RE: [eia] Nelson/Napoleon

["Nate Ellefson" <nellefson@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

How to put this: I think the rule that Joel cited is the controlling
one, so I'd have to vote that Turkey does get 2PP.  That being said, I
don't think it *should* be that way...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: eia-bounces@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:eia-bounces@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of J.J. Young
> Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 5:45 PM
> To: public list for an Empires in Arms game
> Subject: Re: [eia] Nelson/Napoleon 
> 
> 
> Uh, is there any reason why we can't move on with the naval 
> phase while this issue is under discussion ?  Once the 
> Spanish I fleet retreats and is possibly pursued, and a 
> leader casualty check is made for Nelson, the Coalition naval 
> phases will be complete.
> 
> At this point, J.J. and Joel seem to favor giving allies 
> commanded by Nelson/Napoleon the appropriate PP bonus or 
> penalty, while Danny, Kyle, and Mike seem opposed.  Hearing 
> from Jim and Nate will most likely settle the matter.  Then 
> we'll know whether Turkey got +2 PP from the battle or just +1 PP.
> 
> -JJY
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joel Uckelman" <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: "public list for an Empires in Arms game" <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 5:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [eia] Nelson/Napoleon
> 
> 
> > Thus spake "Kyle H":
> > >     My view is *not* that the Nelson/Napoleon bonus goes 
> to whoever 
> > > has
> the
> > > most fleets/corps.  My view is that the Nelson/Napoleon 
> bonus goes 
> > > to GB/France *only*.
> > >     So in the case that Mike describes, with one British fleet and
> multiple
> > > Spanish/Russian fleets under the command of Nelson, the 
> Spanish and
> Russians
> > > would earn PPs normally while GB would get 1 PP + the 
> Nelson bonus.
> > >     The fundamental issue for me is that it makes no 
> sense that the
> success
> > > of a British commander would have any effect on Turkish 
> politics.  
> > > The success or failure of a British commander held in high esteem 
> > > (i.e.
> Nelson)
> > > has an effect on *British* politics.  The success or failure of a 
> > > French commander held in high esteem (i.e. Napoleon) has 
> an effect 
> > > on *French* politics.  I don't see any good reason why it would 
> > > affect anyone else.
> > >
> > > kdh
> >
> > That's exactly the point on which we disagree. Nelson and Napoleon 
> > were
> the
> > foremost naval and land commanders of their time; they have quite a 
> > reputation. If your fleet or army was commanded by one of them, why 
> > wouldn't people in your government find that (dis)heartening in the 
> > event that they lead you to victory (defeat)?
> >
> > Can't you imagine someone in the the Turkish government concluding 
> > after a naval defeat that if they can't win with Nelson at 
> the helm, 
> > then they simply can't win at all? Or the opposite, in the 
> case of a 
> > victory?
> >
> > --
> > 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
> 

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