Re: [eia] Re: reinforcement phase

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

Kyle, I agree with everything you've said, including the opinion that using
the escrow account for reinforcement orders is a bad idea.  Also, I point
out again that if a player doesn't feel there's any way others'
reinforcement orders could conflict with his, a player can feel free to jump
ahead of the order you suggested.  For example, it would be a _very_ rare
occasion that Great Britain would choose to separate their naval and army
reinforcement orders.  I think the political orders have a much greater
potential of changing a player's reinforcement orders than another player's
reinforcement orders, and so this solution should take care of most
problems.

-JJY

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kyle H" <menexenus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2002 1:33 PM
Subject: [eia] Re: reinforcement phase


>     I reluctantly agree with JJ that we are probably better off doing
> political orders separate from reinforcement orders.  I didn't propose it
> before because I thought (and still think) that it will slow our turns
down
> even further.  But as reluctant as I am to add another round of emails to
> each turn, I can see that what JJ says is essentially correct.  If we are
> going to allow people to revise their reinforcement orders in response to
> other people's political orders, then we might as well just separate the
two
> steps.
>     The rules for the reinforcement phase specify that we are all supposed
> to do naval reinforcement first and then army reinforcement.  I hope you
> will all agree that we should condense these two steps into just one round
> of emails, combining naval and army reinforcement.  Luckily the order for
> both steps is almost identical - the only difference is that France and GB
> switch places.  So it is easy to combine them into one combined
> reinforcement phase.  Only the second and seventh steps are split between
> France and Great Britain.  It works like this.
>     1st step:  Spain sends out both naval and army reinforcement orders.
>     **2nd step:  France sends out naval and GB sends out army
reinforcement
> orders
>     3rd step:  Prussia sends out both naval and army reinforcement orders.
>     4th step:  Austria sends out both.
>     5th setp:  Turkey sends out both.
>     6th step:  Russia sends out both.
>     **7th step:  France sends out army and GB sends out naval
reinforcement
> orders.
> I think this is the best, most reasonable way to go if we are going to
have
> a separate round of emails for the reinforcement phase.  If there are any
> objections to doing it this way, please express them.
>     In his email, Joel suggested that we use the escrow for both the
> political phase and the reinforcement phase.  I am opposed to this
> suggestion.  We wanted the escrow for the political phase because many of
> the steps require simultaneous announcements.  But the reinforcement phase
> is separated into major power turns.  Since the reinforcement phase was
not
> designed to be simultaneous, there is no need to use escrow for that.
>
> kdh
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "J.J. Young" <jjy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2002 12:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [eia] escrow question
>
>
> > Hello, all.  I'm back.  As far as the escrow question goes, I think that
> > _any_ player should have the right to change their reinforcement orders
> > based on others' political orders, especially declarations of war.
After
> > all, even if war is not declared directly on you, your situation could
be
> > vastly different from the one in which you thought you were writing your
> > reinforcement orders.  For this reason, I think that we would have
people
> > going back to rewrite their orders way too often (at least one player
> every
> > turn, and maybe most of the players in a big shakeup).  So I am
proposing
> > that we use the escrow email only for political orders, and we send out
> our
> > reinforcement orders after the political orders from everyone come in.
Of
> > course, if you feel that nothing anyone will do in the political phase
> could
> > affect your reinforcement orders, you can still send them out early -
just
> > not in the escrow.  I think that doing it this way will not slow us up
> very
> > much, if at all, and will avoid a lot of confusing backtracking.
> >
> > -JJY
> >
> > P.S:  I also propose that we send out a notification when we have sent
our
> > political orders into the escrow, unless there is some other way to know
> who
> > has responded.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Kyle H" <menexenus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Friday, June 28, 2002 8:04 PM
> > Subject: [eia] escrow question
> >
> >
> > >     Looks like we'll be done with January soon and we will be moving
on
> to
> > > the February political/reinforcement phase.  Mike and others have
> > expressed
> > > a desire to do our political phase orders using the Escrow account.
> > That's
> > > fine by me, as long as we all understand that any major power who has
> war
> > > declared on them should have an opportunity to revise their
> reinforcement
> > > orders accordingly.
> > >     But here's my question:  Joel, do we have to be invited to respond
> to
> > > the Escrow account, or do we just send our orders to that email
address
> > > whenever we want?  If we have to be invited first, then please send
out
> > the
> > > invitation soon so that we are ready to get underway as soon as
Spain's
> > land
> > > orders are in.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> eia mailing list
> eia@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia
>
>


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