Matrix Games Forums

Call this a bug or a feature. I call it a surprice [;)]

Austria allied with Russia, who has loaned three corps to Austria.
Austria at war with Turkey. Russia not.

Turkey attackes stack with austrian and the loaned russian corps.

Ruusian corps are now not withdrawn one area towards nearest russian suplly.
Instead they are repatriated form Peterwardein - to Moscow ???

I just need to know, is this how its supposed to be ??

/eske

Did Austria neglect to give Russia access? If so, it could be that the game is repatriating them as soon as the phase in which they are loaned is over--since then they revert to being Russian unless and until Russia loans them again next month.

It probably shouldn't do that, though...Loaned corps should have some kind of temp access when the loan expires.

I think that this is another manifestation of the end-cases in the loaned corp rules.

There is another thread - "France not able to attack Russia" that is also concerned with
this.  There are end cases arising from MULTI-WAY wars (as opposed to simple 2-sided)
that are not addressed in a consistent manner for loaned corp.

Loaned corp should not be able to be used to attack someone who is not at
war with the owner. The Russian corp in this case should even be useful
to Austria since RUSSIA is not at war with Turkey - The original EIA
combined movement (which loaned corp is ment to replace) only applied
to allies fighting a common enemy. In fact there were specific rules as to how to
handle MULTI-PLAYER combined stack combats where not all of the
sides involved were at war with each other.

This sounds a little different. This looks to act as it should. The Russian corps are not at war with the Turks and cannot fight. If the Turks end up in the same area then the Russians are repatriated and the Austrian leadership is sent packing. In order for your loaned corps to work in the case to your advantage, Russia needs to be at war with the Turks.
 

Why not just have the Russians be ignored and not moved at all?

I think something needs to happen here since there is Austrian leadership involved. An army would not simply walk by because they are Russian soldiers. The presence of Austrian leadership would certainly not be good and the Turks would be hostile to them.

In this case, the Austrian Leadership (Charles) with the two Austrian Cav Corps withdrew. Once the peace between Turkey and Russia had been signed (as it was during the previous diplomacy phase), any bond between the now-neutral Russians and the Austrian Leader was sundered. I think it would have been better to have left the Russians where they were. They should not magically reapppear in Moscow.

Maybe not Moscow but I think they gotta go, no?
 

Why? Why could they not be simply ignored?

I don't think they would ignore neutral troops under enemy leadership. I would think at that time that the Russians would be told to evacaute the battle field or else...
 
 

Well, at the time, the Russians were no longer under Austrian (Enemy to the Turks) control. The peace between Turkey and Russia had been already signed.

And if the Russians were indeed under the Austrian Command at that time, should they not have withdrawn with the Austrians? And that would have brought into play the +1 for a purely cavalry (the Austrians were all cav but the Russians were infantry) withdraw...

I think it wisest to ignore the neutrals... but I will leave the matter to others opinions hereafter unless solicited.

I think they should leave. There should be no neutral forces in an area, where a battle takes place.
And they should be neutral: Russia was not at war with any of the forces involved in battle - even if they technically was under Austrian command.
 
That however does not call for a repatriation - just a retreat one area towards nearest supply.
In ths case repatriation was a disadvantage. It might just as well have been a big advantage. Substitute Russia with a GB, who just had been invaded while army was far away.
 
No! Repatriation like this is not good for the game. So - while I'm at it a suggestion: let repatriated forces return as reinforcement in home country next reinf phase.
 
And suppose Russia and Turkey did not have enforced peace. Would Russia still remain neutral ?  (Not sure how this thing works).
 
/eske

I agree that they should leave. Some problems will arise out of that, though.
 
If the Austrians had had control of the Russians for quite a while, they may be a LONG ways from Russia, and could die trying to make it home. I think that the Austrians therefore need to remain in control in order to pay supply for them. But, they have to be moved as well. In this case, I think they should retreat as if they were Austrians for purposes of retreating (i.e. retreat towards the neares Austrian depot).
 
That could get REALLY hard to code. So, I would agree with a compromise that they should be repatriated, but to the nearest location in Russia, not to Moscow. And, the corps should remain intact.
 
One of the problems with repatriating as factors is that the corps was removed as part of the repatriation. But, what if they were guard factors? Now, the owner has no place to put them.
 
So, the corps counter that held them needs to be added back to the pool, as if they owner had paid for them normally.

But Jimmer, they can't have been under Austrian control a long time. Russia gets them back at end of each month.
If they are moved somewhere Russia don't like. Austria doesn't get them next month.
 
Btw. that prevents a loaned corps from conquering a minor for the controlling nation, doesn't it ??
 
I mean DoW a minor, then I loan corps nearby from a friend. Take the minors capital with the loaned corps, but at the end of the months tha corps is returned to the owner, my friend, and there is a lapse of war - unless of course I entered the minor with one of my own corps as well.
 
Or can't the loaned corps attack the minor due to the owner (my friend again) not being at war with the minor?
What if my friend has access to the MP getting control of the minor ??
 
*sigh* loaning of corps seemed such a easy replacement for combined movement ...
 
/eske
 
 

ORIGINAL: eske

*sigh* loaning of corps seemed such a easy replacement for combined movement ...

/eske

No doubt! I thought so too!
Far reaching side effects!

Hello Eske:

I know I proimised to be quiet until asked but I lied [:D]

Your point "I think they should leave. There should be no neutral forces in an area, where a battle takes place.
And they should be neutral: Russia was not at war with any of the forces involved in battle - even if they technically was under Austrian command." is valid.

I ask you to consider, however, that there is no need for the neutral troops to move any area. Each one of these game areas is quite large. There is plenty of feasibility that the Russians, in this case, could move to another area/stay out of the way and not be in the area of the battle.

So I believe that it meets your and mine intention that they stay out of the battle's way yet requires no movement of troops at all.

best
Mardonius

I dont think this far Repatriating is in any way EIA.
Or basicly Russia should then not be able to enter its allies country PR/AU if they where not at war with the same enemies ? Example if Russia and Austria where at war with France, but then Turkey DOW's Austria and Russian forces should jump home, unless Russia also DOW'ed Turkey ?

As Mardonious points out the areas are big.

In general the lend corps should had been acting as part of the stack but not the force, so if Austria won the battle, Russian forces stayed, if Austria lost, they should withdraw as if Austrian.  Otherwise it could be exploited just send 1 factor corps to jump "neutral"-forces far far away.

I seen some "jumps" of forces of Depot-Garrisons Marshall know what i talk about
Aus-factors in Genoa jumped to Corfu, Aus-Factors in Frankfurt teleported to Novrogod.

Regards
Bresh

ORIGINAL: Mardonius

Hello Eske:

I know I proimised to be quiet until asked but I lied [:D]

Your point "I think they should leave. There should be no neutral forces in an area, where a battle takes place.
And they should be neutral: Russia was not at war with any of the forces involved in battle - even if they technically was under Austrian command." is valid.

I ask you to consider, however, that there is no need for the neutral troops to move any area. Each one of these game areas is quite large. There is plenty of feasibility that the Russians, in this case, could move to another area/stay out of the way and not be in the area of the battle.

So I believe that it meets your and mine intention that they stay out of the battle's way yet requires no movement of troops at all.

best
Mardonius

Agreed. In the boardgame, with it's fixation on rigid steps, there was a need to "retreat" the non-warring faction(s) first. But, the computer may be able to handle that in one area.

However, I would say that this depends on coding. It is possible that keeping them there would require a major rewrite of the battle code, and I'm for perturbing things as little as possible. If the code isn't as trivial as saying it, then it should wait.