RE: [eia] limited access revisions

[Danny Mount <mount.23@xxxxxxx>]

I agree that no other existing corps should be allowed to enter into FET,
but I disagree that we should restrict reinforcements by supply-chain.
Think about a situation where a corps need to move through or out of FET and
is walking into another battle.  This seems to put them at a serious
disadvantage.  So I think that if the valid supply-chain is there then why
should we be the ones to basically declare that supply-chain invalid.

Danny

-----Original Message-----
From: eia-bounces@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:eia-bounces@xxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
J.J. Young
Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 8:59 PM
To: public list for an Empires in Arms game
Subject: Re: [eia] limited access revisions


I agree with Joel here.  When I speak of restricting new corps going into
FET, I'm talking about corps already existing outside of FET marching into
FET carrying factors that weren't there before.  I don't care about
restricting the placement of new corps markers in FET, as long as they are
using preexisting factors.

I have no problem with the placement/removal of leaders into FET.

I am for the restriction of any new _factors_ into FET after peace is made,
either by marching in or by supply-chain reinforcement.  It seems Joel
agrees, and Kyle disagrees.  Other opinions ?

-JJY

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joel Uckelman" <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "public list for an Empires in Arms game" <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 6:09 PM
Subject: Re: [eia] limited access revisions


> Thus spake "Kyle H":
> >     That is *not* what I was picturing.  I was thinking that no new
mobile
> > units (such as corps and cossacks) could enter FET after a peace
agreement
> > was reached.  I did not think that peace would stop a country from
> > reinforcing normally across valid supply lines.  Hopefully no one thinks
> > that peace would prevent new leaders from arriving to take command.  In
a
> > similar vein, I would not think that peace would stop supply lines from
> > functioning to reinforce depleted armies.
> >     If I'm in the minority here, I'm willing to accept that.  But I just
> > wanted to make it known that I was not thinking of reinforcements to
> > existing corps as new land forces entering FET.
> >
> > kdh
>
> Corps, division, company, etc. are just organizational units. In reality,
> there's no reason to care how many formerly enemy corps are in operation
in
> one's territory independently of how many soldiers they contain. (That
> may not carry over exactly to the game, since the way forrage works might
> make me wish there were a single ten-factor corps in my territory instead
of
> ten one-factor corps.) Any reinforcement of a corps in FET necessarily
> involves more soldiers entering FET, and that is presumably what a real
> power would be concerned with, not with how the soldiers already in FET
> are organized.
>
> In my view, there's no problem with constructing new corps in FET so long
> as the factors in them come from corps already in FET; the problem arises
> from putting more *factors* in FET.
>
> _______________________________________________
> eia mailing list
> eia@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia
>
>


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


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