Re: [eia] Russian Land Phase, January 1807

["J.J. Young" <jjy@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Oh, I see.  So the Russians at Acre used their unspent movement points and
are unable to besiege this turn.  I gotcha.

-JJY

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joel Uckelman" <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "public list for an Empires in Arms game" <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 10:12 PM
Subject: Re: [eia] Russian Land Phase, January 1807


> Thus spake "J.J. Young":
> > > 1I NW of Lublin -> Thorn, drop 1M, 2I -> Posen, -$4
> >
> > What path does this corps follow ?  It seems as though it would have to
> > force-march.
>
> That corps was originally going to Danzig by that route. Put it between
> Thron and Posen instead, reducing my cost by $2.
>
> > > 2I at Damascus -> Acre, 3-
> > > 1I N of Damascus -> Acre, 2-
> > > Bagration, 1C at Damascus -> Acre, 5-
> >
> > With two enemy corps at Acre, aren't all these forage rolls at -2 ?
>
> Yes. They are all at -2.
>
> > Also,
> > it's not very clear to me if the corps starting N of Damascus, which has
to
> > move through an area in the winter zone, can avoid the -2 penalty by
ending
> > its movement outside the winter zone.
>
> I believe it can. 7.4.1.2.4 says to modify the forage roll for winter
"unless
> the corps is not in the winter zone". None of these corps are in the
winter
> zone at the time of the roll.
>
> _______________________________________________
> eia mailing list
> eia@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia
>
>


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