ok. So the situation is 1 Russian corps in the area consisting of 1
militia, the centrals can take this into account.
On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 12:59 PM NIKOLAOY DHMHTRIOS <nikolad1@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
So, a garrison, which cannot move from a city to a depot in the same area
can destroy a depot and retire in the city while a XXX cannot. This is the
same game that allows a defeated and broken Army to retreat some 200 or
more miles through enemy held areas without suffering any adverse
consequenses.
As for the Russian move; consider that a XXX is in the area OUTSIDE the
city; I won't update the map with this (or if you deem this necessary I
can't do it earlier than tomorrow morning
Στις 2018-09-21 12:47, Makis Xiroyannis έγραψε:
No reply from Russia here, so since the move was not legal we assume the
depot remains empty.
(He can build a corps if he wants, but the corps will remain there for the
entire turn and be unable to destroy the depot)
On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 1:09 PM Makis Xiroyannis <
makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Was that depot created THIS turn, sorry I missed that. In that case yes,
it is impossible for the above to happen, because even if you create a
corps in reinforcement it cannot be "emptied" during the land phase.
In this case, either create a corps and leave it there (can still NOT
destroy a depot, only garrisons can do that), or leave the depot free for
anyone to take over if they wish. Or don't create the depot in the first
place.
thanks for the note
On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 12:57 PM Yannis Sykamias <ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Makis, my understanding is that Dimitris' question was not referring to
the feasibility of this happening, but to the fact that since there was not
any depot in the area during the reinforcement phase this factor transfer
could not happen until step 7...
Dimitris is correct from my part
------------------------------
*From:* eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
on behalf of Makis Xiroyannis <makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx>
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 19, 2018 10:20:48 AM
*To:* eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [eiagreek] Re: Garrison placements on depots
To keep all opinions, in the same thread, transfering this from Trello
*(Dimitri (R)) Another issue regarding moving garrisons to depots: As
has already been decided the treck is so long that a XXX must be built for
the G to move from the city to a D in the same area. Fine! A new XXX is
created in the area during the Reinf Phase. Depots can only be
created/removed voluntarily during the Depot C/R step at the start of the
Land Phase. A XXX cannot detach its last factor (see the rules already
mentioned by Dimitris-Prussia) during movement. So a XXX built in a city
for the sole purpose to move a G factor to a D in the same area will need
to wait until the following Reinf phase, that is next month, to disband (we
know it's a long, very long and arduous process). Am I right or am I
missing something? *
You are arguing against your own case now, but that's fine. Personally,
I checked the rulebook as soon as you suggested that you will use 1 corps
for the transfer of the militia and found it legal. The rules are like
this, check the bold parts in particular:
*5.2.1 CORPS COUNTER REINFORCEMENTS:*
*5.2.1.2 * CAMPAIGN CORPS PLACEMENT: Purchased empty corps counters may
be placed in an unbesieged home nation city (or minor free state city for
corps of that minor free state) or with any existing, unbesieged friendly
corps. A factor must be immediately placed in (see 5.2.2.2) or transferred
(see 5.2.3) to such a corps.*
*5.2.3 TRANSFER OF ARMY FACTORS: During an Army Reinforcement Step
unbesieged corps in the same area may exchange factors as desired, capacity
permitting. Corps of dierent nationalities (including dierent minors or
a major power and a minor country) may not exchange factors. This is the
only time during a Turn that army factors may be exchanged except to detach
and absorb garrison factors (see 7.3.3). Army factors may also be exchanged
with garrisons in the same area during this step, the same as in 7.3.3 and,
if all factors are detached from a corps, the corps counter is removed (see
5.2.4). EXCEPTIONS: Feudal, insurrection and*
*artillery factors may not be exchanged.*
The order and the letter of the rules are respected. There is no mention
that a corps that was just created in 5.2.1 cannot be disbanded in 5.2.3,
therefore, by my reckoning no, you do not have to disband the corps in the
next reinforcement phase. Nor do I find it "broken" since you paid $1 for
this small exchange and spend one of your available corps.
