Michael Gorman on Tue, 25 Jul 2006 12:25:58 -0500 (CDT) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: [eia] [escrow] July 1806 Political Orders |
At 11:37 AM 7/25/2006, you wrote: >So the French army can leave Prussia to invade Austria, march to Linz, say, >seven spaces from Paris, then march back through Prussia to attack Russia a >year later. And then return through Prussian territory a year after that to >attack Austria again. As long as they never return to French territory, the >four French corps that entered Prussia have access through Prussia forever >and ever, amen. > >This is a broken rule. > >I'll play the game that way, but this is a broken rule. > >-JJY This is why my original sentiment was that the new access agreement should follow my army around closing off access as I go. I shouldn't be able to keep that old agreement around forever, eventually it has to be superceded by the new one and since the right to return is phrased as a right to return the way I came, I'd say that it's saying I have the right to pass through Prussia in order to head back to France, which is going to be simplified by me having already been planning on doing that anyhow. Since Prussia is long and narrow, it makes life complicated since there is a whole lot of Austria south of it that would not constitute returning to France but was also not part of why I was originally given access to go into Prussia anyhow I don't think it should keep the old agreement alive. I'm advocating us using some spirit of the rule logic to say okay, the old agreement was to go across Prussia for a joint attack on Russia. Yes, it would make life easier if Prussia had made that an explicit part of the agreement when it was issued, but the two of us certainly know why we put the agreement in place. Yes, we did discuss what might happen if Austria attacked, but that was never an important part of the access agreement. The agreement was based on the idea of a war with Russia. As such, I would say that if I use the fading bits of the old agreement to march south into West Galicia, it would be reasonable to say okay, you've decided to do that, West Prussia, East Prussia and Masovia are simply no longer on your way back to France, there's no reasonable way you can say you need to return via them when you still have access to Silesia. Posen might be arguable, but the other three certainly not. I've gone beyond what the agreement was for so it shouldn't cover me forever. I think we're going to be stuck using some judgement on this one and keep in mind that you might want to be careful of what kind of access you grant people in the future. I think this is the first time I've seen major rewriting of an access agreement that wasn't caused by war so I don't think we should spend too much more time on this argument as it's likely going to remain an abnormal situation. _______________________________________________ eia mailing list eia@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia