Technical information needed!!
Moderator: MOD_EIA
RE: Technical information needed!!
Good rule find!! Apparently I did not remember correctly. I did remember that two players can agree to resolve the combat has trivial combat, however, I am still pretty sure that the 5 to 1 thing is in there, but I don't have a rulebook handy and it's been 4 years since I have played the game, so I really don't know. LOL. I love the lawyer-esque rules of EiA.
RE: Technical information needed!!
You're right, got this from the errata (The General 25/4) :
12.3.10: OVERWHELMING NUMBERS: Field or limited field combats where one side has a 5:1 or better ratio in strength factors _must_ be resolved using trivial combat. EXCEPTION: An outnumbered _defender_ may attempt to withdraw before the trivial combat by rolling the commander's strategic rating or less.
And here we have obviously a rule problem with an errata poorly written. First, you don't know if you have overwhelming numbers until 7.5.2.6 STEP SIX-REVEAL FORCES/MORALE LEVELS: Both players reveal their forces and determine their final morale levels.. That's clearly working in the opposite way that : 7.5.3.1: Trivial combats are resolved similarly to field combats, but the procedure is much simplified. No operational possibilities chits are chosen <cut>.
IMHO if i use this errata, i will only replace step 7 and part of eight aka artillery by the field combat and keep the others, including PP win/loses.
12.3.10: OVERWHELMING NUMBERS: Field or limited field combats where one side has a 5:1 or better ratio in strength factors _must_ be resolved using trivial combat. EXCEPTION: An outnumbered _defender_ may attempt to withdraw before the trivial combat by rolling the commander's strategic rating or less.
And here we have obviously a rule problem with an errata poorly written. First, you don't know if you have overwhelming numbers until 7.5.2.6 STEP SIX-REVEAL FORCES/MORALE LEVELS: Both players reveal their forces and determine their final morale levels.. That's clearly working in the opposite way that : 7.5.3.1: Trivial combats are resolved similarly to field combats, but the procedure is much simplified. No operational possibilities chits are chosen <cut>.
IMHO if i use this errata, i will only replace step 7 and part of eight aka artillery by the field combat and keep the others, including PP win/loses.
RE: Technical information needed!!
ORIGINAL: Titi
You're right, got this from the errata (The General 25/4) :
12.3.10: OVERWHELMING NUMBERS: Field or limited field combats where one side has a 5:1 or better ratio in strength factors _must_ be resolved using trivial combat. EXCEPTION: An outnumbered _defender_ may attempt to withdraw before the trivial combat by rolling the commander's strategic rating or less.
And here we have obviously a rule problem with an errata poorly written. First, you don't know if you have overwhelming numbers until 7.5.2.6 STEP SIX-REVEAL FORCES/MORALE LEVELS: Both players reveal their forces and determine their final morale levels.. That's clearly working in the opposite way that : 7.5.3.1: Trivial combats are resolved similarly to field combats, but the procedure is much simplified. No operational possibilities chits are chosen <cut>.
IMHO if i use this errata, i will only replace step 7 and part of eight aka artillery by the field combat and keep the others, including PP win/loses.
ah man you beat me to it. [:'(]
It is a general popular error to suppose the loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for its welfare.
-Edmund Burke
-Edmund Burke
-
timothy_stone
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Thu May 22, 2003 1:29 pm
RE: Technical information needed!!
About your different discussion, I have to tell you that you are right, there are PP involved, even with the 5:1 trivial combat rule. As you said, it is simply to avoid to choose a chit since there is no sense in such a proportion of troops.
And there is always a lost of PP since there are corps involved in the fight, that is the basic rule, corps involved in a combat, PPs won/lost.
that is the way i have always understood it, but i have played in several pbem games where the majority felt otherwise, so when a vote was taken we ended up playing that the rule meant 5:1 combats were not worth pps - which just led to people attacking screens with 4-factor corps then reinforcing in, it was silly.
there are several (dozens) of rules that i've learned that people play different ways, i ended up keeping a list of them all, and each new pbem game with new players, i would list them all and we'd vote on them. That way whether we agreed or not, we all knew how we were playing the rules - it made for far less arguments
-
timothy_stone
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Thu May 22, 2003 1:29 pm
RE: Technical information needed!!
The whole point of that strategy isn't to defeat the invading nation nor to win pps. The point is to stale the invading nation and make the invasion as costly as possible to the invader. If you can deplete the invaders war chest while staling it's movement into your country while losing minimum army factors, then maybe you can find an ally against the invader or test the patience of the invader so much that he/she makes a mistake and puts themselves in a position for you to take advantage of.
