Re: [eia] access adjustments ?

[Michael Gorman <mpgorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 02:51 PM 4/13/2004 -0400, you wrote:
>     I think that adjusting Voluntary Access in response to Minor Country
> Control was justified in this particular instance because there was so much
> action with regard to Minor Countries being attacked.  But let's not forget
> that usually Voluntary Access decisions are made and sent in with the
> Political Phase escrow.  (In the last game, a Voluntary Access amendment was
> rejected because it was not made at the proper time.)
>     So I just want to make sure everyone is aware that we are making an
> exception to the rule in this case, but we shouldn't expect to be able to
> make such Voluntary Access amendments all the time.
>
> kdh
I think this is a poor solution.  We found in our last game that minors 
were going neutral with great regularity.  One bad war and you can start 
losing control of minors from going into instability.  Having to guess what 
will happen in a previous step of the political phase and write your orders 
without knowing something that you might be supposed to know before you 
make that decision is a problem.  We haven't even addressed the question of 
where in the political phase this step is supposed to be placed, which 
would then decide if you should know minor control before deciding access 
or not.
If it is step J, then I think we need a third escrowe for the political 
phase so you can base your access decisions on what may have changed 
previously in the phase.

I already think the access in the political phase is a bad idea, putting it 
effectively after declaration of war and before everything else, which is 
where everything in the second escrowe sits, is just asking for too many 
what if access decisions.

Mike


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