[eia] Siege of Amsterdam

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

(History Monkey reporting...)

As Kyle said, in Genoa the two British corps successfully withdrew without
casualties or pursuit.  In Amsterdam, the attacking French XI and Imperial
Guard corps (4 I, 1 C, 5 Gd - 4.5 morale) under Ney breached the defences
and fought against the British II corps (9 I - 4.5 morale).  In the first
round, the French inflicted -1 I and -.6 morale losses, and suffered -2 I
and -2.8 morale damage in return.  In the second round, the French
inflicted -1 I and -2.2 morale on the British, but Ney suffered -2 I
and -2.8 morale and his army broke and resumed the siege.

As a result, Britain went up +1 PP to the 13 box.

-JJY

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kyle H" <menexenus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 8:21 PM
Subject: Re: [eia] Battle & seige


>     Tonight, JJ and I resolved our limited field battle at Genoa and our
> siege battle at Amsterdam.  Both of them went as poorly for me as they
could
> possibly go.  (British forces successfully withdrew from Genoa - even
though
> each corps rolled separately.  And JJ rolled double-sixes in the siege
> battle to break me in 2 rounds.)
>     JJ will send you all the details, I'm sure, but the general results
are
> that one French corps at Amsterdam gets absorbed into the other, GB gets
+1
> political point for winning a siege battle, the British at Genoa withdrew
to
> Turin, the French depot there was burned and its garrison retired into the
> city.
>     So now GB is up, followed by Spain.  Then we'll finally be done with
> this turn!
>
> kdh
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "J.J. Young" <jjy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 6:57 PM
> Subject: Re: [eia] Battle & seige
>
>
> > This is perfectly fine with me.
> >
> > -JJY
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Kyle H" <menexenus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 4:44 PM
> > Subject: Re: [eia] Battle & seige
> >
> >
> > >     Thanks for helping me resolve my concerns about resolving battles
> with
> > > escrow+pbm.  I think you (Mike, Joel, and JJ) have all found
acceptable
> > > solutions to my worries about the use of Outflank.  Mike and Joel make
> > good
> > > points about withdrawals, though.  However, I think this is a small
> price
> > to
> > > pay for the convenience of the escrow+pbm system.
> > >     So, in conclusion, our general procedure for conducting battles
will
> > be
> > > as follows (unless the players involved make other arrangements):
> > >
> > > 1.  Establish an escrow for chit choice.
> > > 2.  If choosing Outflank, list the corps that make up the pinning
force
> > and
> > > the corps that make up the flanking force.
> > > 3.  Once chits have been revealed and withdrawals have been resolved,
> > reveal
> > > the exact compositions of the pinning and flanking forces (if
> necessary).
> > >
> > > Pretty simple.  Am I missing anything?
> > >
> > > kdh
> > >
> > >
> > > > >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
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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