Michael Gorman on Wed, 25 Aug 2004 20:12:18 -0500 (CDT)


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

RE: [eia] Russian Land Phase, December 1805




I would disagree with this line.  I think that Spain should only be able
to take part in the battle if they have combined movement with Russia,
which they don't.  Combined movement is what accounts for coordination
among countries, and that if combined movement isn't there, neither is
the coordination that is required for two countries to fight as a single
force.  In my opinion, in this case, if the Spanish garrison wants to
fight, they'll have to try to break out independently of Russian action.
Normally this would be the case as it is not normally possible to end any nation's land phase with hostile forces co-existing in an area.

Looking over 7.3.8 where they deal with combined movement, it looks like any force allied with the nation initiating the attack can stay and fight. So even without combined movement, if it were possible to get your force into the same space, you could join a battle without combined movement. However, for field battles this is only possible by being part of the combined movement. In the case of a relief battle, the Spanish force does not have the option to leave the area and so can remain until the land combat phase. So if Spain is allied with Russia it looks like they clearly can take part in the battle as they are an ally of the attacking nation.

I could however see it being argued that the only reason an alliance is required in field combat rules is that the only way to gather multiple attackers is through combined movement and the only way to combine movement is to be allies. Therefore the use of the word allies in the field and trivial combat rules is simply a matter of convenience since no other situation is possible. the Spaniards can see a battle happening outside their city and know this is the time to attack no matter who it is out there.

So I think it looks like an alliance is required, but I'm not strongly attached to the idea. :)

Mike

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