. I would like to suggest however that the official rules sometimes REALLY need house rules or
            Message 5 of 7 , Apr 18, 2005
              I believe Jim is correct in his Official Rule interpretation.

              I would like to suggest however that the official rules sometimes REALLY
              need house rules or "unofficial" amendments to make them playable or fair
              work with balance in the rest of the game.

              It is ALWAYS good to understand the intention and meaning of the official
              rules before mendling with them but sometimes they REALLY need to be
              modified IMHO.

              I have never played even one game with Warlords and Pirates so I cannot
              commment on any house rules that make that expansion set work better.
              BUT I am guess there may be other folks here who have some idea's or
              opinions.

              -tom w

              --- In Supremacy@yahoogroups.com, "MarkSullv" <Mark.V.Sullivan@g...>
              wrote:
              >
              >
              > Tom,
              >
              > Ok, I guess I just feel that Russia is at a major disadvantage there,
              > since it is real hard for them to support their few sea zones, if they
              > are shared. Well.. namely Black Sea. oh well...
              >
              > Any thoughts on pirates? I notice when I play random with 4 nations,
              > there are VERY few pirates when I say pirates only inhabit seas with NO
              > owned ports on them. And I thought I saw something about if warlord
              > (or neutral) ports outnumbered superpowers, then a pirate could take
              > that sea.
              >
              > Without that, I just feel like pirates are basically an afterthought...
              > even though warlords would play a large role.
              >
              > Mark
            • Jim Boyd
              My group had many rules pertaining the Warlords and Pirates that allowed for them to actually play as active players. Selling them arms and such according to
              Message 6 of 7 , Apr 18, 2005
                My group had many rules pertaining the Warlords and Pirates that allowed for
                them to actually play as active players. Selling them arms and such
                according to the rules we found could be abused especially with the
                additional units that we added to round out what Robert Simpson intended to
                eventually release. I'll dig them out and post them here.

                If you've not played a game with all expansions.....(Fortuna not as
                needed)....then you haven't really enjoyed the game to it's fullest. I am
                always befuddled by how people view this game as simply a wargame. It's not
                Risk or Axis and Allies at all. It's a geo-political game. Warfare is only
                one type of diplomacy and only one facet of the game.

                How many of you use the Tournament Scoring rules for all games? If you
                don't then that would explain why it is viewed as a wargame only. The
                Tournament scoring rules allow for many strategies or combinations there of
                to win the game without eliminating all the other players.

                Jim

                -----Original Message-----
                From: Supremacy@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Supremacy@yahoogroups.com]On
                Behalf Of aka_tom_w
                Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 10:36 AM
                To: Supremacy@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: [Supremacy] Re: Pirate and Navy Placement (re: house rules and
                modifications)





                I believe Jim is correct in his Official Rule interpretation.

                I would like to suggest however that the official rules sometimes REALLY
                need house rules or "unofficial" amendments to make them playable or fair
                work with balance in the rest of the game.

                It is ALWAYS good to understand the intention and meaning of the official
                rules before mendling with them but sometimes they REALLY need to be
                modified IMHO.

                I have never played even one game with Warlords and Pirates so I cannot
                commment on any house rules that make that expansion set work better.
                BUT I am guess there may be other folks here who have some idea's or
                opinions.

                -tom w
              • MarkSullv
                Jim, Please do post them. I am working on a network game version of Supremacy, and I am also trying to make them more active players. Each warlord or pirate
                Message 7 of 7 , Apr 18, 2005
                  Jim,

                  Please do post them. I am working on a network game version of
                  Supremacy, and I am also trying to make them more active players. Each
                  warlord or pirate has a stance with each player which may be affected
                  by any number of things. This stance determines if the warlord will
                  even do business with a superpower, and also affects prices while doing
                  business with them. Also, I am working with the concepts of companies
                  and warlords. If a company is unearthed in a territory with a warlord,
                  you had better stay on friendly terms with him, or you may be paying
                  quite a bit more for those resources.

                  I have no intention to allow them to attack or move between territories
                  of course, but I am trying to get them a bit closer to active players.

                  Mark

                  --- In Supremacy@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Boyd" <rdboyd@b...> wrote:
                  > My group had many rules pertaining the Warlords and Pirates that
                  allowed for
                  > them to actually play as active players. Selling them arms and such
                  > according to the rules we found could be abused especially with the
                  > additional units that we added to round out what Robert Simpson
                  intended to
                  > eventually release. I'll dig them out and post them here.
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.