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

["Everett E. Proctor" <spiritmast@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

This is the solution that I am most in favor of.   To solve Joel's
problem, I suggest that we should read the honor of war to mean the
closest friendly city that can accommodate those garrisons.

I very much against allowing new corp to enter or reenter the opponent's territory.

-Everett

On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 15:52:14 -0400
"J.J. Young" <jjy@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I am much more concerned about restricting corps movement than I am about
> how far garrisons get to move.  I thought, since the honors of war mechanism
> already exists in the game, why not make use of it in this situatiuon (which
> seems similar to me) ?  In fact, it's the only precedent the rules offer of
> a garrison "marching" anywhere.  No one disagrees that it could be possible
> for the honors of war to allow a garrison to move a considerable distance.
> Why not when peace is declared, also ?
> 
> -JJY
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joel Uckelman" <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2003 3:18 PM
> Subject: Re: [eia] a try for a simple solution to 12.4
> 
> 
> > 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
> >
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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