If you had a Prussian corps in a city together with garrison from a minor
country would it be different?
On 2 Aug 2018, at 11:46, Dimitris Stavr. <poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
and then they fought a battle together (when they were defending the city).
again as separate entities?
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf
of Yannis Sykamias <ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 2, 2018 11:44
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: spanish relieving force fails to win
yes they can provided that the city stacking capacity is kept.
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf
of Dimitris Stavr. <poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 2, 2018 11:37
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: spanish relieving force fails to win
initially there was one factor alone as city garrison
then the corps entered the city and i ask, is it possible to co-exist IN the
city a factor and a corps as separate entities??? and not as ONE garrison force?
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf
of Laertes Papaspyrou <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 2, 2018 11:20
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: spanish relieving force fails to win
Corps may be removed as a casualty.
On 2 Aug 2018, at 11:18, Dimitris Stavr. <poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
ok for the casualties, but defenders had a corps, where is it now?
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf
of Yannis Sykamias <ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 2, 2018 11:15
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: spanish relieving force fails to win
i believe that Spain is allowed to allocate his casualties as he desires.
My question is, since the city was under siege, did Spain roll for forage
casualties before the battle?
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf
of Dimitris Stavr. <poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 2, 2018 10:56
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: spanish relieving force fails to win
garrison had a corps.
The one garrison alone (existed before corps enters city) and a corps that
entered city are 2 different "entities"?
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf
of Laertes Papaspyrou <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 2, 2018 10:51
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: spanish relieving force fails to win
There is no mention anywhere of proportionality in this case. I checked. I
guess you noticed the garrison used the city cannons as best as possible but
this exhausted the garrison to almost the last man.
On 2 Aug 2018, at 10:37, Dimitris Stavr. <poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
7.5.4.2.3.1 Relieving Force Fails TO Win: If the relieving force breaks or
does not win within 3 rounds, the siege is resumed.
7.5.4.2.3.1.1: The surviving siege defenders return to the besieged
city and the entire relieving force returns to the area from which it
entered the siege area (returns to any one of the areas from which it
entered, if more than one). If all siege defenders were eliminated, the
city is captured.
are there any surviving defenders? how is determined how many survived?
is Spain allowed to "kill" all but one defenders?
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf
of Dimitris Stavr. <poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 2, 2018 09:19
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: [dicelog] Kassel Battle Round III Spain
Nonono dont say it.
He was better "prepared"
Did he roll for kassel garrison??
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf
of Makis Xiroyannis <makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 2, 2018 7:43:39 AM
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: [dicelog] Kassel Battle Round III Spain
Lol he is really unbelievable... beats down the science of statistics everytime
On Thu, 2 Aug 2018, 2:06 am Dimitris Stavr., <poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
no problem amigo.
and no comments
From: eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf
of Laertes Papaspyrou <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 2, 2018 02:01
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: [dicelog] Kassel Battle Round III Spain
I sincerely apologize!
6 @ 3-1 = 10% of 51 = 5 casualties and -1.5 morale , BREAK
From: Dice Server -1qr56b9- <diceserver@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: bitoulis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, 2 August 2018, 2:00
Subject: [eiagreek] [dicelog] Kassel Battle Round III Spain
This is an automatic message.
This message was generated by
bitoulis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
through the "hamete virtual dice server" at https://dicelog.com
Message sent to:
bitoulis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dice Roll Information:
----------------------
Dice Results:
-------------
Result of the throw of dice "1d6" :
6
If you have any doubt, you can verify the validity of this message,
using the Verification Number on https://dicelog.com/verif :
5488wmq7t9
or simply (*) click the URL:
https://dicelog.com/verif?vnum=5488wmq7t9
(*): you may have a security warning about invalid SSL certificate,
see why: http://dicelog.com/inc/sslwarning_en.html
Regards,
the dicelog.com team.
