Re: [eia] political points after a battle

[Joel Uckelman <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thus spake "J.J. Young":
> BTW, the emphasis in the FAQ quote I sent was added by the answerer; I was
> just quoting them.
> 
> We can do whatever we want, of course, but I got the impression that the
> interpretation which Kyle originally had is semi-official, with articles
> being written about it in The General, etc.  But if we're going outside of
> the pale, then here's the interpretation I prefer:
> 
> I would prefer the gain all/lose all interpretation, for two reasons.
> 1.)  It seems unfair to me that in a situation where one ally sends a heap
> of corps into a battle, and another ally sends only one corps and a leader,
> the player who committed the most force gains nothing.  This seems against
> the spirit of the game (remember that passage in the "general hints" 15.8,
> where it suggests that one player offer the services of a leader to a
> prospective ally-this doesn't seem to me like they're interpreting the rule
> in the EiH way.
> 2.)  I can imagine a situation where it is unclear who is in command.
> Suppose an equal number of Prussian and Austrian corps, with no leader,
> fight a battle together.  Since they have identical corps tactical ratings,
> who's the commander ?  Do they dice off for it ?  How does this make sense ?
> 
> Anyway, that's my opinion.  Hopefully we can discuss this and still keep the
> game moving at the same time.
> 
> -JJY

We've had naval battles in which fleets from more than one power were 
involved on a side. How did we handle political points then? Whichever way 
we decide, both of these situations should be handled the same way.

-- 
J.


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