Re: [eia] Prussian Economic Phase, 3/07

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

I'm not strongly advocating a particular point of view here; I'll go with 
whatever most players feel is right.  I just took a stab to get us talking 
about it and maybe get Mark to get the game rolling again.

-JJY

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joel Uckelman" <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "public list for an Empires in Arms game" <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2007 9:53 AM
Subject: Re: [eia] Prussian Economic Phase, 3/07


> Thus spake "J.J. Young":
>> Do others agree that having negative manpower would trigger bankruptcy ? 
>> Or
>> is it just the same as having zero manpower with no additional penalty ? 
>> Or
>> do you simply lose as much as you are able, and then get no political
>> benefit from the manipulation ?
>>
>> On a separate but related rules question...
>>
>> Yes, I know that if we weren't using option 11.9.1.2, a country would
>> otherwise go into Civil Disorder if it could "collect" no home nation
>> manpower.  But Economic Manipulation seems to be a separate step from the
>> Money/Manpower Collection step.  Also, the rules for Civil Disorder seem 
>> to
>> take no other possible cause into account except occupation by an enemy. 
>> So
>> can Civil Disorder (or, with the option we are using, mandatory
>> Unconditional Surrender) be triggered by your own Economic Manipulation ?
>
> Bankruptcy is only ever mentioned w/r/t money, so I take it that you can't
> go bankrupt for lack of manpower. This seems in accord with the 
> nontechnical
> usage of the word. The only thing which explicitly prevents a power from
> getting the benefit of EM is enemy occupation of its capital---even
> bankruptcy doesn't prevent EM from taking place, and in particular, not in
> the case when EM is the cause of bankruptcy (or negative manpower
> collection). So I think that banruptcy isn't relevant here.
>
> 8.2.2 says that manpower collection may be negative due to EM, so the
> manpower effect happens during manpower collection. In this case, home
> nation manpower is part of the sum which makes up total manpower. In
> the present case, Prussia *is* collecting home nation manpower: There's
> 9 points of it. If no home nation manpower were collected, then the
> defefict would be -10, not -1. I read the civil disorder rule 8.7
> as requirng that some home province generates manpower, not that that
> manpower is ultimately available for use.
>
> So, my take is that collecting negative manpower has no further effect.
> The rules are silent on paying back negative manpower; if that were the
> case for Prussia, I'd expect the rules to say so.
>
>
> -- 
> 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