Thank you for getting your orders in nice and promptly everyone! The map is below.
And has been updated following the message I sent to you all
Click to make larger!
It's now Spring 08, and please could I have your orders by 7pm, on
Sunday 30th May.
BANK HOLIDAY ALERTIt's worth having a quick look at the French retreats. Both units could only go to Picardy, and as only one could retreat there it was chosen randomly. In this instance it didn't make much difference as both were armies - although if one was a fleet and one was an army it may have make a difference. If you think this scenario might happen to you in the retreat phase then specify which one you want to take priority in your retreat orders.
I'm a little torn at what to do if it's two dislodged units by different powers with only one retreat between them. In face to face diplomacy when retreats are submitted instantly after (but separately) to orders, with out negotiation, when two units retreat to the same place they are disbanded. However in face to face diplomacy players get to see the map and adjust retreats based what actually happened rather than what they speculated would happen.
One concession that postal or internet diplomacy must make is that retreat phase orders must be submitted alongside movement phase orders to prevent retreat negotiation and a much, longer game so it may be the case that sometimes retreating units have to go to the same location. I propose to work retreats out so that the default is not to disband units (eg, if one unit can only retreat to one location and another unit can only retreat to the same location along with another one, the unit with the one option gets that space and the other unit retreats in to the one space remaining - rather than randomly generating a retreat for the one with plenty of options and if it's somewher that the other unit is going then disbanding both).
This would replecate the benefits of being able to see your units before sumbitting retreats. Where there are more retreating units than spaces it will be a random decision which one is disbanded.
It's not a perfect system - and if anyone wants to raise concerns with this approach (or wants me to explain it better!) then message me before the next set of orders and I'll start a new post for discussions.
Fall 07 OrdersHere's what you did do.
AustriaF Alb - Gre
A Arm - Syr
A Boh - Sil Bounced with Sil (1 against 1).
A Gal S A Mos - War
A Gre - Bul
A Mos - War
A Rum S A Gre - Bul
A Ser S A Gre - Bul
A Sev - Arm
EnglandF Edi - Yor
FranceF Bel - Bur Ooopsy. Hold order assigned.
A Bre S A Par Support cut by Move from English Channel. Dislodged from Eng (2 against 1)
A Par Holds Dislodged from Bur (2 against 1)
GermanyF Ber Holds
A Kie - Hol
F Nth S A Kie - Hol
A Pru - War Bounced with Mos (1 against 1).
A Sil S A Pru - War Support cut by Move from Bohemia.
F Swe Holds
ItalyA Bur - Par
F Eng - Bre
A Gas S A Bur - Par
F Ion - Tys
F Mao S F Eng - Bre
A Mun - Ruh
F Nao - Nwg
A Tus - Pie
Russia:
F Bot - Stp(sc)
Turkey:
F Aeg - Con
F Ank - Bla
A Con - Ank
A Smy S A Con - Ank
Fall 07 RetreatsTwo French units were dislodged and the only available location for both to go to is Picardy. As both cannot go to to the same location it was randomly determined which one was sucessful.
France: A Bre - Pic
Fall 07 Builds and DisbandsAustria:
10 Supply Centres (+1)
Builds A Vie
England:
1 Supply CentreFrance:
1 Supply Centres (-2)
Disbands A Pic
Germany:
7 Supply Centres (+1)
Builds A Kie
Italy:
11 Supply Centres (+2)
A Ven
A Rom
F Nap
(one build carried over from last turn)
Russia:
1 Supply Centre (-1)
Turkey:
3 Supply Centres (-1)
Disbands F Bla
