by fredd13
emilbrown wrote:
I'm not sure what the correct spoiler tag for this question is.
Please suggest and I'm happy to update.
Update: Thread title and hidden question body updated based on thread suggestions. Also note that there are Cairo recon spoilers elsewhere in this thread (including in the quoted version of the original question).
[o]
This is a question about infesting cities.
I understand that if a city goes to 0, then it becomes infested, and that paying to bring the population back up to 1 is a separate post-game step so that the city would be infested.
However, if a population 1 city has both plagues and a supply center at the end of the game, do the two -1/+1=0 cancel such that the city doesn't become infested?
The game end step 1 rules for population change does list the decreasing step first, and the infesting rules say "immediately", but the step 1 rules also at the end say that when a -1/+1 situation happens that the population "stays the same", so we're not clear on the correct interpretation.
Thanks!
[/o]
Please suggest and I'm happy to update.
Update: Thread title and hidden question body updated based on thread suggestions. Also note that there are Cairo recon spoilers elsewhere in this thread (including in the quoted version of the original question).
[o]
This is a question about infesting cities.
I understand that if a city goes to 0, then it becomes infested, and that paying to bring the population back up to 1 is a separate post-game step so that the city would be infested.
However, if a population 1 city has both plagues and a supply center at the end of the game, do the two -1/+1=0 cancel such that the city doesn't become infested?
The game end step 1 rules for population change does list the decreasing step first, and the infesting rules say "immediately", but the step 1 rules also at the end say that when a -1/+1 situation happens that the population "stays the same", so we're not clear on the correct interpretation.
Thanks!
[/o]
[o]
I don't believe they become infested. That's certainly not how we've played it.
My view is that, if the intended reading of the rules was that the city had to drop to 0, get infested, then rise back up again, there wouldn't be any point to the extra words about cities that both lose AND gain population (other than to clarify that even cities that drop to zero gain one population - in which case, why not stress that instead?)
Plus, in my book, "stay the same" is not the same as "lose 1 then gain 1".
[/o]