Re: [eia] 2 rules questions

["J.J. Young" <jjy@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> >I don't have the time or energy to start a major rules debate this week,
but
> >I don't agree.  According to 7.5.1 or thereabouts, the act or decision of
> >besieging a city takes place at the same time as field combats, not
after.
> >I feel that the way we have structured our land orders via email was to
say
> >when each corps moves if we would have that corps lay siege (or we assume
> >that it will) if the enemy we attack withdraws into a city.  At least, we
> >have no history of sending separate emails announcing our decision
whether
> >or not to lay siege after the defender's decision whether or not to
> >withdraw.
>          I believe the only time you don't declare a siege combat right
> away is when you fight a field battle first.  Otherwise it is declared at
> the time the forces retire into the city and thus happens before field
> combats are resolved.  That's in 7.5.1.1.2:  If they all do so retire
> (referring to defending forces in the area), the attackers may, if
desired,
> be placed on top of the forces and a siege occurs.
>
>          So, I would say that if you have declared a siege, you would not
> be eligible to reinforce in the same turn as you are going to take place
in
> another combat that major power phase.  Similarly, if you did not declare
a
> siege, those forces would be available.
>
> Mike

What Mike has said here is exactly the same as my point of view; forces that
declare a siege should not be used as reinforcements.  Thank you for
pinpointing the relevant rule.

-JJY


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