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 <---