FOFC Advanced Civilization Board Game

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

so you mean that you have to move all 6 guys at once? or maybe just move all the guys eventually onto the same place (as kong as the place can hold that many?)

This is a tricky question. Britrock answered 'eventually onto the same place' but I would answer that both are right. I mean, you have to have 6 guys in the territory when you want to build the city. So the turn you're doing it, all 6 guys have to be there at once, after the movement phase is over. And the conflict phase, too, which can be important.

[CrimsonFox]

And I made the ship last round. It was somewhat an accidnet as I was seeing what countries were around and suddenly this ship pops up. And then I stupidly hit done instead of reset. But I lived with it since I could get those islands. But now I'm unsure. Do I actually have people on those boats? I would think so since I converted two to do it. Now I don't know what I can do with this boat.

[Passacaglia]

You don't have people on them. It costs the two population just to build the ship, and once the ship was built, they went away. Plus, it costs one population to maintain it, and that population needs to be in the territory bordering the boat. And since you don't have any population there, you can't maintain the boat, anyway.

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

You don't have people on them. It costs the two population just to build the ship, and once the ship was built, they went away. Plus, it costs one population to maintain it, and that population needs to be in the territory bordering the boat. And since you don't have any population there, you can't maintain the boat, anyway.

oh boy! I guess I will just try not to come in last then. If that admin thing works let me know. Really I did not mean to build that. And obviously I didn't realize it didn't act as a unit.

[Passacaglia]

CF, it looks like no luck on getting your ship from last round unbuilt. Sorry. The good news is that IMO Civ is a very forgiving game. If you've got a low population, you get to go last, which is nice, you'll probably benefit when someone draws a Civil War calamity, and you'll probably get left alone when people are distributing losses due to the Famine and Epidemic calamities.

Anyway, it's my turn to build ships, but I'll wait until you're sure that you've reset any ship-building actions from this turn, so this doesn't happen again. Let me know if you're okay for me to make my turn!

[Passacaglia]

A little smooth talking, and I got the admin to give CF two more population to make up for the ship he built. The ship is still there, but it's going to die off anyway, and there's nothing CF can do with it. So we should all be even.

One slight problem -- he added the extra two population to Aquitania, which CF couldn't have reached in two turns from the starting point he chose at Corduba. Of course, if he had chosen to start at Lusitania, which would have been wiser IMO, he could have reached Aquitania by now. Personally, I'm cool with that being no big deal, but it affects path, who might have been planning his moves based on knowing that CF was further south than he is now (though I don't have any good specifics of how he'd do that, personally).

I'd rather not get the admin involved, but I'll leave it to path and CF to work this out in a way that's agreeable to both, and for CF to realize he's already been bailed out big time so it's probably okay to give a little bit here, and for path to realize that if CF had been making wise moves in the beginning, he'd be in this position.

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

A little smooth talking, and I got the admin to give CF two more population to make up for the ship he built. The ship is still there, but it's going to die off anyway, and there's nothing CF can do with it. So we should all be even.

One slight problem -- he added the extra two population to Aquitania, which CF couldn't have reached in two turns from the starting point he chose at Corduba. Of course, if he had chosen to start at Lusitania, which would have been wiser IMO, he could have reached Aquitania by now. Personally, I'm cool with that being no big deal, but it affects path, who might have been planning his moves based on knowing that CF was further south than he is now (though I don't have any good specifics of how he'd do that, personally).

I'd rather not get the admin involved, but I'll leave it to path and CF to work this out in a way that's agreeable to both, and for CF to realize he's already been bailed out big time so it's probably okay to give a little bit here, and for path to realize that if CF had been making wise moves in the beginning, he'd be in this position.

awesome thanks. Yeah I sent a "beg" email to the admin too to remove the ship. But you've done that I see. ANyway. thanks. making the ship wasn't really intentional. I accidently clicked the mouse and there it was and didn't realize what was happening. Even though it happened I assumed it wouldn't cost me big as I figured the ship was a unit where I could take over those islands (other games act like this) but guess not.

Thanks again. I'll probably just take those extras and retreat make to my area.

[CrimsonFox]

SO what's the goal here. Don't we want to actually CLAIM these areas by having a unit in them? If there is no unit in a country, we don't own them right?

