Re: [eia] Apologies

[Joel Uckelman <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thus spake Michael Gorman:
>
>          It only matters to Russia which was given a capital that can be 
> defended and a bleeding wound called St. Petersburg.  The economic 
> manipulation rules make it sound like you need to take both in order to 
> stop Russia from getting taxation, but the taxation rules make it pretty 
> clear that you only need to take the easier of the two.

Could you point me to those? 12.5 says nothing at all about this. 
Interestingly, the requirements for trade and taxation differ---Russian 
trade is stopped only when both are occupied.

>          There really isn't any interpretation as it is quite clear what 
> the rules say.  I simply had failed to realize just how vulnerable Russia 
> was in this game versus in the actual Napoleonic Wars.  As every other 
> nation has one capital it doesn't matter to them.
>          My major curiosity at this point is why they have the two capital 
> rule for Russia.  I'm not sure why it exists at all.  Why not just declare 
> St. Petersburg as the capital as it is by far the easiest one to 
> attack.  There isn't any reason for Moscow to be the capital beyond a vague 
> nod to the fact that people had to take it over in the real world.  But as 
> they aren't requiring that in the game, what's the point of the nod?
> 
> Mike

Moscow was still the largest city in Russia, and lots of governmental stuff 
remained there despite St. Petersburg's having been the capital for since 
1712. So there is a good reason for it to be considered a capital. But 
these same reasons argue for needing to occupy both to prevent Russia from 
collecting taxes. Russia is far larger than the European powers, and 
there's little reason to believe that occupying St. Petersburg would stop 
the taxman in Astrakhan from collecting taxes and sending them to 
Moscow---which, given the way Russia's road net is, is where it would go on 
its way to St. Petersburg anyway. Apparently that's not what the rules say, 
though. So I agree that this is strange, but not for the same reasons.

Here's a related question: In 1812, why did Napoleon march on Moscow rather 
than St. Petersburg? The answer to that might give us some idea of why the 
designers made the decision they did with respect to the Russian capitals.

-- 
J.


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