PBEM

[Matto]

So waiting for Sweden and Austria ... 

[Franck]

Sent, I forgot to send it when I played it!

[barbarossa2]

LOL.  And I just forgot to do the turn with everything that happened today. *Sorry*

[Mus]

ORIGINAL: IronWarrior

To me, Terms of Surrender are "enforced" and not "proposed", so I would say it is illogical for the originating nation to be penalized for non compliance by the surrendering nation (including secret treaties).

Terms of Surrender are already limited by what happens during the war (casualties sustained, how badly the side was defeated, etc) which should be enough imo. The victor should not be further penalized by limiting what they can demand under Terms of Surrender because of existing treaties (which may have caused the war in the first place [:D]).

...'To the victor go the spoils'?

Right...should the losing party fail to obey the terms of its surrender the war would continue. Therefore the only thing that makes sense is for treaties that conflict with the terms of surrender to automatically cancel and the canceling party (loser of the war) take those glory hits as additional penalty while abiding by the terms of its surrender.

To the victor go the spoils, vae victus, the strong do what they will and the weak suffer what they must, pick your historical quotation about the consequences of losing wars.

[;)]

[Mus]

BTW heres a screenshot of the ongoing treaty weirdness. Turkey bounces back and forth between enforced no alliance clause and enforced alliance clause.

I get free 5 glory every turn for forming an alliance with Russia... no penalty for canceling treaty as required by surrender treaty.

WAD? I hope not.

The way I think it ought to be working is that the surrender terms treaty should take precedence and I should be forced to cancel my enforced alliance agreement with Russia (big glory hit) and then cancel my alliance a single time (another big glory hit).

[Kingmaker]

HiHi
 
Russias T27 orders sent in.
 
All the Best
Peter

[IronWarrior]

France turn 28 in. [8D]

[Kingmaker]

HiHi

Russias T28 orders sent in.

All the Best
Peter

[timurlain]

Prussia is waiting for the frog-eaters as well
How dare the French not accept my generous treaty ?

Turn in.

[barbarossa2]

Hello all,
 
I am leaving for two weeks on vacation. It is *possible* that I will be able to play CoG:EE from where I am at. But it is also possible that this won't be possible and for two weeks I may be out of communication. Until further notice, please send my turns to France (Iron Warrior) to execute.
 
-B2

[IronWarrior]

ORIGINAL: timurlain

Prussia is waiting for the frog-eaters as well
How dare the French not accept my generous treaty ?

Turn in.

[:D]


Have a good trip B2. Now if I remember right you said something about subsidizing France with the entire Treasury of Sweden? [:D] (just kidding)

[lenin]

What has happened to the British army in Gibraltar? I took 1k casualties at most, against 38k Spanish. Yet they have disappeared? Where have they gone to? I should have 57-58k against 100k or so?

Any ideas, or is this a bug?

Just wondering, as the Spanish were on course to reduce Gibraltar in about 5 years, yet now they seem to have captured it, despite ongoing supply from the sea.

Does a "breach in the walls" allow a garrisons capture? If so, its a waste of time garrisoning your fortresses?

Pete.

[lenin]

Just looked again. I suffered 500 casualties against the Spanish 38k, but still my garrison surrendered (all 58k or so of them) -despite approximate numerical parity and mostly superior morale..

Oh well....

[barbarossa2]

Interestingly in a ton of reading I am doing about siege warfare in the 18th century, most garrisons (seems 90% or so) did, in fact, surrender when the walls were first compromised or breached or assaulted. A drummer would announce this to the besieger. This was known as "beating the chamade". Generally, because it spared the attacker heavier losses, if the defender surrendered early enough the surrender was an "honorable" one and the garrison was allowed to leave for another fortress controlled by its nation. More rarely the surrendering unit would agree not to participate in warfare for up to six months. The officers generally stuck to their agreement as honor was the lifeblood of being an officer (however, once in captivity a healthy small percentage of Britsh officers did try to escape from the "officer's prison" at Verdun in spite of having given their word not to). Odds reducing a surrender like this were: a sizeable garrison, hope of relief, a determined general, or a siege between christians and muslims.

Siege rules may have changed during the "Napoleonic" era though, and I don't know if these rules still held.

[barbarossa2]

I am sending in T29 now. After this, until I report back, IronWarrior will take care of this. I will try to see if I can play where I am going though.

[IronWarrior]

France turn 29 in.

[Mus]

ORIGINAL: barbarossa2

Interestingly in a ton of reading I am doing about siege warfare in the 18th century, most garrisons (seems 90% or so) did, in fact, surrender when the walls were first compromised or breached or assaulted.

When they didnt it was an invitation for a bloodletting.

Turkish turn 29 in.

Im basically forced to automatically declare war on the entire world under the provisions of the French surrender terms... Allah willing I will prevail.

[&o]

[Kingmaker]

HiHi

Russias T29 orders sent in.

All the Best
Peter

[timurlain]

Prussia's orders in as well. What a defeat for the English [:(]

[Matto]

I was surprised too, that it was so quick ... I think, that each turn is some small probability to surrender checked ... and how it looks, I won it