This came up in the "strength" thread, but I wanted to give it it's own thread.

Does a stronghold require a defensive unit to cause a battle? My initial assumption was no and that an enemy would have to still have a combat and bring more than 5 strength to defeat the stronghold. However, the rules also state that a battle is between units , which would imply that a undefended stronghold is free for the taking.

Was anyone at the sneak preview that might know the answer or maybe Cory can answer?

Thanks,

Chris

"When a player moves units into an enemy area, he must start a battle."(pg.21)

An "Enemy Area" is "Any area that is controlled by another player."(pg.15)

"A player controls an area if he has at least one plastic unit (including routed units) of his color and/or one of his strongholds in the area."(pg.15)

According to these two paragraphs, a battle must be started when Player B attacks Player A's area containing one of A's strongholds and 0 of his units.

This would allow any attacking units to draw fate cards once. This would also grant e.g. a Siege Tower a chance to make use of his Special Ability

"Lay Siege" to gain Player B a Strength bonus (and possibly allow player B AND A to use Tactics cards to boost their Strength).

During battle step 5 "Tally Strength"(pg.21), Player A would accumulate 5 Strength. Since the Stronghold cannot deal any damage, there will be enemy

units present in step 5d(pg.21) which will force Player A to flip the stronghold to the damaged side. Nonetheless, Player B will have to accumulate more

than 5 Strength (through Fate Cards / Special Abilities (e.g. "Lay Siege") / Standing Units) in order to win the battle an conquer the Stronghold.

I admit that there is one flaw to this construct, namely:
"The term battle refers to any time units are fighting each other. Each battle involves two groups of units attacking each other in an

attempt to gain control of an area." (pg.21)

Since the Stronghold is neither specified as being a Unit, nor explicitely excluded from being such, it is still open to interpretation as to whether

a Battle is even triggered. Personally, I assume, that the above definition of "Battle" is meant to distinguish it clearly from Duels or Diplomacy.

"Units: These plastic figures represent each faction’s armies as well as neutral armies. Any ability that
applies to units does not include hero figures unless otherwise specified (because heroes are not units)."(pg.15)
As you can see, Heroes are once again explicitely declared non-Units, whereas Strongholds remain unmentioned.

Moreover, this leads to another, yet related question:
"Players always control areas in their home realm (even if they do not have any units or strongholds present) unless enemy units are present"(pg.15)

Thus, an invading Player B would also have to start a battle when moving units in to Player A's undefended Home Realm area. This would allow

Player A to possibly use Tactics Cards, giving him an advantage in case of his Home Realm being besieged.

However, as in this topic's actual question, this can be answered as soon as we know if a "N vs 0" Units battle is possible (N being any number >0)

Personally, I will assume that a battle is triggered, and that a Stronghold is always "manned" and not free for the taking. I will also assume that

moving Units into other players' Home Realm areas will trigger a battle, regardless if there are any defenders. Until further notion.

Cory's answer in the "strength" thread specifically mentioned strongholds, so I think the answer is strongholds cause a battle.

I don't think home territories do though. In the "Frequently Used Terms" section of the rulebook it specifically says under Controlled Area that "Players always control areas in their home realm unless enemy units are present." Unfortunately, that's the only place that really says anything about this case, but it implies that enemy units just walk in and take over an empty home area without a battle.

ckessel said:

Having just played my first game, I'd say that a home area still triggers a battle - the defender could do things like Blackmail or Summon Lightning to try and keep the area, after all...

That doesn't really make sense. Certainly you can't Strategize into areas in someone else's home realm (they are not considered empty), but you could Mobilize into two of them. Otherwise the Daqan Lords would just move their Knights back and forth in someone else's home realm drawing fate cards to get tactics cards.

I've sent the question to Corey. I'll post when I get an answer

Both Cause a battle. For strong holds this is in the FAQ:

I think movement restrictions on page 18 deals with the home realms question "Units may only move through friendly or empty areas. They may
never move through enemy or neutral areas." Meaning to take over home realm areas must be through battle actions, even if the battle is 1 unit on 0.

I don't think it's disputed that such is what the LETTER of the rules say. My question to Corey was more intended to see if it's what the INTENT of the rules are.

As broken points out, it could have reprecussions, such as allowing the Daqan Knights or the Necromancers to go back and forth in the Home Realms just to get Tactics Cards and Reanimates.

My question is then, why are you not attacking and killing them instead of letting them do that?

The second game I played (first of the epic variant) I was the Uthuk and bolted for the Elves in the first year (I was able to remove an activation counter from the board with a tactics card). The Elf player ended up more or less abandoning his home realm, because he was able to move a hero out and play a Lost City card. If I had been the Daqan Lords or Waiqar the Undying I could very easily have moved units which gain things during battle back and forth in the areas I could easily have controlled.

sigmazero13 said:

um... so once a year you can move a knight into an enemy territory to maybe get a tactic card... until the other players decide to kill you? Once you attack you get an activation token. When was the last time you had the freedom to just keep moving a knight or necromancer around over several years in an enemy homeland?

mateooo said:

If you are hurting for resources elsewhere on the map, it certainly could be hard to dislodge a group of Knights and other units. Granted, you are likely going to lose, but in a 3+ player game, that one player (especially Daqan getting Tactics cards) could use the benefit in his quest to attack others.

True, it's not very likely to be sustainable, but all it would take is one group of Daqan Knights to pull a bunch of cards and get a few Tactics cards to make it worth it. Same with Necromancers - it may only take one (or two) times to make the maneuver worth it.

Hence, the question to Corey to see what the official word is.