M.
On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 3:31 PM Makis Xiroyannis <
makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Gentlemen, I already said I agree with the second point you made. We
should make proper presentation and monitoring of our turns so that
everyone else can follow. Dimitris-Russia will make the adjustments in CB
for corps/money and send a summary of the battle, or tell us he is not
available at this point, so that one of us does it instead. You can start
working on your turn anyway.
On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 12:42 PM Yannis Sykamias <ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Dimitris, Makis is correct. Russia's action were performed in the
reinforcement phase.
However, Makis my comments were for the proper maintenance. Russia did
provide a valid explanation but did not make these corrections on his last
file, so again the explanation was provided but the error remains!
Proper game maintenance facilitates our game monitoring and it is also
a matter of etiquette towards our fellow players to try work on this at
the
best level each one of us can do it.
------------------------------
*From:* eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
on behalf of Dimitris Stavr. <poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx>
*Sent:* Sunday, September 16, 2018 11:28:04 AM
*To:* eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [eiagreek] Re: Garrison placements on depots
so you mean do everything during reinforcement step. didn't see
something saying the opposite, but
it was difficult to understand it without any notes and watching moves
and depot placements at the same time. and also with no money/corps
reduction.
------------------------------
*From:* eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
on behalf of Makis Xiroyannis <makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx>
*Sent:* Sunday, September 16, 2018 11:10
*To:* eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [eiagreek] Re: Garrison placements on depots
Καλημέρα,
this reference is for land movement, chapter 7.0, not for
Reinforcement, chapter 5.0
On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 11:07 AM Dimitris Stavr. <
poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Kalimera
7.3.3.1.2: Detachments cannot empty a corps. All corps must always
contain at least one army factor to maintain the corps counter on the
map-corps counters may be removed only due to 5.2.3/5.2.4, 7.3.5,
7.4.1 or
7.5.5 and at those times.
------------------------------
*From:* eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
on behalf of Makis Xiroyannis <makis.xiroyannis@xxxxxxxxx>
*Sent:* Sunday, September 16, 2018 10:30
*To:* eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [eiagreek] Re: Garrison placements on depots
Good morning, lets address the issues raised in this email.
*I am bringing here the issue that was recently discussed in Trello,
regarding depot placements since I did not receive any reply from anyone
else on this.*
*As it seems Russia placed a reinforcement directly to the depot under
the argument that they were placed in the city and somehow walked...*
As Tiron said, you caught Dimitris (R) doing an error, and he fixed
it. His explanation tells me that he forgot about it because he does not
find it reasonable. Yet, he fixed it by spending one of his bought corps,
which is a more analytical way it means
1. Create a corps in the area by transferring 1 militia from the depot
to this corps.
2. Disband the corps in the area by moving 1 militia from corps to the
city
There is no mention in the rules that you cannot create and disband a
corps in the same turn. Now, of course, he has spent $1 for this single
transfer because this new corps is now used and might need to be
repurchased next ECO, but that is his problem and his decision. In game
terms he can do it.
*My understanding is that as we have already discussed and agreed that
garrison factors may not walk alone but only through corps. *
Your understanding is correct, it was our decision, and we play it
like this. He used a corps to transfer it.
*Going forward it would be helpful to have this issues clarified and
also have a wider participation when we notice something which against the
rules as agreed. *
I did not reply yesterday because Russia used the corps after you
pointed out the correction, which was a legit amendment.
*Tiron I don't understand which is the reasonable explanation that
Russia provided. Russia did not use any corps for the placement of a
factor
in the depot.*
*what is this sentence then "I "I 've bought 7 XXX so consider this
as one of them built in the city"? *
*Tiron, I did not see this happening on the board , so I assume that
Russia used 3 new corps this turn? *
Yanni, he used the corps as a REACTION to your comment. He moved,
erroneously, the garrison before and when you spotted he corrected his
mistake in a valid way. This is why you don't see it in CB, he had not
intended to do this at the time.