[Autumn]

You don't get a benefit from having an area, per se. But you want to grow your population, which requires spreading out. And you want to build cities, which require getting 6 units in a city site. Of course there will be conflict over territories as we spread out, so you want to have the numbers and strategic locations.

[Passacaglia]

Well, you never really 'own' a territory. You just have population tokens in it, or you don't.

Take Aquitania for example. You've got 2 dudes there, and it can hold 3. Great. There's room for one more. But let's say path wants to put dudes in Aquitania. There's a lot of things that can happen here.

Example 1: path brings 1 dude into Aquitania, and you keep your 2 there. So there's 3 in the territory, and it can hold 3. No conflict is needed, you keep your 2 there, and path keeps his 1.

Example 2: path brings 2 guys, and you bring in 2 from Pyrenees. So you've got 4, he's got 2. That's 6, but the territory can only hold 3. So there will be conflict. The civ that has the last amount of tokens in that territory loses a token first -- in this case, that's path, with 2. He loses 1, and now it's 4-1, still above 3, so conflict keeps going. You take turns at this point -- you lose a guy, and it's 3-1. His turn, he loses one, it's 3-0, your guys. You can say you 'own' it now if you want to, but there's nothing special about your being 3-0 instead of 2-1.

Example 3 -- path brings in 2 dudes, and you keep your 2 in there. 2 each, so that's 4, which is above 3, so there's conflict. Since you guys are tied at 2, You both lose a token at the same time. When that happens, it's 1-1, which is under 3, and conflict is over.

Example 4 -- path brings in 2, and you bring in 2 from Pyrenees, and 2 from Tarraconensis. With the 2 already there, you've got 6. So it's 6-2. He loses a guy first, it's 6-1. You lose a guy then, 5-1. He loses a guy next, it's 5-0. Then in a couple phases when it's time to remove excess population, you'll drop to 3, since that's all the territory can hold. Before remove excess population is city construction -- and if only you had 6 units there still, you could have built a city! Oh, although not really -- it's only 6 in a territory with a black or white square, but since Aquitania doesn't have one, you need 12.

The closest you can come to 'owning' a territory is having a city there. You can't place population tokens in a territory with a city, whether it's yours or someone else's -- the city is all that's there. You can attack a city -- to do so, you need to have at least 6 tokens, then the city gets replaced by 6 tokens, then conflict proceeds as before.

I hope that helps, but feel free to keep asking stuff!

[CrimsonFox]

some useful videos the admin sent me,

• Advanced Civilization Rules Explanation - Part 1a - YouTube (Part 1a (setup and phases 1-9))
• Advanced Civilization Rules Explanation - Part 1b - YouTube (Part 1b (phases 10[trade]+ and end game))
• Advanced Civilization Rules Explanation - Part 2 - YouTube (Part 2 (calamity and advancement overview))

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Well, you never really 'own' a territory. You just have population tokens in it, or you don't.

Take Aquitania for example. You've got 2 dudes there, and it can hold 3. Great. There's room for one more. But let's say path wants to put dudes in Aquitania. There's a lot of things that can happen here.

Example 1: path brings 1 dude into Aquitania, and you keep your 2 there. So there's 3 in the territory, and it can hold 3. No conflict is needed, you keep your 2 there, and path keeps his 1.

Example 2: path brings 2 guys, and you bring in 2 from Pyrenees. So you've got 4, he's got 2. That's 6, but the territory can only hold 3. So there will be conflict. The civ that has the last amount of tokens in that territory loses a token first -- in this case, that's path, with 2. He loses 1, and now it's 4-1, still above 3, so conflict keeps going. You take turns at this point -- you lose a guy, and it's 3-1. His turn, he loses one, it's 3-0, your guys. You can say you 'own' it now if you want to, but there's nothing special about your being 3-0 instead of 2-1.

Example 3 -- path brings in 2 dudes, and you keep your 2 in there. 2 each, so that's 4, which is above 3, so there's conflict. Since you guys are tied at 2, You both lose a token at the same time. When that happens, it's 1-1, which is under 3, and conflict is over.

