Re: [eia] Victory at Leipzig?

[Michael Gorman <mpgorman@xxxxxxxx>]

At 07:30 PM 11/24/2004, you wrote:
> I have been studying the Assault Combat Resolution rules since I conceded 
> defeat at Leipzig yesterday, especially 7.5.4.1.3.4 - 7.5.4.1.3.5, and am 
> convinced that France won the assault combat there.  Here is why:
>
> 7.5.4.1.3.4 states that if the beseiger (i.e. France) loses or does not 
> break the defender in three rounds the siege is resumed with no further 
> combat this round.  To lose means that one side breaks and the other does 
> not.  No other result, other than elimination, is ever considered a 
> win.  Since the Saxons broke also, France did not lose.
>
> 7.5.4.1.3.5 states that if the defender breaks or is eliminated the 
> beseiger wins, the city is captured, and the surviving defenders surrender.
>
> In summary, France met the requirement for winning the assault, despite 
> breaking, and should now control the city.

Yup, but then in the next set of rules it defines victory in assault combat 
based on whether or not the attacker breaks.


7.5.4.1.4 Political Points For Siege Assault Combat Winners: If the 
assaulted city contains a corps and/or is a "fortress" (has one or more 
fleches), the defender gets one political point if the besieger loses (is 
eliminated or broken) or does not win within three rounds, and the besieger 
gets one political point if the city is captured. Record on the POLITICAL 
STATUS DISPLAY on the Status Card. No political points are ever lost on 
either side, regardless of the outcome and none are gained if the city has 
a no corps and/or is not a fortress (has no fleches).

So, if we apply the rules in order without consideration of sense, we get 
that France wins the battle and takes the city, but Prussia wins 
politically since the French forces broke and Prussia gets the political 
point for the city France now controls since one part of the rules define 
victory purely based on what happens to the defender and the other defines 
it based on what happens to the attacker.

If we sum the rules, then France has both been defined as victorious in the 
first two rules and as defeated in the third.  So, the city falls but is 
not captured and both sides get a political point.

That's why I was initially thinking that the field combat special results 
should apply which say that in the both break situation neither sides is 
defined as victorious and there are no political points awarded.


7.5.2.10.4.2 Both Break: If both forces break in the same combat round and 
there are survivors on both sides then neither side wins, gains or loses 
political points, or is pursued. Only the attacker retreats-as per 
<http://www.centerdigit.com/openrpg/eina/#7.5.2.10.3>7.5.2.10.3, except 
that the attacker retreats his own forces.

If we apply this rule then the siege continues but neither side gains 
political points.

I think the current ruling is a combination where you apply the both break 
rule but then say that since neither side won, the attacker has failed to 
win within three rounds and the defender gains a point.  I'm not certain if 
that makes sense, but I also have no real strong feeling against it so 
don't really care, and of course it's to my benefit this time around.

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