Re: [eia] Battle of Leopoldstadt resolution

["Kyle H" <menexenus@xxxxxxx>]

    "Gamey"?  We're playing a game!
    The rule I suggested (#2) follows the model provided by Declaration of 
Combat and Combined Movement in section 7.3.8.  If my rule is "gamey," then 
so are those rules.  (7.3.8.4 and 7.3.8.6 specify that corps that are not at 
war with *all* the nations on the opposing side must leave the area of the 
battle.)  And if you want to throw those rules out too, then you're 
basically just making up your own game.
    The basic principle of 7.3.8 is that you can't have a fight in an area 
if that area contains a corps that is not at war with
*all* the powers in the opposing side.  (Quoting directly from 7.3.8.7: 
"This will now leave just two forces in every area where an attack has been 
declared, the attacking force ... and the defending force.")  When a corps 
is not at war with the opponents on one side, 7.3.8 kicks that corps out of 
the area to allow the fighters to fight.  My suggestion just specifies where 
the stack gets kicked out to (back to its area of origin) *if* it chooses 
not to declare war.
    After all, the result that Joel finds "gamey" is avoided entirely if the 
reinforcer just declares war against its opponents.  As I see it, the only 
thing "gamey" here is someone who is trying to fight nations that he is not 
at war with.  If he isn't willing to put up the PPs to declare war, then he 
deserves his "gamey" fate.  :-)
    I think my suggestion #2 is the best way to go within the rules. 
However, I could also support Jim's suggestion (#1).  However, I'm adamantly 
opposed to letting armies fight against nations with which they are not at 
war.

kdh

>
> #1 seems gamey to me, for the reason that armies arriving at a battle
> wouldn't just not fight. #2 seems gamey for the same reason. There's
> another model for this in the rules, namely when a neutral fleet is
> transporting an enemy corps. You have the option to declare war in
> that case, but need not do so to attack, as per 6.3.1.2. My suggestion
> is to waive the rule that neutral armies cannot fight each other
> for this single case, and then permit a DoW using 6.3.1.2 if either side
> desires it.
>
> I like this as a solution to the hypothetical situation because it doesn't
> bring about the improbable event of an army not fighing after marching to
> the battle.
>
> -- 
> J.
> _______________________________________________
> eia mailing list
> eia@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia 

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