Re: [eia] battle of Bordeaux: British withdrawal roll, overwhelming odds and trivial combats

[Joel Uckelman <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thus spake "Bill Jaffe":
> I see the siege rules as rewarding primarily "fletches", which are
> fortifications that make a city more important from a POLITICAL point. The
> reason having a corps present is added is because the loss of an entire
> corps formation in a siege would be politically newsworthy, just as the fall
> of Lille or some of the other principalities. I actually would house rule
> that a 2 or more fletch city, or 4 or 5 spire city always causes PP to be at
> stake, even in a surrender. But I don't know if that would be unbalancing.
> 
> Clearly, most overwhelming odds situations are more about a small force left
> behind to hinder the movement of a large force, rather than these where 1
> mid-sized corps of 8 or 10 faces a 1 point militia-based corps.
> 
> However, I do see this as not changing the way the rule reads - you are
> forced to trivial combat, so 7.5.3.5 doesn't apply, and there are no PPs
> awarded.
> 
> Bill Jaffe
> Wargaming since Tactics (1958), and playing 18xx since 1829
> billj@xxxxxxxxxxx
>  

The sole exception given for PP awards after trivial combats listed in
7.5.3.5 is when both sides agree to resolve a limited of field combat
as a trivial combat. Overwhelming numbers forces this to be a trivial
combat, so that exception doesn't apply here.

There is one justfication I can think of for awarding PP when a corps
is defeated in a siege vs being defeated in a trivial combat, namely
that in a successful siege assault the corps staff is captured, while
in a trivial combat presuambly many of these people slip away even if
the corps itself ceases to exist. I think that it's the loss of the
staff (who are presumably important people at home) that matters
politically here, hence the PP award for the siege and not for the
loss of a tiny battle.

Also, I think that the rules as written permit a second withdrawal attempt
in this case, though I find this odd, and think that they probably shouldn't.

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