Hi,

when a player has to choose whether he retreat or pay 2 influence and discards 2 tactics cards, can he choose not to retreat if he has not enough cards or influence ?

Yes. Corey has answered this elsewhere. If the "blackmailed" player does not have the full amount of the blackmail, he loses as much as he has and then continues with the attack.

TK

PS Check out sigmazero13's excellent compilation of rulings from Corey.

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/filepage/52411/various-rulings-from-corey

TK

The link doesnt work.

Well, so this card is nearly of no use, since it cannot stop opponent from attacking.

the link will work, once the site is back up. But user sigmazero compiles a list that is worth printing out and putting in the box. It's hosted at board game geek.

Rasiel said:

Just check the link. It worked for me. The site must have been down when you tried it.

This card can't stop anyone from attacking, but it does make it more costly for them.

TK

Rasiel said:

The card is perfectly useful as long as your opponent has the influence and/or tactics cards. It's only useless against opponents who have neither of those things, which makes sense. Why would you try to blackmail someone you don't have any dirt on? Not all cards will be useful in all situations, that's why you need to think tactically

For what it's worth, I personally have not seen someone choose to retreat with the Blackmail card. But I have seen them lose some nasty Tactics Cards, making them sort of wish in retrospect that they had retreated instead.

I think you'll find your best bet in getting them to retreat is playing it before a minor skirmish. If they have a full invasion force, chances are they are willing to eat the cost of the card; if it's just a few units trying to take a space, they may not be willing to sacrifice as much.

"If they have a full invasion force, chances are they are willing to eat the cost of the card; if it's just a few units trying to take a space, they may not be willing to sacrifice as much."

thats what I say, when it matters, no one will retreat no matter what cards/influence he has. If it doesnt matter, he will retreat because he doesnt care... so what use is this card for ?

The rules say players cannot use a Tactics card during the
same turn in which it is drawn.

Another question. When a player draws tactic card as a secondary ability of a season card, when is the first time he can play it (its nobodys turn)? Is it after first player resolve his order card ?

He looses two random tactic cards, if he was relying on playing one of those to make the battle effective (e.g to stand up 4 routed units after the battle) . That can ruin his plan for the turn.

And loosing 2 influence also weakens his game position. You have 4 resources for gaining dragon runes in the game {influence, heroes, your army & tactics cards) of the 4. influence is the most effective at gaining runes.

I'd have named blackmail as "raid supply lines" to make it clear what it really does.

Rasiel said:

The use is for making him retreat when it's just a little attack. He might just be dicking around trying to take that hex, but you might need it as part of your plan. Rather than fight a battle you might lose, you blackmail your opponent and hope he backs down. If it works, you've saved the hex for another turn (which may or may not be all you need) and prevented the potential loss of units you might have further use for. You've also caused your opponent to burn one of his attack orders (mobilize/conquer) to no avail.

Also, as others have pointed out, though an opponent may be willing to eat the tactics/influence for an important battle, it's not like he's losing nothing. The cards he loses may have proved useful in a turn or two - if not in the forthcoming battle, but now he doesn't have them when he needs them. Lost influence is always a big deal. I haven't played very many games yet, but influence is one thing I can never seem to get enough of. No matter what my plans might have been, losing two influence is significant.

The card may not always succeed in forcing the enemy to retreat, but that doesn't mean it's useless. You're making the enemy sacrifice something. What something that is, he gets to choose, but no matter what he does lose something. If the card was meant to flat out stop an invasion, then that's what it would say. "Your opponent must immediately retreat." It probably wouldn't be called Blackmail either. There is a difference between subtlety and uselessness, and ideally your opponent won't see it.

Edit: If you want a more specific example of how this card isn't useless, consider this:

Your opponent is attacking a hex you've left relatively undefended, as your armies have been busy elsewhere. Your opponent has no influence (he's been spending lately) and two tactics cards in his hand. He's also been bragging about how one of those cards is going to win him the game this turn (because he's stupid that way.) You drop blackmail on him as soon as he attacks your hex.

Now he must either discard the two tactics cards he has (and thus not win the game) or retreat his armies, which will likely prevent him from playing said card anyway. He'll probably retreat, since that only sets him back one turn, whereas losing the tactic card might set him back longer than that. You've now bought yourself the rest of the season to reinforce that hex against his next attack, or to counterattack the retreated army and prevent him from moving forward with his plan. Even if he chooses to press the attack, he's losing that fancy card of his which buys you time to mount a counterattack, possibly with the help of other players ("come on guys, he said he was really close to winning!")

Granted this is a very specific situation. Blackmail is a very situational card. You don't go around dropping Blackmail on every attack your opponents throw at you, you wait for the right time. Look for a situation where the choice between retreat or not is bad either way for him. Or, if you have several blackmail cards (I'm not sure how many are in the deck) then you could also go for death by papercuts. Keep blackmailing every attack one opponent makes, he keeps choosing to press because why the heck the not? After a few rounds of this nonsense he will have lost a lot more than just two influence/tactics.

Rasiel said:

The rules say players cannot use a Tactics card during the same season in which it is drawn. I think that answers your question.

broken said:

Hmm, I'd overlooked that, and it looks like one of Corey's rulings is at odds with this (partly because the question itself was in error). I'll have to remove that from the document, then.

However, I have to admit that rule can be a headache, trying to remember which Tactics Cards you drew that season, and which ones you didn't. The ruling Corey have indicated you can't use them the same TURN you draw them, which is much easier to remember (since there are only a few ways to do so, and usually you are near the end of the turn by then. If you play Strategize, and then have a few people Mobilize against you, trying to remember which cards you drew that season will be tougher - and harder to enforce.

Steve-O said:

All tactics cards are very situational. Raze a city i find much harder to use. Blackmail could be a game winning card, or just a minor annoyance.

Sometimes, 2 lost influence could later translate into a lost influence bid, and that could lead towards utter defeat. Using an influence bid (the summer one to move any hero) and "lost city" card, i built a fortress in the back of a homeland, and eliminated a player in summer of year two.

Equaltocody said:

Every time I've had Raze a City, I've found a use for it It gives me a reason to push into a city near an enemy home realm, and then kill the city when I know I'm going to get pushed back!

sigmazero13 said:

you lucky dog. I was thinking that would be a great use. I've had it twice, and in those games it was better/possible for me to hold out on the cities and use rally.

I'll have to play with more force next time i get one.

Equaltocody said:

you sure you can use lost city in an enemy homeland?

I dont remember the exact wording of the card, but im guessing it says it can only be played in an uncontrolled hex, and an enemy homeland is never empty or uncontrolled.

I believe you are correct, and that Lost City may not be played in a home realm.

Equaltocody said:

It depends on where the city is. Sometimes I will push deep into enemy territory with the sole purpose of destroying their city, especially if it's a good city (like a 3 Tactics Card city) that I know I wouldn't be able to hold for very long.