Example 4 -- path brings in 2, and you bring in 2 from Pyrenees, and 2 from Tarraconensis. With the 2 already there, you've got 6. So it's 6-2. He loses a guy first, it's 6-1. You lose a guy then, 5-1. He loses a guy next, it's 5-0. Then in a couple phases when it's time to remove excess population, you'll drop to 3, since that's all the territory can hold. Before remove excess population is city construction -- and if only you had 6 units there still, you could have built a city! Oh, although not really -- it's only 6 in a territory with a black or white square, but since Aquitania doesn't have one, you need 12.

The closest you can come to 'owning' a territory is having a city there. You can't place population tokens in a territory with a city, whether it's yours or someone else's -- the city is all that's there. You can attack a city -- to do so, you need to have at least 6 tokens, then the city gets replaced by 6 tokens, then conflict proceeds as before.

I hope that helps, but feel free to keep asking stuff!

I think Passa is a warmonger and wants path and I to fight! KILL HIM!

[CrimsonFox]

so why does path only have 6 guys when the rest of us have 8

[Passacaglia]

My guess is that he had 4 population all in one territory, and population expansion is limited to 2 per territory. Not sure if that was a mistake or intentional.

[Warhammer]

That or a ship built, not looking at the map, at most you can add 2 guys to one territory during the pop growth phase.

[Autumn]

So looks like in Take Two nobody wanted to trade. But I'm still trying to get familiar with the trade mechanics on the site. I see you can post a message, letting people know what you want to trade. And then you can click on their colored boxes on the right to send them a message? How do you go about actually trading?

[britrock88]

Take Two? There are no cities yet... As for the first FOFC game, I think the site tends to wait until players are bumping the card-in-hand limit (8) before trading really gets going.

Mechanics... there's lots of good hover-text on the Trade Cards page, explaining calamities, showing the card images of the cards you don't have, so on. As you noticed, posting a public message of "Looking for ___, trading ___" is most helpful to the group. Typing and hitting enter up top accomplishes that. The little envelopes next to players' names on the rights link to email addresses for trade negotiation. To actually input a trade, though, just click within a player's colored box, but not on the envelope. A box will appear underneath that allows you to drag-and-drop your cards to add them to the trade. Once that box has opened up and you've dragged a card into it, I think it becomes pretty self-explanatory.

[Passacaglia]

Yeah, brit's right. No cities yet in Take Two, and in the first game, I guess Crete, Illyria, and Egypt could trade, but the game assumes we wouldn't bother. I don't recall even being given the option.

Brit has a lot of good points in his post, although I should also mention that there's a "lie" button that shows up once you are trading cards away. You have to trade cards in sets of at least 3, and you have to tell the truth about at least 2. So beware -- if someone offers you 4 cards, 2 of them can be lies, which means 2 of them can be calamities. Also, the 'unspecified' term is key here. Best I can explain it, it's like you're saying "this card is going to be the lie" -- so that's something to watch for when you're trading. If you want Bronze, and someone offers you Bronze, Salt, and Ochre, they could be telling the truth about the Salt and Ochre, but the Bronze could be a lie. However, if they offer you Bronze, Salt, and Unspecified, the Bronze and Salt have to be the truth. Brit also mentioned the 8-card limit, which is another thing to think about when you're trading -- if you don't buy any civilization cards, but have more than 8 cards (not including calamities), you will have to discard.

[britrock88]

Where is tarc when we need him (in both games)?

[Autumn]

So a wrinkle of conflicts I'm only now coming to understand as I do them in several games. I'll explain for anyone who is along wtih me on the learning curve:

I was thinking that if tokens are in conflict you just subtract them from each other and whoever has some left wins. But it's more complex. You actually take away one token from each side, alternating, until you reach the territory limit.

So if the territory has a limit of 2, I have 3 tokens, and an invader adds 2 tokens: They take away first because they have less tokens. Then I do, then they do and then we stop, because there's now only two tokens left. So I end up only losing one token, not two.

If the two sides have equal tokens, then you take away from both sides at once, so if they invaded with three, we would both lose one, then we would both lose one and then stop, with each of us having one in the territory.

Definitely impacts strategy, and as I'm starting to get into conflicts in several games I'm realizing the huge import of turn order. Ic ouldn't quite understand why you'd want to go last, but now that I see all movement is done turn by turn, and then conflict, so the person who goes last gets to decide what the conflicts will be or escape them.

[CrimsonFox]

You definitely are in the center of the conflict area. I'm surprseid Thrace and Babylon are ranked so high for wins.

