Re: [eia] two propositions

[Joel Uckelman <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thus spake "Kyle H":
>     Today JJ, Jim, and I were talking at our FTF game about a couple =
> Empires in Arms issues.  We were able to come to consensus among the =
> three of us, and I hope that that consensus can be extended to the rest =
> of the group as well.
> 
> Proposition 1:  How to handle confusing declarations of combined =
> movement.
>     In the case at hand, GB and Prussia *seem* to have combined =
> movement, and Austria and Prussia also *seem* to have combined movement. =
>  But it is impossible for both combinations to happen simultaneously =
> (because that would entail a combination of all 3 countries which was =
> not accepted by Austria in its orders).  The question was how to resolve =
> which of the 2 combinations should take place in a way that was fair and =
> generalizable to future situations. =20
>     Jim came up with what I think is a very elegant solution to this =
> problem.  He said we should leave it up to Prussia which country he =
> wishes to combine with (since he can't combine with both).  I think that =
> makes a great deal of sense and am willing to endorse it.  It won't =
> solve all potential problems that we could have with combinations, but =
> it will solve a large subset of them.  And that's good enough for me.

I'm not sure that solution will work when four powers are involved, but 
it's the best I've seen so far.

> Proposition 2:  Access declarations during the Political Phase.
>     Once upon a time, we had a house rule saying that all voluntary =
> access agreements (and amendments to those agreements) had to take place =
> during the political phase.  Later, we scrapped that rule so that some =
> countries could make voluntary access agreements on the fly.  Recently, =
> JJ made a request that Spain declare at the beginning of the turn =
> whether GB would have access to Spain for the remainder of the turn.  =
> This request seems to take us back in the direction of our old house =
> rule.  I propose that we return to our old house rule that specifies =
> that all voluntary access agreements (as well as amendments thereto) =
> must be publicized during the Political Phase.  The benefits of such a =
> house rule are that all countries know where they will have access for =
> the entirety of the turn without needing to fear that it will be yanked =
> out from under them just as they are about to make a move.  JJ and Jim =
> were in favor of returning to this house rule, and I hope the rest of =
> you are as well.

This has always seemed to me a saner way of handling access than the way we have been.

-- 
J.


_______________________________________________
eia mailing list
eia@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia