I don't see the above conflicting with what we played, considering the
decision of where a corps is, is taken during movement. But I will not
argue any more on it, perhaps it seems natural to me only because I have
been playing it like this.
Votes are only 2 on 2, so it can go either way.
On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 7:47 PM, <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
No, the manual is
A) You complete all movement
B) Enemy decides if he wants to fight or move into city
If enemy decided to move into the city THERE IS NO MORE MOVEMENT. You can
not continue moving any corps at all.
On Mar 3, 2018 18:38, <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
what you mean for the manual? The choices basically are
*A.* Is the exact location of any corps in an area (inside or outside a
city) decided when someone ends his movement phase? (so he announces
whether corps are in or outside the city at that time)
OR
*B.* The exact location of the corps in an area (inside or outside a
city) is announced as soon as any enemy enters.
On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Laertes Papaspyrou <
bitoulis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I vote for the manual. It’s clear
On 3 Mar 2018, at 16:55, eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Its not a house rule really, to be honest in every group i played
(except with you) it was interpreted like that, and I simply picked it up.
Off course if you don't expect it you are always allowed to reply it, that
bit at least we allow it in this group.
If you don't like it feel free to vote against it, maybe others don't
like it too.
On 3 Mar 2018 3:56 pm, <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In general I have no problems with house rules or interpretations but
for someone who was not here at the begining it is impossible for me to
know them all.
I plan my turns based on rules and if a house rule is different from
what I am playing I am making a mistake in my turn, without knowing,
putting my navies and armies in danger.
I have no objections to the house rule.
On Mar 3, 2018 11:10 AM, "Makis Xiroyannis" <makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hello all,
while we are waiting for Turkey/Prussia clean up files and Political
phase, I bring back this discussion raised by Tiron since the turn is
starting again now and we can decide on it if you wish.
Rules *7.5.1* and *7.5.1.1.* are correct, as Tiron interprets them in
the first letter of this chain. We have been playing like this indeed.
Rules *7.3.2.1* and *7.3.6.2* are also correct as mentioned by
Laertis, but we are not only doing that while playing depot garrisons.
The missing piece of the rules that we need, is *7.3.7.1. *To
explain:
*7.3.7.1* ENEMY CORPS OR CITY GARRISON IN AREA: If during movement a
corps moves into an area containing enemy corps not in a city, the corps
must cease movement and declare an attack. If enemy corps
and/or garrison factors are in a city *the phasing corps may continue
movement or stop movement and besiege* (see 7.5.4) *or not, as the
owning player desires.*
The trick here is *when* this decision - whether the corps is inside
the city or outside - is performed. In the explicit garrison rules we play
with the other group with Tiron, it is always clear what is in and what is
outside. But for our games, *we decided that this decision will be
taken by the defending player the moment a hostile corps enters its area*.
We did this for 2 reasons:
1. Less bookkeeping (otherwise we should note for every corps on the
map whether it is inside, or outside of a city at every time)
2. More tactical flexibility (allowing the defending player to make a
decision during an opponents turn)
For me it is also slightly more realistic, given that corps always
knew an enemy was coming due to scouts, and when placed in an area they
had
the privelege to chose a location close to fortified cities in case they
needed to fall back. In any case this is something the rules allow.
Personally I am in favour of continuing to play like this, ie the
decision of where the corps is (inside/outside) to be taken during hostile
movement. I am not strongly in favour, I simply think it gives a bit more
flexibility. You can all vote and decide on it.
M.
On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:46 PM, Tiron <strategija@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I fully agree that we should not alter rules mid turn, actuality I
think we should not change the rules of the game at all or as least as
possible. We play any game, from chess to EiA, because we start with the
same set of rules on both sides, we have the same understanding how the
game can be played.
Having said that I am also fine if the group has it's own set of
house rules or interpretations, but I also think as a "relatively" I can
not be expected to know them. I made game decisions based on the rules
as I
can read them.
With Makis agreement I will change part of British naval turn to move
the fleet at Channel crossing to London and 2 British fleets blocking
french port into Channel Crossing.