Meanwhile Pass and furball seem to have a clean getaway to run up 5 cities quickly. Granted I don't know what surprises the cards give but I thought that as long as you aren't by a flood or a volcano your cities are safe from cards (just not people sttacks)

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Autumn

So a wrinkle of conflicts I'm only now coming to understand as I do them in several games. I'll explain for anyone who is along wtih me on the learning curve:

I was thinking that if tokens are in conflict you just subtract them from each other and whoever has some left wins. But it's more complex. You actually take away one token from each side, alternating, until you reach the territory limit.

So if the territory has a limit of 2, I have 3 tokens, and an invader adds 2 tokens: They take away first because they have less tokens. Then I do, then they do and then we stop, because there's now only two tokens left. So I end up only losing one token, not two.

If the two sides have equal tokens, then you take away from both sides at once, so if they invaded with three, we would both lose one, then we would both lose one and then stop, with each of us having one in the territory.

Definitely impacts strategy, and as I'm starting to get into conflicts in several games I'm realizing the huge import of turn order. Ic ouldn't quite understand why you'd want to go last, but now that I see all movement is done turn by turn, and then conflict, so the person who goes last gets to decide what the conflicts will be or escape them.

Yep -- sorry, I may have hinted at some of this stuff, but not come out with it exactly. If you guys are curious, there are some technologies you can buy that help you if conflict is your thing.

You can get Metal Working for pretty cheap (80 gold), which makes it so that whenever there's conflict, the other civ starts losing population first. Unless you both have Metal Working, in which case it works like normal (the civ with less population in the territory removes first).

You can get Military, which is more expensive, but it lets you go last in every round. That is, everyone with Military goes after everyone without it.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

You definitely are in the center of the conflict area. I'm surprseid Thrace and Babylon are ranked so high for wins.

Meanwhile Pass and furball seem to have a clean getaway to run up 5 cities quickly. Granted I don't know what surprises the cards give but I thought that as long as you aren't by a flood or a volcano your cities are safe from cards (just not people sttacks)

I agree on Thrace, things get pretty crowded there. Babylon is pretty good, though -- you've got 6 city sites that no one can get to before you, and several opportunities to get to 9.

I agree with you too on me and Egypt -- I think they win most often IIRC, since they have a lot of city sites right in their area, and a lot of ways to get to 9. Plus a lot of high-numbered territories. I guess the risk with both Egypt and Babylon is that Floods hit them hard. Not sure about furrball and Africa. Yeah, he can get to 5 with no real conflict (although, I let him off the hook in Cyrene, I strongly considered sticking two population there and not letting him build that city there), but after that 5, options start to fade.

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

I agree on Thrace, things get pretty crowded there. Babylon is pretty good, though -- you've got 6 city sites that no one can get to before you, and several opportunities to get to 9.

I agree with you too on me and Egypt -- I think they win most often IIRC, since they have a lot of city sites right in their area, and a lot of ways to get to 9. Plus a lot of high-numbered territories. I guess the risk with both Egypt and Babylon is that Floods hit them hard. Not sure about furrball and Africa. Yeah, he can get to 5 with no real conflict (although, I let him off the hook in Cyrene, I strongly considered sticking two population there and not letting him build that city there), but after that 5, options start to fade.

isn't game over after five cities?

[britrock88]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

I agree on Thrace, things get pretty crowded there. Babylon is pretty good, though -- you've got 6 city sites that no one can get to before you, and several opportunities to get to 9.

I agree with you too on me and Egypt -- I think they win most often IIRC, since they have a lot of city sites right in their area, and a lot of ways to get to 9. Plus a lot of high-numbered territories. I guess the risk with both Egypt and Babylon is that Floods hit them hard. Not sure about furrball and Africa. Yeah, he can get to 5 with no real conflict (although, I let him off the hook in Cyrene, I strongly considered sticking two population there and not letting him build that city there), but after that 5, options start to fade.

Maybe I'm playing Babylon wrong, but the fact that most of Babylon's nearby city sites are in areas that would be good farms (5/6 are 3s) or flood areas (3/6, but you mentioned this already) takes off some of their luster. Well, if setting up a line against Warhammer in Assyria or you in Egypt goes badly, I suppose I can turn back toward home.

