Joel Uckelman on Sun, 18 Apr 2004 14:25:34 -0500 (CDT) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: FW: [eia] Assault at Kassel |
Thus spake D Mount: > I would think that the intent of how the rules were written would force the H > essian corps to Minden. I think it is as simple as having two options that a > re equidistant, but one being occupied, so Minden is the only choice. Let me > know what you all think about this. > > -Danny I would agree if there were anything in the rules or errata to indicate that enemy presence matters for determining the precedence of areas for retreat. I know it seems weird, and there is a mechanism like this in many (most?) other wargmes, but it's just not here as far as I can see. Until someone provides a citation for that indicates otherwise, my vote is that these are legal retreats. _______________________________________________ eia mailing list eia@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia