Blockade of ports (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815



Message

Dancing Bear -> Blockade of ports (2/20/2010 10:20:51 PM)

I notice that in the original rules (6.2.7), a fleet could enter a blockade box if "it is at war with the major power controlling the port or if the port or box contains an enemy fleet or enemy corps".. and the equivalent of loaned fleets capable of transporting the enemy corps.

I believe in this version of the game, you can only enter the blockade box if at war with the port controller or with access to the port. Does anyone know if the rules are interpreteted correctly here?



delatbabel -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/22/2010 10:13:00 AM)

The rules aren't interpreted correctly, there is definitely a bug. e.g. I've tried (as GB) to blockade a neutral Spanish port containing French forces. I should be able to do that but the game won't let me. It's not currently in Mantis yet but I'll get a save game together and post it there.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/22/2010 1:07:45 PM)

This is a deviation that I'm not sure I can overcome. You can only enter a port IF you are at war with the port's controller.



Dancing Bear -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/22/2010 1:40:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

This is a deviation that I'm not sure I can overcome. You can only enter a port IF you are at war with the port's controller.


Since creates a serious problem for trying to contain fleets with invasion forces (i.e. imagine a neutral spain loans its fleets to France, who then leads an invasion of GB from a Spainish port, which GB can not blockade), why not allow anyone access to any blockade box? This would 100 times more preferable than what we have right now.

I can't see how having access to everyone's blockade box would upset the game balance, and it might be an easy fix for this problem.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/23/2010 2:05:52 PM)

It's simple. You cannot blockade someone you are not at war with and this is a core function of the engine. It is a lot more difficult to overcome this than it sounds.



NeverMan -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/23/2010 5:49:22 PM)

Well, then this is a major problem for obvious reasons, which Bear has already attempted to address.



Dancing Bear -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/24/2010 3:06:41 AM)

Hi Marshall
The term "core function of the engine" sounds pretty intimidating. Can it be changed to you have to be at war with either the port owner or the nation that controls the port at the begining of the naval phase (i.e. enemy corps sitting in a neutrals port area)?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

It's simple. You cannot blockade someone you are not at war with and this is a core function of the engine. It is a lot more difficult to overcome this than it sounds.





Marshall Ellis -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/24/2010 1:01:17 PM)

A possible work around would be a DOW prompt when you enter the blockade box. This DOW maybe should not cost any pp since the neutral port is harboring an enemy?



NeverMan -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/24/2010 9:10:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

A possible work around would be a DOW prompt when you enter the blockade box. This DOW maybe should not cost any pp since the neutral port is harboring an enemy?



No, I don't agree with this.



StCyr -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/24/2010 11:43:23 PM)

quote:

It's simple. You cannot blockade someone you are not at war with and this is a core function of the engine. It is a lot more difficult to overcome this than it sounds.


Indeed, it is simple- Marshall, after all these years you still donīt understand what this game is about.

If there are enemy troops in a neutral port you have to be able to block these troops. But well, "a core function of the engine" is of course a perfect argument for being unable to perform an action that happened many times in history and is the only possible option.

Best excuse so far - itīs not a bug, itīs a core function. Great.



pzgndr -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/25/2010 12:09:46 AM)

quote:

imagine a neutral spain loans its fleets to France, who then leads an invasion of GB from a Spainish port, which GB can not blockade


The loaned status could be reconsidered. Once loaned to a MP at war, those units should also be considered at war. Thus you should then be able to enter the blockade box, and maintain the core function which makes sense per se. I believe we have other issues associated with loaned status, so this is something else to think about.



Dancing Bear -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/25/2010 1:58:05 AM)

Hi Marshall,
I don't think the DOW prompt will work either, as it might lead to very effective British surprise attacks. What happens with ports in minor countries? Surely the blockade box status of these ports is not hard wired.

Maybe instead of a prompt for a DOW, some code to trick the game into allowing access (a one area temp access type thing as per allies?) as long as enemy corps and loaned enemy fleets are present.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

A possible work around would be a DOW prompt when you enter the blockade box. This DOW maybe should not cost any pp since the neutral port is harboring an enemy?





Marshall Ellis -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/25/2010 1:39:03 PM)

If the blockade were allowed then the attack would not be a port attack, right?
How would (For example) GB attack a hostile in a neutral port?



Ted1066 -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/26/2010 2:48:00 AM)

The original EiA rules allowed for a DoW by a player whose opponents troops were being ferried by a neutral ally. A second scenario was a neutral ally of the opponent housing an enemies fleets/troops in their territory. The example is France/GB at war and a neutral Spain is transporting French troops. EiA allowed for GB to issue a DoW in the naval phase and pay the full PP cost of the DoW in order to attempt to interdict the Spanish fleets. The second example is French fleets hiding in a neutral Spanish port could be attacked by GB so long as GB DoWs Spain in the naval phase.

Marshall, correct me if I'm wrong, but the current iteration of the game engine does not allow for this type of declaration, does it?

Ted



Dancing Bear -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/26/2010 3:13:21 AM)

Hi Marshall
that is correct, moving into the blockade box would not be a port attack, and GB could not attack a hostile in a neutral port without first declaring war on the port owner.
WRT to blockade boxes. the first issue is that a hostile fleet (or a fleet transporting hostile corp) inside a neutral port could not be blockaded by GB, which is allowed under the original EIA rules without a DOW. (this prevents France from sneaking across the border to Spain, jumping on Spanish ships without a blockade box challenge).
The second, less frequent issue is that a hostile fleet (say GB controlled Portugal at war with France and Spain) could hide in a blockade box of an enemy (say the French), but not be attacked by the Spanish.

