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

[MICHAEL P GORMAN <mpgorman@xxxxxxxx>]

Looking over the manipulation rules they don't seem to make any complaints about not having enough manpower for manipulation.  I think the rules' viewpoint is that not being able to levy any new troops for a turn can be crippling enough without the need for further penalty.

----- Original Message -----
From: Joel Uckelman <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sunday, March 18, 2007 7:04 pm
Subject: Re: [eia] Prussian Economic Phase, 3/07
To: public list for an Empires in Arms game <eia@xxxxxxxxx>


> Thus spake "Kyle H":
>  >     I agree with what Joel writes below.  However, I don't see how 
> one can 
>  > benefit from the effects of Economic Manipulation dependent on 
> manpower when 
>  > you don't have the manpower to sacrifice.  So, I would add that, in 
> the case 
>  > of negative manpower, the effects of economic manipulation are 
> cancelled for 
>  > the duration of that econ phase.
>  > 
>  > kdh
>  
>  That would break the symmetry with bankruptcy, then. You definitely can
>  get the benefit of EM despite being unable to pay the cost of EM due
>  to bankruptcy. Usually this would happen when EM itself causes you to 
> go
>  bankrupt, so calling it a "benefit" is dubious; nonethless, the point 
> is
>  that EM still occurs when you can't pay for it, so I see no reason why
>  it shouldn't also occur when you lack the manpower.
>  
>  -- 
>  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