Ceded provinces and inestability

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Ceded provinces and inestability

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

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

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Ceded provinces and inestability - 11/12/2004 11:17:10 AM

fjbn

Posts: 79
Joined: 6/24/2004
From: Cordoba, Spain
Status: offline

Rules says that when a major power falls into the inestability zone, her conquered minors become neutral (rule 10.5.2.1) if there is no corp inside the minor. Of course, there is a good reason behind this rule. If things go wrong, there are many posibilities that your conquered begin a revolt to became neutral again, but I think there must be a difference between conquered and ceded provinces. I mean, a ceded province still has a loyalty to her former owner, so I think it�s more logical that in this case ceded provinces return to her former owner as a unceded province.

Post #: 1

RE: Ceded provinces and inestability - 11/12/2004 2:42:13 PM

hlj

Posts: 83
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline

I think you are right in your interpretation of the loyalty of the ceded provinces.

The rules however dont mention any change to control of ceded provinces as a result of instability or fiasco diplomatic status.

Some people therefore interpretate that the only way ceded provinces can change control is through conquest or through peace conditions.

Marshall,
How is this handled in the game?

HLJ

< Message edited by hlj -- 11/12/2004 12:45:07 PM >

(in reply to fjbn)

Post #: 2

RE: Ceded provinces and inestability - 11/14/2004 4:19:40 AM

Marshall Ellis

Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline

Hey guys:

They are all handled the same which is the default of the game i.e. but I'm confused since a ceded province would revert back to it's original owner (If is is a province of a major nation). I may be a confused about your question ... Give me an example!

Thank you

_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games

(in reply to hlj)

Post #: 3

RE: Ceded provinces and inestability - 11/14/2004 7:40:35 AM

donkuchi19

Posts: 1062
Joined: 3/14/2004
From: Cleveland, Ohio
Status: offline

Marshall,

I think this is what they mean.

Tyrol is a ceded province from Austria to France.

France enters instability zone. It's minors revert to neutral status. What happens to Tyrol? Technically, it is not covered in the rules but we always played that it reverted to original owner if still in the game.

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)

Post #: 4

RE: Ceded provinces and inestability - 11/14/2004 10:58:36 AM

ardilla

Posts: 399
Joined: 2/25/2004
From: Castellon, Spain
Status: offline

It never happenned in any of my games to this point.

But I think, like conquered provinces became neutral, provinces part of another country will come back to the owner, I think it is logical.

The rules says also that if when get into inestability zone if there is/are corp/s of another nation it comes under that nation control.

Regards.

_____________________________

Santiago y cierra Espa�a!!!

(in reply to donkuchi19)

Post #: 5

RE: Ceded provinces and inestability - 11/14/2004 3:25:32 PM

Hoche

Posts: 491
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

If a nation slips into the instability of fiasco zone on the PSC NOTHING happens to ceded proviences. The rules only address what happens to minors to add anything would change the rules.

Rational: Minors go neutral or change control because the are or have been self governing units. Proviences on the other had are not self governing unit but parts of the larger whole lacking the needed institutions to break away.

I think it would be a mistake to change the rules.

_____________________________

It is a general popular error to suppose the loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for its welfare.
-Edmund Burke

(in reply to ardilla)

Post #: 6

RE: Ceded provinces and inestability - 11/15/2004 3:11:49 PM

fjbn

Posts: 79
Joined: 6/24/2004
From: Cordoba, Spain
Status: offline

I dont think so. First. Ceded provinces had their corps. I mean, they had the corps belonging to their major power. Minor countries were all under the influence of some major power. For example, Napoles under Spanish control until late XVIII. You say that ceded provinces suffer the lack of direction to provoque a revolt. I desagree. They had a political direction, the only one that people really obbey, their natural sovereigns. So, if you take Tyrol as a ceded, people always remain loyal to Austria.

If you remember history you will see that kings always made a difference between territories. It�s not the same for France to lose Lille (considered a French city) that other territories, no matter if they were historically under French influence, because they were not considered French. Prussia always tried to recover Magdeburg more than other territories recently gained.

(in reply to Hoche)

Post #: 7

RE: Ceded provinces and inestability - 11/19/2004 12:01:28 AM

Frank McNally

Posts: 42
Joined: 8/29/2003
Status: offline

But these attempts to recover ceded provinces are generally initiated by the formerly controlling power.

Neutral states have/had an independent govenrments, which might even be partially intact after conquest. When another power ceases to control them, they simply revert.

Seems clear enough that ceded provinces and neutral powers are different beasts and therefore can reasoably have different rules.

(in reply to fjbn)

Post #: 8