On 2018-02-14 19:18, Makis Xiroyannis wrote:
Tiron feel free to change your naval where you think it is affected
by this rule
Just arrived home and can have 1 hour or so wife-free, could we play
on a bit the western battles so that we proceed with the turn? I am not
normally in a hurry, but given that I will be packing tommorow evening,
and
traveling for 4 days, things will slow down
Turkish turn should not affect the west
On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 8:14 PM, Makis Xiroyannis <
makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Like Yannis, I also remember many cases, and more importantly
remember cases were we LOST corps (instead of retreating into the city)
so
that the opponent cannot move further. I have lost several corps this
way,
and the centrals too.
On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 8:08 PM, Yannis Sykamias <
ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I can certainly recall cases from our first war with France where
we applied this for corps thus allowing the attacker to continue its
move.
I agree with Makis, it is not proper to apply any change in the
middle of a turn so we may proceed the turn while discussing on what
is the
proper way to implement this action.
_____________________________
From: Laertes Papaspyrou <bitoulis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 19:52
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: Something about rules
To: <eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Regarding the rule under discussion, we play it as such for depot
garrisons. Not sure about corps.
I found the below rules :
7.3.2.1: A corps must cease movement when it consumes its movement
allowance or when it enters an area containing an unbesieged enemy
corps
(not if the area contains only cossacks, freikorps, guerrillas
and/or
garrisons).
7.3.6.2 GARRISONED DEPOT AREA: If an enemy depot is garrisoned, the
player controlling the garrison factors has the option of
immediately
destroying the depot before the moving force chooses whether to
leave the
area (if permissible) or to stay and ght. If the garrison does
not elect to
destroy the depot and the phasing force chooses to stop its
movement and
ght, the depot may be captured after land combat (see 7.3.6.1) and
destroyed or converted (but not used for supply this major power's
sequence-also see 7.5.2.14). If the garrison destroys the depot,
the garrison
surrenders or all or part (if city cannot hold all-the part not
moved to the
city will surrender) can be moved to an unbesieged friendly
controlled or
vacant city in that same area, at the owning player's option.
So it seems you only get he option to continue moving when facing a
depot garrison. I think this how we have been playing by now.
------------------------------
*From:* Makis Xiroyannis <makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx>
*To:* eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Sent:* Wednesday, 14 February 2018, 19:46
*Subject:* [eiagreek] Re: Something about rules
I don't have the rules in front of me but this is how we have been
playing it yes. I suggest we do not change it mid move even if you are
correct. I would also suggest that you change the part of your naval
move
that was jeopardised due to playing differently.
'Re Turkey, I had hoped he would have posted so that you have an
overall view of things, but something is probably holding him up, so I
would suggest we continue with the Western front were Turkish actions
are
not very relevant.
On 14 Feb 2018 6:59 pm, "Tiron" <strategija@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
During discussions with my allies it turned out that the group has
played before in one why I find unusual and it certainly compromises
part
of my naval move.
I am told the corps can continue movement after initial battle is
declared but defender retreats into city.
I would like to note the rules here:
*7.5.1 GENERAL RULES OF LAND COMBAT:* If *at the end of all
movement of the phasing major power*, enemy forces (excluding
guerillas-see 10.1.1.3) occupy the same area as its corps, freikorps or
cossacks, the phasing major power must attack in those areas (also see
7.3.7 and 7.3.8).
*7.5.1.1 DEFENDER RETIREMENT INTO CITY:* Any forces or portion of
forces upon whom an attack is declared may immediately retire into any
friendly controlled or vacant, and unbesieged city in that area but
not so
as to exceed that city's garrison capacity.
7.5.1 is clear, you complete your movement and anywhere you enter
enemy area and say Attack!
7.5.1.1. says after you said Attack! defender can retreat into city
.
So the sequence should be like this
Movement -> Attack -> Retreat into city
I do not see where is says after retreating into city you go back
to step 1.
On a side note, are we waiting for Turkish turn or we proceed with
French battles?
