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

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

I underlined _fleet_ at one point where I meant to underline _require_.

-JJY

----- Original Message -----
From: "J.J. Young" <jjy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 12:12 AM
Subject: Re: [eia] a try for a simple solution to 12.4


> > Taking that into account, here's a modified proposal:
> >
> > 1. At the time peace is made, any garrisons in formerly enemy territory
> are,
> > at the owner's option, repatriated to the nearest city in friendly
> territory
> > that can hold them.
>
> I like this because it puts responsibility on the owner whether or not to
> possibly strand garrisons.
>
> > 2. A ground unit in formerly enemy territory may move only by satisfying
> one
> > of the following conditions, using movement points as the distance
metric:
>
> Small question; why is it important to use movement points as the metric,
> instead of simple areas ?  Maybe this was answered earlier and I missed
it.
>
> >  a. The ground unit ends its move nearer to the nearest accessible
> friendly
> > area.
> >  b. The ground unit ends its move nearer to the nearest of the former
> enemy's
> > ports.
> >  c. The ground unit ends its move nearer to the nearest enemy area, and
> the
> > nearest enemy area is nearer than the nearest friendly area.
>
> This last bit ("and the nearest enemy area is nearer than the nearest
> friendly area") is a stronger restriction than I had proposed, although I
> don't object.
>
> >  d. The ground unit begins its move in an area that can be reached
> overland by
> > an enemy unit from that enemy unit's current location during that enemy
> unit's
> > next move.
> >
> > 3. No land unit may cross into formerly enemy territory without an
access
> > agreement.
> >
> > 4. A fleet owned by or allied to a power that made peace may enter a
port
> in
> > former enemy territory if a land unit allied with that power is in the
> port
> > or could enter the port later during the turn.
> >
> > 5. A fleet that enters a port under 4 must embark during the next naval
> phase,
> > carrying, at least one land unit if possible. A fleet that enters
> > Constantinople without an access agreement must exit the Dardanelles
into
> the
> > area through which it entered.
>
> One small problem here; what if the fleet moves to the port, with every
> intention of picking up a corps that could move to the same port, but some
> unexpected circumstance (such as enemy action) prevents the corps from
> getting to the port that turn.  Would the fleet be forced to leave the
next
> turn, and then come back again in the third turn ?  This creates an extra
> month's delay in evacuation.
>
> Is it necessary to require the _fleet_ to leave immediately at all, other
> than the same 6 month time limit as corps have ?
>
> > Ok, hopefully that captures everything we've said thus far.
>
> I think that Joel and I (at least), are getting close to consensus.  But
> there's a number of players that haven't been heard from, yet.
>
> -JJY
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eia mailing list
> eia@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia
>


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