In the "Assault"  example on page 16, the player deals 200 Casualties to the neutral city of Froli.  Froli does 100 Casualties and 1 Victory to the player.  The example concludes the battle with the player winning since Froli's strength has been reduced to zero.

In the FAQ, page 2, under "Neutral Cities", second question: "Q: If a  Noble Assaults a neutral city, and the city gets 2 or more Victories than the Noble, does the Noble die, as per Noble vs. Noble combat?  A: Yes"   If the neutral city had gotten 2 Victories in the page 16 example, it would have won the battle.

So..1 Victory more than the Noble does not force a retreat, but two victories kills the Noble.   Is this how y'all are playing it?  It's in the rules and the FAQ, so we're doing it that way, it just seems odd that 1 Victory is nothing, but two is a killer.

TK

Found some more info: on page 17, second paragraph, it says "The ATTACKER may also capture the city by achieving a full or partial victory as described in the "Count Victories" step of resolving open-field battles.  At the point it seems the rules intended "Victories" to count only for the attacker, but the FAQ decided more Noble deaths were needed.

So...like I said earlier, 1 Victory for the neutral = nothing, but 2 is a killer.

TK

If the city is destroyed by the assault and the attacker has 1 or more nobles still alive, the number of Victories is irrelevant.  If the city survives the assault, 1 Victory more than the attacker forces the noble to reatreat and 2 Victories more than the attacker kills the attacking noble. (Capturing a City Via Assault, page 17).

I agree the examples seem to indicate this, but nowhere in the rules does it actually say this.

The page 17 example does not say the "city kill" takes priority over the "victory" card win.  It just says the attacker "may also capture".

To be clear, I agree with you, but don't feel this is state clearly enough in the rules.

TK
 

In the "Assulting a City" Section on page 16, the rules direct the players to follow the same procedure as an open-field battle (pages 14-15), with specified changes.  One of the specified changes is the breaches may replace 100 casualties, but there is no specified change from the open-field battle rules which indicate that reducing the enemy to zero does take precedence over Victory Card count.  Therefore, that rule must be applied in assaulting a city.

I agree with you that the rules should be clearer to directly address a likely outcome such as this.