This issue I consider it is now clear. Moving on:
*Also, please let's try to provide a battle summary after a battle is
completed. I did not receive any for the siege battle in Copenhagen. *
*in this russian turn were no comments on messages box (if red circles
all over the map is more effective, then maybe we shall use them as well),
no changes in treasury. how much money are left ? *
A totally different subject than the title, but on this one you are
both correct. Dimitri (R), your turn seemed hasty indeed.
1. We always provide battle summaries for the battles we run in our
turn. Everyone does not have to re-run the battle to see what happened,
there should be a summary of the tactics used, modifiers, terrain, tables,
and final outcome - casualties for both. I have seen turns where people
offer a full turn description with all battles/sieges/casualties that
happened during the turn in one page but lets not be so extreme. Still,
basic battle summaries should be there for easy reference and as a
historical record. If you do not have the time to do this due to something
else that is more urgent (happens to all), ask one of us to do it. But
lets
not just leave it there to the dice rolls and drop the turn. Ruins the
thematic of the game as well.
2. When we develop a turn, we explain what we do in the comments
section. Click on Actions --> Enter Message or simply click Control+M
[image: image.png]
type what you want and press
[image: image.png]
the red circles are usually used when we want to place a permanent
note in a specific location. During the flow of the turn, the comments
section is better.
Now lets have a result of that siege and an adjustment to the
treasury/remaining corps so that we can continue.
On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 11:36 PM Dimitris Stavr. <
poliorkitis@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
in this russian turn were no comments on messages box (if red circles
all over the map is more effective, then maybe we shall use them as well),
no changes in treasury. how much money are left ?
------------------------------
*From:* eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <eiagreek-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
on behalf of Yannis Sykamias <ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx>
*Sent:* Saturday, September 15, 2018 23:02
*To:* eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [eiagreek] Re: Garrison placements on depots
Tiron, I did not see this happening on the board , so I assume that
Russia used 3 new corps this turn? Also, we have a marker for displaying
the available new corps. I am trying to keep my available corps updated.
Also, please let's try to provide a battle summary after a battle is
completed. I did not receive any for the siege battle in Copenhagen.
------------------------------
*From:* 30051270400n behalf of
*Sent:* Saturday, September 15, 2018 22:29
*To:* eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:*[eiagreek] Re: Garrison placements on depots
Wait a minute, what is this sentence then "I 've bought 7 XXX so
consider this as one of them built in the city"?
On Sat, 15 Sep 2018 17:03:15 +0000
Yannis Sykamias <ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Tiron I don't understand which is the reasonable explanation that've
Russia provided. Russia did not use any corps for the placement of a
factor in the depot.
________________________________
From: 30431200120n behalf of
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2018 19:40
To: eiagreek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eiagreek] Re: Garrison placements on depots
I can not see the exact reason to offer additional comments.
Factors can not be exchanged except thought corps.
You spotted something out of the ordinary and Russia offered a
reasonable explanation - he has extra 7 corps to place so one of them
was placed and used to drop the factors in question.
For me (Britain) it is easy as I do not have so many troops but
sometimes we have an idea how to play our turn and then in actually
moving the pieces we forget a small detail.
On Sat, 15 Sep 2018 16:07:11 +0000
Yannis Sykamias <ysykamias@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I am bringing here the issue that was recently discussed in Trello,
regarding depot placements since I did not receive any reply from
anyone else on this. As it seems Russia placed a reinforcement
directly to the depot under the argument that they were placed in
the city and somehow walked...
@yannis135 of course, as obviously they cannot walk; but still I
bought 7 XXX so consider this as one of them built in the city
walking to the gates and then dropping it's content on the depot
My understanding is that as we have already discussed and agreed
that garrison factors may not walk alone but only through corps.
In this specific the issue may easily be resolved if we assume that
the new russian corps was placed in Ochakov and then moved through
Odessa to Nemirov. So under this assumption we proceed our turn
normally. Going forward it would be helpful to have this issues
clarified and also have a wider participation when we notice
something which against the rules as agreed.