Joel Uckelman on 4 Dec 2003 04:33:52 -0000

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

Re: [eia] Access

Thus spake Michael Gorman:
> The land movement phase is political.  The combat phase is political.  The
> economic phase is political.  If the basis of something being in the
> political phase is that it is a political decision, then there is no other
> phase than the political phase.
> What I have yet to hear an argument for is why I have to publicize my
> discussions with other nations about access in advance and why I can't
> change my mind in the middle of the turn about access.  In other words, why
> does this decision need to be made simultaneously with everyone else, rather
> than in the sequence of the land or naval phase and why does it have to be
> announced to the world in advance and not just to the person I'm negotiating
> with.
> The time delay argument is useless.  When everyone has good email access we
> blow through decisions in no time at all.  If I've already negotiatied what
> access I'm going to give someone in advance, then it's trivial to pop out an
> email at some point to authorize their movement during the land phase.  The
> only time we've seen big delays of any sort is when someone is just too busy
> to pay attention to the game or away from access to their records.
> Otherwise we've been able to flash through all sorts of things with very
> little delay.

Are you saying that access should be an interrupt? Or that it should be 
possible to change access between a major power's naval and land phases?
If so, I object on the grounds that you could destroy the corps of your 
allies by granting someone them access prior to their naval phase, wait for 
them to transport a corps to one of your ports, and then revoke access just 
before their land phase. It would then be impossible for the corps to 
disembark, and there wouldn't even be any opportunity to declare war to 
save the corps. That makes no sense to me at all.


eia mailing list