J.J. Young on 11 Aug 2002 04:33:02 -0000


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [eia] Need help understanding how garrisons work.



>     In Case 1, where we have a homogeneous garrison, the default
assumption
> seems obvious: 10 factors go out and 2 stay in.  In Case 2, where we have
a
> heterogeneous garrison, I'm not sure what the default assumption should
be.
> I can see myself preferring different things under different
circumstances.
> The same goes for Cases 3 and 4.  I'm starting to think that we should
only
> have a default assumption for homogeneous garrisons numbering fewer than
10
> factors.  Otherwise, we should prompt the phasing player for specific
> instructions regarding how many and which garrison factors migrate to the
> depot.
>

Judging by our game so far, I think that garrisons larger than 10 factors
are going to be few and far between, so it seems best to me to just have no
default policy in these cases.  If you build a depot in a place with a large
garrison, you have to specify how you arrange the garrison factors when you
build the depot.

>     This issue brings up some other questions I have.  7.4.5 reads that
> "besieged garrisons and corps *must* check for supply by the foraging
> method, using the *city* supply value...."  In the past, we have
interpreted
> that language to mean that *each* besieged garrison and *each* besieged
> corps rolls separately for forage.  [I have always thought that the
language
> in 7.4.5.1 indicates otherwise.  It says, "Instead, for every *full* 5
army
> factors in the besieged city (regardless of whether the factors are part
of
> a corps or merely a garrison) '+1' is added to the die, to a maximum of
> '+2'.  *For example, a city with 5-9 army factors would have '+1' added to
> the die roll.  No other modifiers apply."  To me this indicates that all
the
> factors in the city are added together and one roll is made *regardless*
of
> the number of distinct corps or garrisons within the besieged city.  But I
> was outvoted.]  If we are going to stick with our previous interpretation,
> then I am wondering what counts as a separate garrison (that must make a
> separate forage roll).  For example, I assume that in Case 2 there is only
1
> garrison despite the heterogeneous garrison composition.  But what about
> cases 3 and 4?  Are these cases in which there are 2 separate garrisons
that
> must roll separately, or should we understand these cases to involve only
> one multi-national garrison (that rolls only once)?  [Notice that these
> issues become irrelevant if we use my interpretation of the besieged
supply
> rules.  But we can do whatever people want.]
>

My interpretation of the rules is that all factors in a besieged city which
are not part of a corps are part of the _single_ city garrison.  If such a
garrison contains multinational factors and suffers foraging losses, use the
% loss rules for casualties.

>      Another question:  can a corps in the same area as a depot do the
same
> things that a depot garrison would do?  In the past I have assumed that it
> could.  So for instance, if a corps and a depot of the same nationality
are
> in the same space, and an enemy corps attacks, I have always assumed that
> the corps can choose to burn the depot as if it were a depot garrison.
> However, this assumption is not supported in the rules.  7.3.3.3.2
> specifies, "Corps may form all or part of a city garrison without
detaching
> army factors..." but it says nothing about corps being all or part of a
> depot garrison.  And the rules regarding whether a player is able to burn
a
> depot depend on whether the depot is considered to be "garrisoned" or not.
> (See 7.3.6.)  So it seems that by the written rules, corps do not have the
> option of burning a depot when enemy troops arrive, only garrison factors
> can do that.  Personally, I think corps should be allowed to burn friendly
> depots when enemy corps arrive, just like a depot garrison.  However, if
we
> allow corps to act in the same way that a depot garrison is allowed to
act,
> does that mean all friendly corps can do so, including allied and minor
> country corps?  7.3.3.5.1 and 7.3.3.5.2 specify that depot garrisons must
be
> of the same major power as the depot and can only be composed of minor
free
> state factors within the borders of the minor free state.  To be honest,
I'd
> be willing to scrap these restrictions altogether, but if people want to
> keep them, I'd at least want to allow that allied corps and minor country
> corps can burn a friendly depot at their discretion.

Why stir the pot ?  I think that corps should be able to burn a depot just
as a depot garrison could, including a minor country corps from the same
major power, but that an allied corps could not.  After all, an ally is
never allowed to garrison that depot.  Players should look after their own
property.

-JJY


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