first part is clear, not sure what the yellow part means
On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 10:40 AM, Dimitris Stavr. <poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Ok consider one in Lille and a change will be the number of factors in
wessel. I have sent there 4 with a corps. After Lille change the corps has
5. *My only change is ro drop some*
________________________________________
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2018 10:03:34 AM
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: dropping factors when attacked
if your move was influenced by this rule you can change it. Regarding the
2 infantry in Lille move one or leave them both there as you will, I don't
mind.
On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 9:31 AM, Dimitris Stavr. <poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx<
mailto:poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Hello Gentlemen
In this case i d like to ask for a change in my previous move.
And for what i did in Lille, Makis asked if was correct. I said if it is
not then one factor should go with the others in hanover and leave only one
in Lille. Tell me i have to change this to do it in my turn
________________________________________
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> on
behalf of T. B. <scotland_above_all@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:scotland_above_all@
hotmail.com>>
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2018 5:03:54 AM
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: dropping factors when attacked
Heed ye! The master of Lore has spoken!
Corps have to retreated as a single entity!
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
May I remind you this...
https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1726395/rule-clarifications
[https://cf.geekdo-static.com/images/geekfacebook.png]<https
://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1726395/rule-clarifications>
Rule Clarifications |<https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1726395/rule-
clarifications>
boardgamegeek.com<http://boardgamegeek.com>
/
... and ask for your assistance to keep it up to date?
We can add this, the previous discussion about garrisons (the fact that
they can block movement and retreat to the city) and everything else you
remember and is not included... Let's not let our discussions go to waste
and revert to the same topics! Comment and I'll edit.
________________________________
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> on
behalf of Yannis Sykamias <ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:
ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
Sent: 16 March 2018 15:01:50
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: dropping factors when attacked
[Image]
________________________________
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> on
behalf of T. B. <scotland_above_all@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:scotland_above_all@
hotmail.com>>
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2018 2:47:43 PM
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: dropping factors when attacked
Ill reply here too... You know I need extra time as far as the rules are
concerned.
As the "Master of Lore" I've ascended to planes where the debate takes
place only inside me (it materializes without you noticing there; but like
God, it's there)!
________________________________
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Sent: 16 March 2018 11:19:57
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: dropping factors when attacked
this discussion is up for 8 days now, and had nothing to do with CB
problems. Deadline until the night since you request, though I really don't
see the reason.
This game will take longer than real life in the end.
On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 11:15 AM, Yannis Sykamias <ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:y
sykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
Give him some slack, he slept at 07:00 am... Let’s close this issue when
he re rolls his forage rolls (I hope by early evening?) since there is no
game impact from this discussion in his round.
________________________________
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:
eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>>
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2018 11:07:23 AM
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:
eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: dropping factors when attacked
theo we need a reply here or I roll a dice at today at 16:00
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 10:53 PM, Makis Xiroyannis <
makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:
makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
Theo, a reply here would also be nice.
On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 8:54 AM, Laertes Papaspyrou <
bitoulis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:bitoulis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:bitoulis@
btopenworld.com<mailto:bitoulis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
I will go for 3-3. Master of Lore to decide.
On 9 Mar 2018, at 22:26, NIKOLAOY DHMHTRIOS <nikolad1@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:nik
olad1@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:nikolad1@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:nikolad1@xxxxxxxxx>>>
wrote:
Στις 2018-03-09 22:07, Makis Xiroyannis έγραψε:
Gentlemen, please vote to get this over with so that we can do our turns
During an attack by hostile forces the defender...
1 Can retreat corps into his cities as a single entity Makis
Tiron DN 2
2 Can retreat individual factors from his corps as desired
Dimitris P. Yannis? 2
On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 10:50 AM, Makis Xiroyannis <
makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:
makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
Well, according to Makis points, maybe we should reconsider this!
For me is the same case. Moving from a depot into a city or retiring
factors are results of an attack declared upon those factors/corps. this
type of movement is allowed to be performed by a non phasing side as a
result of a movement performed by the phasing side, and shouldn't be
treated like a normal land movement.
i suppose it is useless to try to persuade anyone, i keep my view, let's
vote to move on.
We actually agree on this, I never disputed that. Movement does take place
during combat as result of enemy actions.
The only thing I disagree is that it can take the form of partial factor
exchange between corps. You can retreat depot garrisons, you can retreat
full corps, but you cannot retreat some factors of a corps, but the rest
not retreating. Even before I found the rules I mentioned, it didn't feel
right.
In any case yes, lets all vote and be done with it. It is not a big deal
and does not hurt anyone, we are simply trying to find the most reasonable
way to play it.
Master of Lore, when you awake from your slumber you need to update our
"house" rules.
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 11:06 PM, Dimitris Stavr. <poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx<
mailto:poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:
poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
Dimitris, factors may move inside the city if they are part of a depot
garrison.
Well, according to Makis points, maybe we should reconsider this!
For me is the same case. Moving from a depot into a city or retiring
factors are results of an attack declared upon those factors/corps. this
type of movement is allowed to be performed by a non phasing side as a
result of a movement performed by the phasing side, and shouldn't be
treated like a normal land movement.
i suppose it is useless to try to persuade anyone, i keep my view, let's
vote to move on.
________________________________
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:
eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>> on behalf of Yannis Sykamias <
ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:
ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx>>>
Sent: Thursday, March 8, 2018 22:57
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:
eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: dropping factors when attacked
Dimitris, factors may move inside the city if they are part of a depot
garrison. For corps it is clear there is no objection from anyone on this.
Makis, the rules you mentioned state exchange of factors which include
the element of two way action, the rule Dimitris refers states retirement
of portion of forces in the city which is a one way action. Also the
detachment prohibition is in the movement step so it refers to the phasing
player but the retirement rule refers to the defending non-phasing player.
