Re: [eia] [escrow] Battle of Florence, October 1807

["Kyle H" <menexenus@xxxxxxx>]

    I am adamantly opposed to this suggestion.  I don't think it makes sense
that a garrison (of all things) can derive political reward in a battle
without taking any political risk.  JJ has already spoken to this point when
he was responding to Jim, and I agree whole-heartedly with what he said
there.

kdh

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joel Uckelman" <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "public list for an Empires in Arms game" <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2004 11:29 AM
Subject: Re: [eia] [escrow] Battle of Florence, October 1807


> Thus spake "J.J. Young":
> > I wish Everett and Joel could have entered their opinions about PPs for
> > garrisons in a field combat before this point, so that it wouldn't look
like
> > Coalition aggrandizment if they agreed with my side.  But as I said, it
> > wouldn't have affected my decision to have the Florence garrison in the
> > battle.  In any case, though, the decision needs to be finalized
> > immediately.
> >
> > -JJY
>
> I see nothing in the rules that exclude a player with only a garrison
> involved in a battle from receiving political points for a victory. The
> relevant rule counts enemy corps, but puts no requirements on the victors.
> On the other hand, if a player on the losing side had only a garrison in
> the battle, he would lose no political points, because the wording on the
> PP chart restricts the loss to only those powers with corps involved.
>
> BTW, I seem to recall seeing an article in The General once that suggested
> doing this very thing in order to score more PPs at no risk.
>
> --
> 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