Re: [eia] a try for a simple solution to 12.4

[Joel Uckelman <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thus spake jjy@xxxxxxxxxxx:
> In order to make garrison retrieval simple and possible, without causing a lo
> t 
> of other unwanted consequences, why not give each garrison in formerly-enemy 
> territory an "honors of war" at the time peace is made ?  This may bring the 
> garrison all the way back home, or it may bring them to a formerly-enemy city
>  
> which is occupied by a friendly corps.  This corps can then pick up the 
> garrison, or split off another corps marker to take them in.  Very simple.
> 
> I would suggest restricting the honors of war given to garrisons to moving to
>  
> friendly cities or cities with friendly corps only, to avoid situations where
>  a 
> garrison would be stranded if the closest corps is of an ally, with no friend
> ly 
> corps present.

I took it that the biggest issue with force repatriation is that by using 
it garrisons can travel a distance not normally possible. Honors of war for 
every garrison would probably lead to just that.

Furthermore, honors of war may very well permanently strand garrisons: 
suppose that the nearest corps in a formerly enemy city is full, and that 
power has no empty corps to build. If the corps leaves to unload then it 
can't return, and there will be no way to retrieve the garrison. In this 
situation what a real garrison would do is start marching home on its own, 
but that seems not to be an option.
 
> This done, the rule for corps movement becomes:  a corps in formerly-enemy 
> territory can only move so as to end its move closer to friendly or allied 
> territory, or closer to the nearest port for evacuation.
> 
> -JJY

Aside from freedom of movement when threatened, and exit into another 
enemy's territory, that is what my proposal for corps movement amounts to.

-- 
J.


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