Hostile fleets leaving neutral ports or fleets transporting hsotile corps should be intercepted in the blocakde box as per the existing code for at sea interceptions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

If the blockade were allowed then the attack would not be a port attack, right?
How would (For example) GB attack a hostile in a neutral port?





Marshall Ellis -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/26/2010 5:24:39 PM)

OK, so you could blockade hostiles but not attack?




ndrose -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/26/2010 6:18:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

OK, so you could blockade hostiles but not attack?




Actually, per original rules (6.3.1.3.2) you *could* attack hostiles in a neutral port without a DoW. But if you didn't have access, the port guns could be used on you. This would be a very rare event, and I don't think it would be a big deal if the game weren't coded to allow that.

The important thing is to allow the blockade, so that hostile invasion fleets can be intercepted.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/26/2010 8:10:47 PM)

Now that is way more possible than the attack. I will look into this!



DCWhitworth -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/27/2010 11:08:00 AM)

I'm not normally one for hystrionics but I've a feeling this issue could be open to exploits that leave the game broken. I think it could be impossible to defend Great Britain from invasions launched from neutral ports that cannot be blockaded.

If you look at history the British Royal Navy pretty much acted as a law unto itself during this era. If there was an enemy there neutrality would not be respected. If an enemy fleet took refuge in a 'neutral' port I don't doubt for a minute that they would blockade it at the least. I also don't doubt other nation's fleets would have behaved similarly given the opportunity, although for obvious reasons the vast majority of examples involve the British navy.



delatbabel -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/28/2010 9:06:56 AM)

The major problem is with French forces in a Spanish port. If GB is unable to blockade this port then the game is over very quickly. France just moves forces to a Spanish port, Spain naval transports those to Britain, rinse, lather, repeat, game over.

It must be possible to blockade a port where there are:

* hostile forces in that port
* hostile ships in that port

... regardless of the port's owner.



delatbabel -> RE: Blockade of ports (2/28/2010 9:26:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DCWhitworth
If you look at history the British Royal Navy pretty much acted as a law unto itself during this era. If there was an enemy there neutrality would not be respected.


It's not a question of neutrality. In the mediterranean ports especially it wasn't necessary for the British to get very close to the port to blockade it. An effective blockade could be run from 50 or so nautical miles off shore, way out of the range of shore batteries and any real knowledge of any ship's presence. Similarly, the British maintained a single channel fleet with a number of "escort" sloops, cutters, and the like which placed an effective blockade on all of the French channel ports. The channel fleet stood off quite some distance from the port, well out into what would be considered the adjoining sea area. Any protests of violation of neutrality would be pretty much void at that distance.

You can see quite some distance from the top of the rig of a tall ship (been there, done that). The only thing you need to do is to be able to get into broadside position well before an enemy fleet leaves the port channel or roads, and given the way that sailing ships of the time were rigged, a spotter in the crow's nest (and indeed the weather) is going to give you many hours warning of any attempt by the blockaded ships to leave the port.



Ulahtonius -> RE: Blockade of ports (3/2/2010 4:10:02 PM)

Hi, would put in my 5 cents at this discussion. I would like to support DCWhitworth historicly there were episodes, when a french ship was chassed to a neutral port (Spanish historicly) and then the GB fleet put a blockade on the harbour. So as you see in this case GB and FR were at war but Spain was neutral.



hellfirejet -> RE: Blockade of ports (5/5/2010 9:20:15 AM)


Been searching for Empires in Arms option rules online,and found these little gems.

    1. BLOCKADE DIFFICULTIES (Optional):  All the problems involved in holding blockading fleets at sea were not worked out until the end of the period covered by this game and there is a chance the blockading fleets can be driven off station.






  • At the start of its Naval Step, a major power with one or more of its ports blockaded may select any one of these blockade boxes in which to "check the blockade".  To check the blockade, the blockade box is announced and all major powers having fleet(s) in that blockade box roll a die for each fleet while the blockaded power rolls one die.  Great Britain's rolls when blockading are always modified by "+1".
  • If any blockading fleet roll matches or exceeds the blockaded power's roll, there is no change.  If the blockaded power's roll exceeds the highest blockading roll, all blockading fleets must be immediately moved into the adjacent sea area or areas (the controlling player's choice).  The blockaded naval power then performs its naval movement normally.
    1. INDECISIVE NAVAL ACTIONS (Options): Although some admirals, notably "Black Dick" Howe at the Glorious First of June, were not adverse to fighting unconventionally, prior to January 1798 (when Nelson rose to command the fleets) naval actions were ruled by stilted "Fighting Instructions" and tended to have indecisive results.  Therefore, prior to January 1798, for any naval combat except when using harbor defenses (which are handled normally), the losses on both sides are halved (fractions rounded up).



    • Marshall Ellis -> RE: Blockade of ports (5/5/2010 2:38:24 PM)

    Graham:

    Curious, I don't think I've seen this one before??? Can you tell me where you found these?



    hellfirejet -> RE: Blockade of ports (5/5/2010 2:44:30 PM)

    Hi Marshall,
                      Here be the link for the information you requested,it's a very good source of info about Empires In Arms.

    http://www.boardgaming.info/EIA-archive/



    Marshall Ellis -> RE: Blockade of ports (5/5/2010 2:47:13 PM)

    Thanks Graham!



    Page: [1]

    Valid CSS!




    Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
    0.75