----- Original Message ----- 
  
  
  Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2003 5:46 AM
  Subject: Re: [eia] corps-on-loan
  
      I agree that repatriation is 
  unrealistic.  But so is the prospect that a French 
  corps-on-loan might march all the way to Constantinople for no good 
  reason.  So is the fact that by leaving the French corps on his extreme 
  eastern border (as Jim seems prepared to do), the Prussian king would be 
  inviting a foreign army to ravage its people all the way home.  ...  
  So it's not as if one rule is "realistic" and the other is "unrealistic"; 
  rather it's a matter of deciding which kind of unrealistic rule we prefer to 
  abide by.
   
      Since no one has piped up in 
  support of my suggestion, I'm willing to seek a compromise.  What I most 
  want to avoid are the following situations:  Jim uses voluntary access 
  agreements to march my corps-on-loan to Jerusalem.  If Jim remained at 
  war with Russia he could conceivably march my corps-on-loan to Saratov or 
  Astrakhan. 
      Before I suggest my 
  (compromise) solution, let's recall that it's not as if this corps is a corps 
  of mindless zombies.  Obviously, they have enough free to stop fighting 
  in the middle of a combat once they've lost half of their strength.  That 
  tells me that there are some lengths to which they will not go in the service 
  of their temporary masters.  On the other hand, I do not want to restrict 
  the ability of the temporary master to use the corps as he wishes.  After 
  all, marching the French corps to Astrakhan could be a legitimate military 
  mission - it is a provincial capital.
   
      So here's the compromise I 
  suggest.  At the moment the corps-on-loan reverts to its original owner's 
  control it is repatriated to *its previous temporary master's 
  territory*.  
   
      In my case, this would mean 
  that if the corps were in Astrakhan or Jerusalem in April of 1805, then it 
  would be repatriated to *Prussia*.  At this point, the corps would still 
  have to march across Prussia to get home.
   
      The purpose of this rule would 
  be to eliminate the ability of temporary controlling powers to abuse the rules 
  and send the corps-on-loan to far-off lands for no reason.  I know that 
  there is a lot of resistance to the "oddity" (as Mike puts it) of a corps 
  moving faster than it usually does.  But what about the oddity of a 
  French corps marching to Jerusalem for no apparent reason?  Do you really 
  think that the commanders of that corps would obey that command?  Is that 
  "realistic"?
   
      In any case, if I can't get 
  automatic force repatriation, then I hope I can at least get repatriation to 
  the previous controller's country.  This rule would eliminate whatever 
  incentive currently exists to abuse the rules and send corps-on-loan to 
  far-off lands for no reason.
   
  kdh
   
  
     
I was thinking bringing a corps on 
    loan into your country would count as voluntary access so you could not 
    refuse the corps the right to return home.  Repatriation would stop 
    someone from stranding the corps on a desert island though.
I think 
    access works though on the basis that in a long game, you can probably get 
    away with an abuse of that sort once and then you'd better never lose a war 
    to the nation you did it to.  The whole point of not doing instant 
    repatriation was to avoid the oddity of having the troops move faster than 
    it is possible to move troops under ideal conditions.  Repatriation is 
    inherently unrealistic as the troops can't go as fast as they might under 
    it.  If a country wants to get the other corps out, they can always 
    dump it off near the border.