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

isn't game over after five cities?

Five cities are necessary, but not sufficient to win the game. Pass can tell you more...

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by britrock88

Pass can tell you more...

Sure. When in our game, click on AST at the top. The info here is kind of the state of the game. First thing there is a table. Each round, we all have a chance to move one square to the right. We've had 4 rounds, so everyone has moved 4 spots, except Egypt and Crete. That's because the Early Bronze Age comes early for those guys -- you can see below what's required to move up a space in each epoch.

The game ends when someone reached the last column. But that's not the winner. The winner is determined by points, which are also spelled out on that page.

[Autumn]

This is definitely a learning game for me. I've made a lot of screwups already, but like any game, each turn I understand the game a bit more. I'm having a lot of fun though. The whole "talk at each other through e-mail" element adds an interesting diplomatic twist.

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by britrock88

Maybe I'm playing Babylon wrong, but the fact that most of Babylon's nearby city sites are in areas that would be good farms (5/6 are 3s) or flood areas (3/6, but you mentioned this already) takes off some of their luster. Well, if setting up a line against Warhammer in Assyria or you in Egypt goes badly, I suppose I can turn back toward home.



Five cities are necessary, but not sufficient to win the game. Pass can tell you more...

Those 3 City Sites are nice because when your cities reduce, you still have 3 guys left, rather than getting hit and having it reduced to 1 or 2.

[Warhammer]

Africa is very tough, but don't let the genie out of the bottle.

[britrock88]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

Those 3 City Sites are nice because when your cities reduce, you still have 3 guys left, rather than getting hit and having it reduced to 1 or 2.

Good point. ... I sure feel lucky playing between you and Pass, who (I take it) are the 2 most experienced players here.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

Africa is very tough, but don't let the genie out of the bottle.

I have no idea what that is supposed to mean!

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by britrock88

Good point. ... I sure feel lucky playing between you and Pass, who (I take it) are the 2 most experienced players here.

We'll see if that plays a factor. I've found that what's worse than bordering an experienced player is bordering an overly aggressive player. It does look like we've done a better job in the land grab than you, using a back-of-the-hand calculation of number of city sites. But I'm not as experienced with this area, I have played Europe more often, so maybe this is normal.

[britrock88]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

We'll see if that plays a factor. I've found that what's worse than bordering an experienced player is bordering an overly aggressive player. It does look like we've done a better job in the land grab than you, using a back-of-the-hand calculation of number of city sites. But I'm not as experienced with this area, I have played Europe more often, so maybe this is normal.

Counting movement by turns from theoretical starting set-ups, I don't think Babylon has any advantages in territories like Assyria/Aleppo or Jericho/Damascus. So it comes down to the finer issues like strategically warring to control population and other micro-level tactics that I don't have a feel for yet. I gave it a shot and some long thought, though!

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

I have no idea what that is supposed to mean!

An Africa that is allowed out of Africa is a tough nut to crack. If Africa is kept largely to Africa, they are not a threat.

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by britrock88

Counting movement by turns from theoretical starting set-ups, I don't think Babylon has any advantages in territories like Assyria/Aleppo or Jericho/Damascus. So it comes down to the finer issues like strategically warring to control population and other micro-level tactics that I don't have a feel for yet. I gave it a shot and some long thought, though!

My theory having experience with this side of the map (I've never played west of Assyria!) is that Assyria should get the upper Levant, Babylon should push for Jericho and Damascus. Egypt should be kept bottled up in Egypt. The only reason why I believe Babylon wins more than Egypt is that most experienced players recognize Egypt as a HUGE threat in the game and can affect them easier than they can Babylon.

Assyria will not wind up with all of Asia Minor in any game. Crete, Thrace, and possibly Asia, will all make inroads in the area. At best, they can hope for 5 sites in the area. If Babylon cuts them off from the sea, it makes Babylon the best hope for Assyrian aggression.

EDIT: A Babylon with no enemies is in a very powerful position. They are hard to hit, Egypt and Assyria are their only natural neighbors. Assyria has too many borders to really look for a fight, and Egypt and Babylon have some pretty defensible borders between one another.

[Warhammer]

How do you discard excess cards?

EDIT: No matter what I do, it is giving me an error...

[britrock88]

Waiting on Autumn in both games.

