Re: [eia] Austrian phase 10/07

["Kyle H" <menexenus@xxxxxxx>]

    I'm not sure it makes sense to say that a leader can remain with foreign
corps with whom he happens to be combining movement.  After all, what would
happen if, on the next turn, the two allies decided not to combine movement?
Would the leader become unstacked and be returned to the pool?  This, to me,
would seem to violate the rule against voluntarily unstacking a leader.
    If it matters to anyone, Empires in Harm addresses this point directly.
In 7.3.11 ("Leaders and Command") it says:

"All leaders, except NELSON or VILLENEUVE, must always be stacked with a
Corps of that Major Power or controlled minor power when on the map"

I think we should follow EIH's lead on this one and say that you can't leave
leaders behind with foreign corps.

kdh

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Gorman" <mpgorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "public list for an Empires in Arms game" <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 6:21 PM
Subject: Re: [eia] Austrian phase 10/07


> At 05:44 PM 2/2/2004 -0500, you wrote:
> >     I don't think this is possible.  Didn't all the Austrian-controlled
> >corps at Milan move away this turn?  Since Charles has to stay with a
corps
> >that he started with, he cannot remain in Milan unless I have
misunderstood
> >your orders.
> >
> >kdh
>
> The Turkish corps may have stayed and he is combined with Turkey so I
would
> think he could stay with them.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eia mailing list
> eia@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia
>

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