Re: [eia] Turkish Land Phase, February 1807

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

Hmmm.  What does everyone else think of this interpretation ?

-JJY

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joel Uckelman" <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "public list for an Empires in Arms game" <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 12:48 PM
Subject: Re: [eia] Turkish Land Phase, February 1807


> Thus spake "J.J. Young":
> > So, am I interpreting the rules correctly, that the Spanish cavalry
corps
> > has not yet disembarked, and is still on the ships in Algiers harbor,
rather
> > than being part of the city garrison ?
> >
> > If this is the case (and I'm not giving anything away here, because
there
> > are no choices involved), then if the city is captured, then the fleet
must
> > move out to the Algiers blockade box, or the sea space off the coast.
The
> > cavalry corps, then, _must_ land in an adjacent land area on the Spanish
> > land phase, or demobilize.
> >
> > I'm referencing rules 7.3.5 and 6.2.6.
> >
> > -JJY
>
> I think Spain is in that situation regardless. 7.3.5 says that "Corps
being
> transported on fleets that moved into a port must disembark in the port's
> area." This doesn't say "into the port". I realize that there's a case to
> be made for a port being in its area, but if both were options, I expect
> they would have said "into the port or its area" instead. And there are
> already clear cases of prohibition on defenders in besieged cities being
> reinforced, e.g., 5.2.2.2.1 and 5.2.2.2.2 disallow the placement of new
> factors in besieged corps and garrisons, regardless of their presence in
an
> unblockaded port. So I believe Spain's options are 1) disembark into the
> area, which initiates a battle with the Tunisians, or 2) disband.
>
> --
> 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