something else,
if we assume that there is a fleet on the sea area of Copenhagen, would then be
possible for Danes to cross the 1st arrow?
________________________________
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf
of Dimitris Stavr. <poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 21:27
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: moving via Danish sea crossing arrows
please consider that we can interprete what was intended as well as what is
written.
relieving the city from a siege could be also an option that was intended to be
included
________________________________
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf
of Makis Xiroyannis <makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 21:11
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: moving via Danish sea crossing arrows
1. Absolutely
2. I too have doubts. The wording of the rule only mentions "garrisons" and not
"unbesieged garrisons" where in other cases it mentions so. Therefore following
the letter of the rule, you can pass through. But I have doubts it was
intended, so whatever we decide will work from now on.
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 8:54 PM, NIKOLAOY DHMHTRIOS
<nikolad1@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:nikolad1@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
If no fleet is in the sea area there is no problem with moving over crossing
arrows
As for a besieged garrison allowing the use of a crossing arrow despite the
presence of an enemy fleet in the area I have my doubts
Στις 2018-06-27 20:50, Dimitris Stavr. έγραψε:
what about this ??
1. do we agree that Danes can move via 1st crossing arrow, because of no
fleet presence on the sea area? or they would be able to move anyways?
2. do we agree that Danes can move via 2nd crossing arrow, because of Danish
garrison presence in Copenhagen?
________________________________
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> on behalf
of Dimitris Stavr. <poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 20:11
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [eiagreek] moving via Danish sea crossing arrows
7.3.1.3.3 Sea Crossing Arrow Movement: It always costs an extra
movement point to use a crossing arrow. Corps, freikorps and/or cossacks
may not use a crossing arrow if an enemy eet occupies the surrounding sea
area.
Russian fleets are in blockade boxes, so Danes can move from Hamburg to the
island and then
12.2.1.2 DANISH/SWEDISH SEA CROSSING ARROWS: These areas are
extremely narrow and could be dominated even by the guns of the period.
A eet in the sea area cannot block any of the sea crossing arrows in
Denmark or the one connecting the Copenhagen and Malmo areas if enemy
corps and/or garrisons are located in both land areas connected by the
arrows.
according to the above, Danish corps is on the one side of the crossing arrow
that connects the island with Copenhagen, and danish garrison is in Copenhagen
is on the other side. so Danes can move to Copenhagen.
________________________________
From: Dimitris Stavr. <poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 20:01
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: issues after Russian movemnt
hello all
i've noticed 2+1 issues after russian turn
1. is allowed to build a depot in a blockade box?
2. is allowed invasion supply without depot in a friendly port?
3. a corps moving via Danish sea crossing arrows, can reach Copenhagen if it
is under siege?
i will send 3 different mails, with distinct subjects amd with my initial
arguement, to discuss each one if it is necessary
