Re: [eia] [escrow] July 1806 Political Orders

[Michael Gorman <mpgorman@xxxxxxxx>]

At 07:51 AM 7/25/2006, you wrote:
>The relevant question tough is whether the same route means the same route,
>or can you use the previous unlimited access to return via Silesia, for
>example.

I would say yes I can.  Since the access agreement he entered under was 
unrestricted, he is unrestricted in his route back.  But as i said before I 
think the new restriction follows along behind him closing off his ability 
to turn back east until he's moving around Prussian spaces he still has 
access to.  I'd also say if he headed south into Silesia he'd be unable to 
turn north west into Posen as once he's in Silesia he has clear ability to 
return home through Prussia via spaces he has access to under the new 
agreement.

>Does Napoleon have to head for the coast and return westward?
>What happens if he goes into Austria territory, does he lose his standing to
>return via Prussia?
>
>I think your depots are safe, does that assume they are supplied (after you
>create a depot to complete the chain)?

This seems like a tougher one.  My sense is the pre-existing depot south of 
Konigsberg could draw supplies through Danzig, assuming the Russian corps 
wasn't there, but that if I built a new one in the restricted area it could 
not draw across an empty Prussian space.  So I don't think I could build a 
depot at Warsaw since drawing supply through Thorn would represent bringing 
new French stuff further into a now restricted area.


Can you create new depots in the denied access area?

In theory yes, but I don't think it's actually possible.  Napoleon's stack 
is under no restriction on depot creation, but I don't think I could trace 
a new supply line into the area as that would seem to be a new movement 
into the restricted region.

And I think this is consistent with the idea that you can fall back on your 
supply lines and go home, but you can't use supply lines as a way to push 
forward into areas you are no longer welcome in.


>I like the faintly sarcastic remark at the end about complete betrayal, of
>course wasn't it Napoleon who said he'd "rather fight Allies than be one"?

Yup, one of his good lines.

>I was think my erstwhile Allies had forced you into Austrian territory
>(albeit unsupplied), however, maybe not...

I think what they're saying is that to do that to someone is an act of 
war.  So you can't do it unless you do so by declaring war.
While saying please move your forces west as I'm dropping out of this war 
might annoy your ally, you aren't effectively attacking their army by 
trying to trap and starve it.

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