[Autumn]

Sorry, I had family visiting this weekend, then a sick wife, so I've just gotten on and taken care of business.

[CrimsonFox]

passenger limit on a ship is 4?

Do passengers on a ship vanish at the end of a turn? or do they stay on through next turn as if the ship had a permanent 4?

YOu can pick up and drop off as many as you need in the same turn as long as the guy has more movement left? Hmmm can you pick a guy up, move boat then drop him off all in same turn?

[Passacaglia]

Passenger limit is 5.

I believe it's impossible to leave passengers on a ship -- once the ship makes its final move, it automatically unloads all passengers. Not sure what happens if you're on the open seas, but (at least in our games) no one has Astronomy, so you can't go into those zones.

Yes, population can (and must) be picked up and dropped off in the same turn.

It looks like you're considering buying ships, so let me be clear about open seas. Until you have the Astronomy tech, you can only put your ships in areas bordering land -- for you, this means you can't use the Western Mediterranean zone, but you can, for example, go from Narbo, to Massilla, to Corsica, then to Rome and Neapolis, or to Sardinia and Caralis.

[CrimsonFox]

Yeah I knew about open sea rules. Just a little unsure of how the people/ship movement totally works and don't want to assume something wrong.

[Passacaglia]

Okay, hopefully this will help. I use myself as an example. I built a ship at Tyre, which has 4 population.

I start by double-clicking the ship. Maybe a single click works, but I've never been patient enough to find out. Incidentally, this is a pain to do in my experience, it helps if you click the "view large" button in the upper right corner. What pops up is a window asking me how many population I want to load on the ship. The pop-up window knows I'm in Tyre, so it gives me the option of loading 0 to 4 population. Then it gives me the options of:

"save and done" which means you don't want to move the ship anymore (although again, I think it will give you an error message if you finish with units on the ship)
"save and move" which means you've selected the number you want loaded and are ready to move it somewhere
"cancel move" which cancels your last move
"reset ship" which cancels everything you've done with that ship

So let's say my goal is to move some units over to Salamis and Cyprus. I'll select to load 2 from Tyre, then "save and move", then I select Sidon to move it there. I double-click the ship again, and now I'm given an number to both load and unload. I could unload some here, but Sidon is already full, so I don't want to. But I will load 1 more. So I select 1 from population loading, then save and move, and click over to Phoenicia. Double-click it again. I've got no population in Phoenicia, so it just gives me the option to unload. I'm not looking to attack Phoenicia in this example, so I keep it at 0, and save and move. Click over to Salamis, then double-click it again. I can unload up to 3 here, but it can only hold 1, so I select 1, then save and move. Click on Cyprus, double-click the ship. This is the ship's last move, so it automatically unloads the remaining population (2) in Cyprus.

You can play around with the order -- load, unload, load, unload, instead of load, load, unload, unload like I did, for example. But that's the gist of the controls. Let me know if you have any questions, and if you want, feel free to PM me your plan if you're worried you can't do it (I'm on the other side of the map from you, so I shouldn't be affected).

[Passacaglia]

I got an email that I had a trade offer from Warhammer, then the site had difficulties, so I couldn't view it (why don't they just tell you what the trade offer is in the email?) -- once I could get back on, the offer is gone, and Warhammer is not in the market, which I don't think he intended, since he has 15 cards. Did you mean to do that, Warhammer?

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

I got an email that I had a trade offer from Warhammer, then the site had difficulties, so I couldn't view it (why don't they just tell you what the trade offer is in the email?) -- once I could get back on, the offer is gone, and Warhammer is not in the market, which I don't think he intended, since he has 15 cards. Did you mean to do that, Warhammer?

No I meant to be in the market. Not sure what I did wrong...

[britrock88]

The "reset done" should bring you back into the market, I hope. Did you click "done" after you offered Pass a trade? During the trading phase, you only need to hit "done" once you've completed all the trading activity you want to for the phase.

[Warhammer]

I'm back in.

[britrock88]

Waiting on tarcone in both games.

[britrock88]

Hey, Pass, am I obliged to remove my units before you (for the Famine)?

[Passacaglia]

I think we all just do it when we can in no particular order

[britrock88]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

I think we all just do it when we can in no particular order

For a game this well-regulated, that's kind of surprising.