Re: [eia] battles involving allied garrisons

["J.J. Young" <jjy@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Mike and I seem to agree that yes, an ally with only a garrison involved in
a field or limited field combat should still be included in the PP losses or
gains for the battle.  Kyle disagrees.

All three of us seem to agree that a besieged city garrison should be able
to help a relieving force, whether the garrison's owner has combined
movement with the reliever or not.

So we need some other opinions, especially on point #1, to firm up how we
will handle this sort of thing, which is about to pop up and may very well
happen again.

-JJY

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kyle H" <menexenus@xxxxxxx>
To: "public list for an Empires in Arms game" <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 5:35 PM
Subject: Re: [eia] battles involving allied garrisons


>
> > 1.)  Does my garrison's participation in the battle involve GB in
> political
> > point losses or gains for the battle ?
> >
> > The heart of this question is, do all the allies involved in a field or
> > limited field battle receive/lose PPs, or just the ones with _corps_ in
> the
> > battle ?  My first impression is that if there are anyone's corps
involved
> > on both sides in the battle, then everyone with _factors_ involved, not
> just
> > corps, should be included in the PP losses or gains.  Be everyone might
> not
> > agree.
> >
>
>     I definitely disagree.  If you have no corps in the battle, then you
> have no effect on the political points that are up for grabs in the
battle.
> If you do not contribute a corps and are therefore not influencing the
> number of political points that could be gained or lost, I don't see how
you
> could claim political points if your side wins the battle.
>
> > 2.)  Would my garrison be allowed to participate in the relief battle if
I
> > did not have combined movement with the relievers ?
> >
>
>     My instinct is that you would not have to be combined with the
relievers
> to fight with them.  The rules allow that armies may attempt to reinforce
> each other even when the two forces have not combined movement, so I
assume
> that garrisons can assist a land battle even if the forces in question
have
> not combined movement.
>
> > Obviously, question #2 would not apply in the case of a depot garrison,
> > which could only be involved in a defensive battle, and so would
> definitely
> > be able to fight.
> >
>
>     I don't think a situation like this would ever come up for a depot
> garrison, because it will have either won its trivial combat, it will have
> lost and been destroyed, or it will have fallen back into a city in the
same
> area.  There would never be an occasion when there would be a relief
battle
> involving a depot garrison, as far as I can tell.
>
> kdh
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eia mailing list
> eia@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia
>
>


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