Re: [eia] rules question

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

The rule seems pretty clear to me that whoever controls the _area_ that
contains Constantinople controls whether or not a fleet can enter the
Dardanelles sea area.  So if Constantinople city is beseiged, the beseigers
would control the area and thus have the choice.  And yes, I would say that
this also means being able to prevent entering the sea area from
Constantinople's blockade box.

-JJY

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joel Uckelman" <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2002 1:44 PM
Subject: [eia] rules question


> Rule 6.2.1.3 states:
>
> "A fleet may not enter the Dardanelles sea area unless that major power
> controls an unbesieged Constantinople, besieges Constantinople, or has
> access from the major power controlling Constantinople."
>
> In the event that I hold a besieged Constantinople, I would meet neither
of
> the first two conditions. As for the third condition, access usually
refers
> to permissions granted other powers, not a power's own ability to move
> freely through it's own territory; interpreted in that way, a Turkish
fleet
> at a besieged Constantinople could get no farther than it's blockade box,
> since the blockade box is entirely within the Dardanelles sea zone.
>
> But Constantinople (the actual city) is on the end of a peninsula, and has
> only one landward side. Besiegers without naval support would have no way
> of preventing a fleet from leaving. Additionally, if the besiegers didn't
> also control some point on the Dardanelles or the opposing side of the
> Bosporus, they should be unable to prevent passage of ships.
>
> How this rule is interpreted will impact my naval placements, so I need to
> know how we're going to call this one before I decide.
>
>
> --
> J.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eia mailing list
> eia@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia
>
>