J.J. Young on Sun, 18 Apr 2004 18:38:16 -0500 (CDT)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: FW: [eia] Assault at Kassel

If we want to put some kind of house rule into effect, that's fine.  I'm not
trying to screw anyone over.  But making capital cities the criterion for
retreat directions is not the answer.  As a naval power, there are many
situations where my forces, if retreated toward London, would be moving away
from the coast, their supply lines, and from any hope of getting home alive.
But I'm certainly willing to consider other ideas for a house rule.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "James Helle" <jhelle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "public list for an Empires in Arms game" <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 10:04 PM
Subject: RE: FW: [eia] Assault at Kassel

> According to the retreat rules it seems the Hessian and Baden retreats
> suggested are legal, if not logical.  However, I oppose the idea that the
> Wurttemburgese would abandon Stuttgart, which is their capital city, is
> one space away, and is unoccupied by any enemy forces.
>     I would favor some house rule that puts a limit on the distance a
> can be from the battle in order to require retreat towards it, as well as
> possibly making the capital city of the force the first consideration,
> followed by a depot.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: eia-bounces@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:eia-bounces@xxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
> Joel Uckelman
> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 1:16 PM
> To: public list for an Empires in Arms game
> Subject: Re: FW: [eia] Assault at Kassel
> Thus spake "Kyle H":
> >     Joel is right that there is no house rule currently in force that
> would
> > require JJ to retreat one way rather than another.  However, we might
> > to consider adopting such a house rule since it seems unrealistic that
> > forces would *intentionally* retreat *toward* enemy corps.
> >
> > kdh
> In reality, the fact that there is a supply depot in London should play no
> role in the decision process of the Hessian (or Badener, or Wurtemburger)
> commander. Likewise, the Turkish depot at Erzerum should make no
> for the Moroccan commander. Retreting toward a depot makes sense only when
> it is near enough to be used within the next few months, and it it
> that the commanders in question would even be aware of the existence of
> particular depots in far off England or Armenia.
> I would expect that for the Hessians the defense of Hesse would be their
> priority, and so if they were unable to retreat into another part of Hesse
> they would attempt to retreat into a friendly area adjacent to Hesse. They
> have access to both Frankfurt and Magdeburg, the latter of which is nearer
> to the site of the battle. So I think it makes the most sense for the
> Hessians to retreat to Magdeburg. (This might be different if they weren't
> on
> their own, but instead were stacked with or near a major power corps. In
> absence of outside influence, my expectation is that the Hessians would
> decide that the best way to defend Hesse is to conquer Holland.)
> I don't know how to codify this, however; good retreat rules are
> difficult to write.
> _______________________________________________
> eia mailing list
> eia@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia
> _______________________________________________
> eia mailing list
> eia@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia

eia mailing list