Re: [eia] [escrow] Battle of Florence, October 1807

["Kyle H" <menexenus@xxxxxxx>]

    I thought that was in there somewhere.  Thanks for finding it.  Yes, it
was my stated intention to detach a garrison if the rules permitted it.  So
I will go ahead and do so.
    Battle of Turin is up next.

kdh

----- Original Message -----
From: "Everett E. Proctor" <spiritmast@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "public list for an Empires in Arms game" <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2004 10:12 AM
Subject: Re: [eia] [escrow] Battle of Florence, October 1807


> > I wish Everett and Joel could have entered their opinions about PPs for
> > garrisons in a field combat before this point, so that it wouldn't look
like
> > Coalition aggrandizment if they agreed with my side.  But as I said, it
> > wouldn't have affected my decision to have the Florence garrison in the
> > battle.  In any case, though, the decision needs to be finalized
> > immediately.
> >
>
> I don't have a strong preference for either way.  However, since there
> are  some situations where factors outside of corp can gain PP (Seiges
> of fortresses), I'd have to slightly side on the side that they do
> gain/lose PP.
>
> Also, while looking at the rules while trying to decide, I found
> 7.5.1.3: "After a combat . . .player's forces may . . . detach factors
> to occupy . . . vacant city"  So, if Kyle wants to detach factors at
> Turin, I say he should be able to.  (I probably would have still used my
> unused movement for foraging and given up ability to siege anyway)
>
> -Everett
>
> _______________________________________________
> eia mailing list
> eia@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia
>

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