Michael Gorman on 24 Nov 2003 16:20:12 -0000


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [eia] errata rules


I think the forcible access would resolve a great many of the problems we've
been having with placing a limited access at the end of war rule into the
game.  Countries have violated borders all the time in history without a
declaration of war.  This rule doesn't let you attack the other country, it
lets you pass through and as I recall, while you are passing through, you
can't declare war on them since you have troops on their soil.  You can try
to use it to force someone else to decalre war on you so you don't have to
pay for it, but if they just let you go, you pay the cost for violating
their border either way and you still can't attack them without declaring
war yourself.

It resolves all the issues for limited access about being able to trap
someones forces with minimal forces of a still belligerent nation as they
can choose to sink the political points and blow off your unwillingness to
give them access and go home anyhow.


I think the overwhelming numbers rule is an attempt to streamline battles,
but as has been pointed out by several people, it doesn't really work with
forces kept hidden and it makes the small force more dangerous as they get
the chance to withdraw without paying the price in poor combat table of a
withdraw chit choice.  So I think we should leave that one out.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Everett E. Proctor" <spiritmast@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "public list for an Empires in Arms game" <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2003 9:45 AM
Subject: Re: [eia] errata rules


> >     There are two brand new sets of rules in the errata which I think we
> > should debate before we decide to include them.  The first new rule is
> > called "Forcible Access" and it reads as follows:
> >
> > 10.3.4 FORCIBLE ACCESS [A]:
> >
> >     The second new rule is called "Overwhelming Numbers" and it reads as
> > follows:
> >
> > 12.3.10 [A]: OVERWHELMING NUMBERS:
>
>
> I am not in favor of adding either of these rules at this point.
>
> -Everett
>
> _______________________________________________
> eia mailing list
> eia@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia
>

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