Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 5/22/85; site cbosgd.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cad From: cad@cbosgd.UUCP (Chuck A DeGaul) Newsgroups: net.games.pbm Subject: Re: Re: Dislodgement - supply vs convoy Message-ID: <1292@cbosgd.UUCP> Date: Mon, 1-Jul-85 14:43:42 EDT Article-I.D.: cbosgd.1292 Posted: Mon Jul 1 14:43:42 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 2-Jul-85 05:38:59 EDT Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus, Oh Lines: 31 Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! I'm sorry but those persons out there claiming that rule XII.5 allows an unsupported fleet to convoy an army with support into a province occupied by a fleet supporting an attack on the convoying fleet have missed the point of the rule. (We are talking Diplomacy here, in case anyone missed this) When trying to decide if convoyed attacks succeed, remember that all the convoy orders must be successful before the convoyed unit's move is considered. Therefore, in the scenario below, the convoy order fails and the army never arrives, despite all of ITS support. Example: England: A Lon -> Bel, A Eng C A Lon -> Bel, A Hol S A Lon -> Bel France: F Bel S F Bre -> Eng, F Bre -> Eng English F Eng must retreat, so the convoy order is negated and the convoyed army never hits the beaches in Belgium regardless of the support it received from A Hol. Remember, convoy order happens sequentially -- first determine if the convoy will work, then determine if the "landing" will work. This is the true meaning of rule XII.5, and is very clear given Example 13 and the subsequent discussion. Sorry to be so didactic, but when someone butchers the elegant and simple rules of Diplomacy, I get a little hot under the collar. ---> Chuck A DeGaul <---