Help!! Can't proceed due to ghost corps!!!

[delatbabel]

ORIGINAL: Dancing Bear

The second is the river crossing. A river crossing disadvantage was applied to Charles attacking army, when only part of his army crossed a river. In this case, there should have been no river crossing penalty for Charles.

Not a bug, the game is correct:

7.5.2.7.1 River Crossing Combat Tables: If any of the attacking forces have crossed a river, a crossing arrow and/or disembarked from at sea to enter the combat area then the river sections (found only in the assault, escalated assault, echelon and probe columns on the cordon line) of the OPERATIONAL POSSIBILITIES CHART are used where appropriate for the first day's combat.

[Dancing Bear]

 
Del, I only noticed the lack of a +1 after the battle when looking at the screen shot posted after all was done, so I can not rule out a change in the dispaly status, although there was no reinforcement during the battle, so I'm not sure what could have changed. A retro-active display change after the loser must remove one cavalry perhaps?
 
HOWEVER, even if there was a display change, the rolls displayed also changed the morale damage to the opponent (shown on the top right of screen as the French final morale). French initial morale was 4.08, and final morale was 1.58. When I re-calculate what his morale should be after the battle, with a +1 applied to Austria, his final morale should have been 0.68, so even it were a dispaly change, the "display" affected the final morale of the opponent.
 

[Dancing Bear]

Rule book incorrect for river crossing?
 
Del, in response to your point about the river crossing, before the battle, I looked up the rules supplied with the game (p71, 11.2.6), and they read "If ALL of the attacking forces crosses a river...."
 
I suspect the rule you quoted is from the original board game rules, and could well be correct, but the Matrix rule book says otherwise.
 
The original EIA make more sense to me, and clearly the game interprets the rules that way. Marshall, can Matrix change their rule book to say "any" instead of "all".

[Marshall Ellis]

Actually, it should be all. That makes more sense to me. There would only be the penalty of the river assault tables if ALL forces crossed the river.

[eske]

Sorry to disagree with you here, Marshall. It makes perfect sense to me, that if any part of an army entering a battle needs to cross a river, the defender gets an advantage.
 
But the relevance of rivers will be reduced significantly. It is not hard to avoid river bonus in battle using the EiA rule. Don't make rivers even less relevant. And it is easier to change the rulebook, right [;)]
 
/eske
 

[Marshall Ellis]

ORIGINAL: eske

Sorry to disagree with you here, Marshall. It makes perfect sense to me, that if any part of an army entering a battle needs to cross a river, the defender gets an advantage.

But the relevance of rivers will be reduced significantly. It is not hard to avoid river bonus in battle using the EiA rule. Don't make rivers even less relevant. And it is easier to change the rulebook, right [;)]

/eske

Sorry? That's not necessary to simply disagree with me This could absolutely go either way. My thoughts are that it is much less of a defensive bonus if only part of the army comes across a river. Less of bonus that strategically might equal no bonus. If the entire army must land / or cross a river then that sounds way more like a defensive bonus to me.

I'm open here so you guys chime in...

[Dancing Bear]

From our own groups internal discussion, I think you will find that most will want the rules to read if ANY corps cross the river then use the cross river tables.

[AresMars]

As concentration of force is an important requirement in war, a river (and river crossings, and naval landings) should make that more of a challenge for a commanding General to win battles.

Also, I am an EIA Purists ( [:D] ) and like the EiA wording....
 
7.5.2.7.1 River Crossing Combat Tables: If any of the attacking forces have crossed a river, a crossing arrow and/or disembarked from at sea to enter the combat area then the river sections (found only in the assault, escalated assault, echelon and probe columns on the cordon line) of the OPERATIONAL POSSIBILITIES CHART are used where appropriate for the first day's combat.

(source: http://eia.xnetz.com/rules/eiarules.html) Thanks delatbabel
 
Sorry Dancing Bear!  [;)]
 
 

[NeverMan]

I prefer to play Classic EiA, so whatever the rules are of Empires in Arms, I would like Empires in Arms (the PC version) to follow those rules. I know that sounds crazy to a lot here though, for EiA to be like EiA.

[Dancing Bear]

I'm good with the original rules, but the rule book that came with the Matrix game says the river crossing applies if "ALL" the forces cross the river, not "any". That's what caused my screw up in our game.

[delatbabel]

I concur with the viewpoint that the Matrix rulebook needs to say "any" where the ADG EiA rulebook says "any". So this doesn't require a change in the game, but a change in the rulebook.

[delatbabel]

ORIGINAL: Dancing Bear

Rule book incorrect for river crossing?

Del, in response to your point about the river crossing, before the battle, I looked up the rules supplied with the game (p71, 11.2.6), and they read "If ALL of the attacking forces crosses a river...."

I suspect the rule you quoted is from the original board game rules, and could well be correct, but the Matrix rule book says otherwise.

The original EIA make more sense to me, and clearly the game interprets the rules that way. Marshall, can Matrix change their rule book to say "any" instead of "all".

The reason I quote from the original board game rules is that they are on line and searchable! I can't grep the hard copy version of the Matrix rules, and I don't always have my laptop with EiA on it when posting to these forums.

In any case I am, like other folks, an EiA purist and believe that EiANW should follow the EiA rules where there is no pressing technical (i.e. programming / database / etc) rule to do otherwise.

[Grimrod42]

How is the fix going on this, I am Russia in this game and would like to continue playing?

thanks

[Marshall Ellis]

ORIGINAL: Grimrod42

How is the fix going on this, I am Russia in this game and would like to continue playing?

thanks

I apologize. I am remote and I do not think I have the files here. I can look at this Friday or you could resend?

[Grimrod42]

Unfortunately I do not have them Soapy does.
Friday should be ok
thanks

[Marshall Ellis]

ORIGINAL: Grimrod42

Unfortunately I do not have them Soapy does.
Friday should be ok
thanks

I'll look back over my emails Friday when I get back to the Mother Ship.

[KenClark]

If you play with the "all have to cross the river" variant you run into the "cav corps goes around the river" exploit where 11 corps cross the river and one cav corps scoots around it - thus making it a nigh-never situation where you have a river-crossing situation.

Leave it with "any corps" in my opinion, it's a much better rule.

[Dancing Bear]

Hi Marshall
   in case you have forgotten, but for the Ferdinand game that Grimrod is refering to, can you add the following factors to a French POW camp, as they were annihiliated due to their teleportation out of City garrisons, where they were ordered to surreneder, into an exposed field combat:
2 Austrian Cav
3 British Cav
5 Austrian Inf
2 Austrian Guard

[Marshall Ellis]

Can you tell me what month and phase it should be?
I think I've got a few of these games???
 

[Grimrod42]

June 1805 Austrian land phase I believe