I don't know I am confused!
_____________________________
From: Dimitris Stavr. <poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:
poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:
poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx>>>
Sent: Thursday, March 8, 2018 22:19
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: dropping factors when attacked
To: <eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:
eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>>
7.5.1.1 DEFENDER RETIREMENT INTO CITY: Any forces or portion o 1f
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
nowhere seen anything about moving, exchanging, detaching, absorbing
just retiring. to me it is different, and "retirement" is connected to
battle.
as i get it, this movement has nothing to do with 7.3 LAND MOVEMENT STEP.
it is clearly a result of such a movement thus not necessary to be treated
the same way.
moreover,
7.5.1.1.4: A city must be able to hold all of the factors of entire corps
that
move in (plus any otherfactors that may be in or moved into the city).
it clearly mentions factors and corps.
I'm sorry, but i will insist on my view.
________________________________
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:
eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>> on behalf of Makis Xiroyannis <
makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:
makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx>>>
Sent: Thursday, March 8, 2018 21:44
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:
eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: dropping factors when attacked
Nope, I am afraid you are both wrong. I solved the riddle finally:
5.2.3 TRANSFER OF ARMY FACTORS:During an Army Reinforcement
Step unbesieged corps in the same area may exchange factors as desired,
capacity permitting. Corps of different nationalities (including different
minors or a major power and a minor country) may not exchange factors.
This is the only time during a Turn that army factors may be exchanged
except to detach and absorb garrison factors (see 7.3.3).Army factors may
also be exchanged with garrisons in the same area during this step, the
same as in 7.3.3 and, if all factors are detached from a corps, the corps
counter is removed (see 5.2.4). EXCEPTIONS: Feudal, insurrection and
artillery factors may not be exchanged.
The above rule is on reinforcement, and rules out any other army factor
exchange,with the exception of detaching/absorbing garrison factors in
7.3.3.
Fine so far, lets check 7.3.3
7.3.3 MOVING INTO CITIES-DETACHING/ABSORBING FACTORSGARRISONS:
During a major power's Land Movement Step, any
non-artillery, non-feudal or non-insurrection corps may detach factors as
garrisons at, or absorb army factors from, depots hnd/or unbesieged
friendly or vacant cities by reducing or increasing its strength, if the
capacity is there. There is no movement point cost for doing this.
So points here
A) 7.3.3 is on the Land Movement step. The rule Dimitris and Yannis use is
on 7.5 (LandCombat) Since 5.2.3 clearly mentions that only reinforcement
and 7.3.3 are the times to exchange factors, it means it is not possible at
any other time.
B) Furthermore 7.3.3 mentions this exception happens in a major's power
Land Movement step, meaning its during a phasing player turn.
And as if the above are not enough, here comes 7.3.3.1
7.3.3.1 DETACHING/ABSORBING FACTORS RESTRICTIONS: Regular
infantry and/or militia factors may not be detached or absorbedin an area
containing enemy corps outside a city.
I believe the above prove 7.5.1.1 viewed in isolation is wrong. It is a
pitty we have to read several paragraphs of different sections in order to
understand something, but there it goes.
"Portion of forces" means whole corps.
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 9:17 PM, Yannis Sykamias <ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:y
sykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
Yes, I agree Makis, this rule gives the defender the advantage of deciding
based on the force moving against him whether he intends to "give" a pp in
siege or not (provided the city does not have any flech). But as it is
written there is no reference to portion of army.
________________________________
From:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:From%
3Aeiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:eiagreek
-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>> on behalf
of Makis Xiroyannis <makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:
makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:
makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx>>>
Sent:Thursday, March 8, 2018 8:59:17 PM
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:
eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: dropping factors when attacked
in any case I will check the rules again, but as I don't see anyone else
replying/caring I will not push the subject
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 8:57 PM, Makis Xiroyannis <
makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:
makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
Ok I see where you stand. But I think it refers to whole corps when it
speaks for "portion of forces".
Lets take an example: A French corps with 20 infantry is attacked in an
area where there is an empty city with four spires (but no fletch). As a
French player I do not like the odds of the attacking army, so I decide to
place 19 infantry inside the cityafter you move and declare the attack.
This way, even if you win the siege against 19 French infantry, you will
not even get a PP because the corps never retreated inside - it didn't have
to. And I did that after seeing what you had sent against me. Can I do that?
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 8:03 PM, Yannis Sykamias <ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:y
sykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
I agree with Dimitris, the rule allows for a portion of defender's forces
to retire in the city. Since there is no explicit definition of portion of
"something" I can accept that it allows for factors from a corps to retire
in the city while the corps remains outside.
________________________________
From:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:From%
3Aeiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:eiagreek
-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>> on behalf
of Dimitris Stavr. <poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx>>>Sent: Thursday, March 8, 2018 7:23:38 PM
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:
eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: dropping factors when attacked
in Lille i followed the rule
7.5.1.1 DEFENDER RETIREMENT INTO CITY: Any forces or portion o 1f
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
to me it was clear that as a defender i had this right.
if this should be interpreted in a different way, you have my opinion, the
stage is yours.
________________________________
From:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:From%
3Aeiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:eiagreek
-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>> on behalf
of Makis Xiroyannis <makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:
makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:
makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx>>>
Sent: Thursday, March 8, 2018 19:15
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:
eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [eiagreek] dropping factors when attacked
Another question that I don't remember if we clarified or what we decided
If a corps is attacked in an area with a city and wants to fight (as
opposed to retreat behind walls) can the defending corps still remove
factors from it and place them into the city?
I thought we could not since defender is not a phasing player, but I saw
Prussia doing that in Lille, shall we play it this way?
