Re: [eia] Battle & seige

[Michael Gorman <mpgorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 04:32 PM 11/18/2002 -0600, you wrote:
> Thus spake menexenus@xxxxxxx:
> >
> >    However, I am still generally opposed to using escrow to resolve (most)
> > battles and here's why:  if one side chooses Outflank, they are 
> supposed to
> > split their force *before* finding out what their opponent's strategy 
> was.
> > When we use escrow, both parties will find out the other's strategy
> > simultaneously.  This gives players who choose Outflank an advantage 
> that the
> > y
> > weren't designed to have.  Since Outflank is a very realistic choice 
> for the
> > French in most cases, I will generally want to use a method other than 
> escrow
> > for battles involving more than one corps.
>
> This occurred to me when conducting my last battle, and I worried about it
> until I realized that there's an easy way to handle Outflank. If you're
> going to outflank, divide your forces when you make your chit selection.
> The only situation in which this would reveal more information than
> resolving a battle in realtime is in the event of a successful withdrawal,
> as the reveal forces step is after the withdrawal step. Is this an
> acceptable solution?
>
> --

        I came to the same conclusion as I was also considering an 
outflank in the battle between Russia and Turkey this turn.  I had simply 
decided I would tack on my split with the chit choice.  To moderate the 
impact should a withdrawal be chosen, I figure you can identify flanking 
and pinning forces by corps rather than give strength details.  It still 
reveals information if people have kept up with corps strength, but as 
corps in the same location can exchange forces invisibly every 
reinforcement phase, the information can rapidly become outdated.
        Strength details can then be revealed normally in the reveal 
forces phase.
Mike


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