Re: [eia] reinforcement question

["Kyle H" <menexenus@xxxxxxx>]

    It's a good question.  I had assumed that you could only place a new
corps outside the home nation with another corps you controlled.  (Thus, I
was celebrating the surrender of the Russian corps at Damietta, because I
assumed that meant the end of Russian reinforcements.)  However, this
wording does seem to place my previous interpretation in doubt.
    Can we find someplace else in the rules where the word "friendly" is
clearly used to mean "allied or controlled"?  Maybe that would help to
settle the issue.  (Alternatively, is there any place else in the rules were
"friendly" is clearly used to mean just "controlled"?)  I am asking because
I use a physical rulebook to reference the rules and do not have a word
search capability as some of you seem to have who access electronic copies
of the rules.

kdh

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joel Uckelman" <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 4:40 PM
Subject: [eia] reinforcement question


> I've been trying to determine whether it is legal for me to place a corps
> at Corfu. 5.2.1.2 permits a new corps to be placed with any unbesieged
> friendly corps. What I'm uncertain about is whether the Spanish corps
there
> counts as friendly. I can't find a definition of "friendly" in the rules.
> Are "friendly" corps just the corps I control? I.e., the rules are driving
> at the distinction between my corps and corps belonging to my minor
allies,
> e.g., Austrian corps are "friendly" corps for the Bavarians? (If so, why
> didn't they say "controlled", which is clearer?) Or are my allies' corps
also
> "friendly"? They're neither enemy nor neutral, so...?
>
> _______________________________________________
> eia mailing list
> eia@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia
>

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