Re: [eia] issues and moving on

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

It seems that Mike, Everett, and Joel, at least, favor being able to declare
war on minors based on what one "could" do in the reinforcement phase,
provided you actually have the corps markers and factors coming to
accomplish it.  I am willing to concede the issue.

This means that there is no problem with any orders which have been given so
far this turn, and we can procede.  As long as we can decide on how to
handle Combined Movement before the next political phase, we're fine.

Next up is France's land reinforcement and naval orders.

-JJY

----- Original Message -----
From: "Everett E. Proctor" <spiritmast@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 7:31 AM
Subject: Re: [eia] issues and moving on


>
> On Sat, 29 Mar 2003 22:39:50 -0500
> "J.J. Young" <jjy@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >
> > I do hold the opinion that it would be better to deal with the forces on
the
> > map when deciding if a declaration of war is possible, but I can live
with
> > it either way.  How about the people we haven't heard from on these
issues ?
>
> I don't know.  It seems to me that being able to plan an attack on a
> minor with troops about to be placed on the board seems a reasonable
> tactic, and I wouldn't want to take it away, but it does impose some
> difficulties.  I would like to say that if that's the only way you can
> attack that country, that you must place those so that they can do so,
> but that's technically not in the rules.   And I'm not sure if the rules
meant to include off map resources.   Put me down as slightly favoring
> being able to include off map resources on this, but that I don't have a
strong argument for it.  Helpful, ain't I?
>
> -Everett
>
>
>
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Kyle H" <menexenus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2003 6:21 PM
> > Subject: Re: [eia] I still have a problem
> >
> >
> > >     Again, I don't care much about this and am willing to concede.  If
you
> > > guys want to do combined movement separate from the escrow, I can live
> > with
> > > that.
> > >
> > > kdh
> > >
> > > > > I don't mind it being in the escrow, but I also don't see how
allowing
> > a
> > > > > "oh, us too" email breaks any rule, breaks any spirit of the game,
or
> > is
> > > > > wrong in any sense. ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Everett
> > > >
> > > > For the record, I agree with Everett.
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
>
> --
> Everett E. Proctor <spiritmast@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Play Sanctum: Online CCG
> http://www.sanctum.nioga.net/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eia mailing list
> eia@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia
>
>


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