RE: [eia] Battle of Rome results

[Danny Mount <mount.23@xxxxxxx>]

I believe JJ said "The Portuguese garrison retired into the city, but the
corps stayed out to fight."  Therefore it was the Portugese garrison that
was besieged at Rome, not the Portugese corps.
-DEM




-----Original Message-----
From: eia-admin@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:eia-admin@xxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
Michael Gorman
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2003 11:53 AM
To: eia@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [eia] Battle of Rome results


At 08:57 AM 3/23/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>OK, so the modified British rolls were 3, 3, 2 (originally 4, 4, 3), and
the
>modified French rolls were 5, 3, 2 (originally 4, 2, 1).
>
>First round:  Britain inflicts -1 casualty (10 %) and -0.7 morale on the
>French.  France inflicts -2 casualties (15%) and -1.4 morale on the
British.
>
>Second round:  Britain inflicts -1 casualty (10 %) and -1.4 morale on the
>French.  France inflicts -1 casualty (10%) and -1.4 morale on the British.
>
>Third round:  Britain inflicts -1 casualty (5%) and -1.0 morale on the
>French.  The French inflict -1 casualty (5%) and -1.0 morale on the
British.
>
>The British break and retreat to the mountain area due north; there is no
>pursuit.  Britain loses -2 PP and France gains +2 PP.
>
>Total losses are 2 British I, 1 British C, 1 Port. I, 2 French I, and 1
>Naples I.
>
>Since the attacking corps used depot supply, the French now have the option
>of besieging Rome.

If the Portugese corps retired into the city, how is it involved in the
field battle?


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



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