Re: [eia] Russian Land Phase, April 1807

["Kyle H" <menexenus@xxxxxxx>]

    I think JJ and Mike are right.  In order for the garrison to be
expelled, a siege would have to be declared.  But like JJ, I could be wrong.

kdh

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "J.J. Young" <jjy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "public list for an Empires in Arms game" <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 2:41 PM
Subject: Re: [eia] Russian Land Phase, April 1807


> I haven't done a thorough scouring of the rules yet, but my thought is
that
> the British garrison would be expelled if a siege could be declared
against
> the city.  Since a cossack cannot besiege a city alone, I believe the
> garrison would stay put in the present case.  But if there's a rule that
> says otherwise, I'm willing to be contradicted.  :-)
>
> -JJY
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joel Uckelman" <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: "public list for an Empires in Arms game" <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 2:04 PM
> Subject: Re: [eia] Russian Land Phase, April 1807
>
>
> > Thus spake Michael Gorman:
> > > At 12:15 PM 6/20/2005, you wrote:
> > > >cossack NE of Breslau -> Stettin,
> > > >  which expels the neutral British garrison to be repatriated in May
> > >
> > > Why does that expel the garrison?  No battle is going to be declared
> since
> > > the two powers present are not at war.
> >
> > I believe because it's a neutral garrison in enemy territory.
> >
> > --
> > 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