Michael Gorman on 21 Mar 2003 17:57:01 -0000

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

Re: [eia] cossacks

At 12:44 PM 3/21/2003 -0500, you wrote:
    Since more than one person has commented on this, apparently my purpose wasn't clear.  I was in no way trying to second guess or otherwise criticize Jim's orders.  They seem perfectly fine to me.  I was simply trying to remind everyone (myself included) about how cossacks work.  That's it.  My apologies if it seemed to anyone like I thought there was a problem with Jim's orders.
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Gorman
To: eia@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 12:24 PM
Subject: Re: [eia] cossacks

At 10:19 AM 3/21/2003 -0500, you wrote:
    I don't know about everyone else, but I had forgotten how cossacks work when they are by themselves.  So, as a public service, I figured I'd remind everyone (including myself). says that cossacks always get to retreat automatically unless the attacking force has a cavalry corps with them.  And then they still have a 2/3 chance of retreating.
    So the moral of the story is:  there's not much point in trying to hunt them down, because they will almost always get away from you.
Well, moving a corps there did open up the supply line to Minsk.

I think the comment was more directed at there is a point in hunting them down.  They tend to get away, but if you don't try hunting them, your troops get kinda hungry.  It's very much like those pesky guerillas the Spanish get if they get invaded.