If you think it is easy to invade Russia then you have been playing with incompetent Russian players. It is very hard to go "get poland" or to "march onto Moscow". If you declare war on Russia and Russia chooses to fight you on it's borders rather than inside it's country, then the Russian player either has a big upper hand or is incompetent.
So... how do you leap from my statement that playing the screening game, especially against the french can cost a ton of pps to the conclusion that i must think that invading russia is easy, or that my the folks i play with are imcompetent? Please don't put words into my mouth and then try to score points off of these imagined sayings and insult my friends in response - that's not all that nice.
RE: Technical information needed!!
My 2 cents..
I say, I think the biggest fear people have is facing a very experienced French player. Next on the list is facing an experienced Russian player. And when they both work together, the rest of the world gets put in, well.... a world of hurt.
I say, I think the biggest fear people have is facing a very experienced French player. Next on the list is facing an experienced Russian player. And when they both work together, the rest of the world gets put in, well.... a world of hurt.
-
John Umber
- Posts: 110
- Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 8:17 pm
- Location: Sweden
RE: Technical information needed!!
It would be nice if you could post those rules that people were arguing about.
The only way I have fought with "small" corps was when trying to circle the french main army and I got Prussia and Russia with me (playing Austria). It got a lot of minor out from the french army, but cost a lot of PP as you have noticed.
In the end we won when England joined in and we simply outnumbered the French. It was fun though.
The only way I have fought with "small" corps was when trying to circle the french main army and I got Prussia and Russia with me (playing Austria). It got a lot of minor out from the french army, but cost a lot of PP as you have noticed.
In the end we won when England joined in and we simply outnumbered the French. It was fun though.
John Umber
RE: Technical information needed!!
ORIGINAL: timothy_stone
So... how do you leap from my statement that playing the screening game, especially against the french can cost a ton of pps to the conclusion that i must think that invading russia is easy, or that my the folks i play with are imcompetent? Please don't put words into my mouth and then try to score points off of these imagined sayings and insult my friends in response - that's not all that nice.
I wasn't leaping to that or putting words in your mouth, just stating that invading Russia shouldn't be easy and that the particular strategy in question is by far one of the best I have seen. I don't know how good your friends are and I never mentioned them. What I was saying is that if a Russian player lets Russia get invaded then he/she is a pretty incompetent Russian player. That incompetence might be due to lack of experience or intelligence or whatever, I don't know. All of my posts are in "general" terms and are not intended to offend anyone, except the ones put directly toward MatrixGames.
I am sorry you took my post so personal.
RE: Technical information needed!!
ORIGINAL: John Umber
It would be nice if you could post those rules that people were arguing about.
The only way I have fought with "small" corps was when trying to circle the french main army and I got Prussia and Russia with me (playing Austria). It got a lot of minor out from the french army, but cost a lot of PP as you have noticed.
In the end we won when England joined in and we simply outnumbered the French. It was fun though.
The only web site you will ever need for eia
http://haverts.com:16080/eia-archive/flash-index.html
It is a general popular error to suppose the loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for its welfare.
-Edmund Burke
-Edmund Burke
RE: Technical information needed!!
http://haverts.com:16080/eia-archive/flash-index.html Has an error on its 1805 chart for spain. Spain has only 3 fleets but the sheet shows 4.
And in the EIA map one of the forrests in sweden have been transmutated into a mountain
And in the EIA map one of the forrests in sweden have been transmutated into a mountain
Regards
xXx
xXx
RE: Technical information needed!!
there are several (dozens) of rules that i've learned that people play different ways, i ended up keeping a list of them all, and each new pbem game with new players, i would list them all and we'd vote on them
For us newbies out here and maybe the vets even, could we get what final ruleset was adapted for this PC version and a list of what changes were implemented? And since we won't have a choice regarding rule interpretations since the PC does it all, what rules options might be offered that players could select when setting up a game?
Bill Macon
Empires in Arms Developer
Strategic Command Developer
Empires in Arms Developer
Strategic Command Developer
- Marshall Ellis
- Posts: 5630
- Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
- Location: Dallas
RE: Technical information needed!!
Pzgndr:
We're incorporating EiA and EiH v3.0 rule sets. 80% of the game is based in standard EiA BUT we offered what we felt were some of the best additions of EiH v3.0. This was mainly Diplomacy (Offering ability to influence and ally a minor nation) and Naval units / extra missions (Adding transports, heavy and light ships along with piracy missions).
Thank you
We're incorporating EiA and EiH v3.0 rule sets. 80% of the game is based in standard EiA BUT we offered what we felt were some of the best additions of EiH v3.0. This was mainly Diplomacy (Offering ability to influence and ally a minor nation) and Naval units / extra missions (Adding transports, heavy and light ships along with piracy missions).
Thank you



