Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Ottoman Empire 'quirk'

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815 >> Tech Support >> Ottoman Empire 'quirk' Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Ottoman Empire 'quirk' - 2/1/2011 1:31:42 PM   
DCWhitworth


Posts: 676
Joined: 12/15/2007
From: Norwich, England
Status: offline
Not sure if this is a bug strictly speaking but something is a bit odd.

OK, Turkey controls Palestine, Syria, Egypt and Cyrenacia. Also Tripolitania and Algeria are allies.
GB declares war on Triplotania, it becomes a Turkish Free State.
Spain declares war on Turkey, Algeria becomes a Turkish free state.
GB occupies Tripoli in a June turn.
In the June economic turn Turkey declares the Ottoman Empire. GB troops in Tripolitania are automatically ejected/repatriated since GB is not at war with the Ottoman Empire.

Now I can't find anything in the rules (computer or boardgame version) that suggests that Turkey can't declare the Ottoman Empire if one of the component states is occupied but not conquered, so *strictly* speaking the game has worked as per the rules but it seems a bit harsh that GB is deprived of a perfectly legitimate conquest.

Anyone got any thoughts on this ? What do we think *should* happen ?



_____________________________

Regards
David
Post #: 1
RE: Ottoman Empire 'quirk' - 2/1/2011 1:36:52 PM   
Marshall Ellis


Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline
OMG??? I'm not sure what should happen??? Would the OE inherit the war settings of Turkey?


_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games



(in reply to DCWhitworth)
Post #: 2
RE: Ottoman Empire 'quirk' - 2/1/2011 1:49:43 PM   
Mardonius


Posts: 654
Joined: 4/9/2007
From: London, UK
Status: offline
I am not certain what should happen. I don't think one can be deterministic, at least in historical terms. But I will say that it is not unreasonable historically for elevated diplomatic actions -- in this case the creation of the OE -- to force the evacuation of troops.

Per the game as it stands now, I would accept the Turkish Move. He will have his hands full soon anyway, as some deft maneuvers will be in order for him to keep his gains/portion thereof.




_____________________________

"Crisis is the rallying cry of the tyrant" -- James Madison
"Yes, you will win most battles, but if you loose to me you will loose oh so badly that it causes me pain (chortle) just to think of it" - P. Khan

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)
Post #: 3
RE: Ottoman Empire 'quirk' - 2/1/2011 5:50:39 PM   
pzgndr

 

Posts: 2836
Joined: 3/18/2004
From: Maryland
Status: offline
This is that grey area where Turkey gained control of Triplotania, but it shouldn't really be officially considered Turkish unless and until a lapse of war or something gives Turkey full control? This has come up before, and becomes particularly awkward in cases like this. An option in the computer game is to allow the AI to control unattached minors while still in the neutral mode. Otherwise, perhaps consider a new setting to discriminate between different types of "control"?

(in reply to Mardonius)
Post #: 4
RE: Ottoman Empire 'quirk' - 2/27/2011 6:25:21 PM   
fw1206

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 9/5/2004
From: near Karlsruhe
Status: offline
Hi guys.
Turkey should actually not be able to create the Ottoman Empire.
Rule 12.8.3 says "...controls any six of these (all possible minor countries that the major power controls must be incorporated)".

DCWhitworth wrote that he controls (not matter how he gain control) Palestine, Syria, Egypt, Cyrenaica, Tripolitania and Algeria.
Ok, these minors are in "any six" but without TUNISIA only Palestine, Syria, Egypt, Cyrenaica, Tripolitania are incorporated.
So he should not be able to create . This means he's right, it is a bug, but not the way he thought. The bug is, that he is able to create the Ottoman Empire.
To create the Ottoman Empire you need at least Tunisia, Tripolitania, Cyrenaica and Egypt. Then you should control either Palestine and Algeria or Palestine and Syria or Morocco and Algeria. One of these 3 combinations you will need at least to create the Ottoman Empire.
If you control 7 minors including Tunisia, Tripolitania, Cyrenaica and Egypt at least 6 minors will be incorporated and if you control all 8 i think its clear and you can create the Ottoman Empire.

Greetings from Germany

(in reply to pzgndr)
Post #: 5
RE: Ottoman Empire 'quirk' - 2/27/2011 6:35:13 PM   
DCWhitworth


Posts: 676
Joined: 12/15/2007
From: Norwich, England
Status: offline
I see your point but I don't think there is anything in the rules to say all the minors must be contiguous.

_____________________________

Regards
David

(in reply to fw1206)
Post #: 6
RE: Ottoman Empire 'quirk' - 3/1/2011 12:17:53 PM   
Marshall Ellis


Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline
They do NOT have to be contiguous. That was never the planned implementation. We never played the board game that way either???
Anybody else?


_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games



(in reply to DCWhitworth)
Post #: 7
RE: Ottoman Empire 'quirk' - 3/1/2011 1:59:54 PM   
Mardonius


Posts: 654
Joined: 4/9/2007
From: London, UK
Status: offline
Nope

_____________________________

"Crisis is the rallying cry of the tyrant" -- James Madison
"Yes, you will win most battles, but if you loose to me you will loose oh so badly that it causes me pain (chortle) just to think of it" - P. Khan

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)
Post #: 8
RE: Ottoman Empire 'quirk' - 3/3/2011 12:13:26 AM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline
The person above misunderstands the use of the term incorporated. What the terms means in the rules he quotes are that you have to add (incorporate) the minor into the OE if you have it.

HOWEVER, I believe that pzngdr is correct. Turkey doesn't really "own", it just has "control". This is just another poor design implementation of the rules and not actually the rules.....

....so, in short, it's either 1) poor design if this was intentional or not thought of or 2) a bug if Marshall didn't intend it this way.

(in reply to Mardonius)
Post #: 9
RE: Ottoman Empire 'quirk' - 3/4/2011 1:23:23 PM   
Marshall Ellis


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

The person above misunderstands the use of the term incorporated. What the terms means in the rules he quotes are that you have to add (incorporate) the minor into the OE if you have it.

HOWEVER, I believe that pzngdr is correct. Turkey doesn't really "own", it just has "control". This is just another poor design implementation of the rules and not actually the rules.....

....so, in short, it's either 1) poor design if this was intentional or not thought of or 2) a bug if Marshall didn't intend it this way.


I thought this was implemented EXACTLY as EiA. Tell me where it strays again ???

_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games



(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 10
RE: Ottoman Empire 'quirk' - 3/5/2011 2:18:56 AM   
pzgndr

 

Posts: 2836
Joined: 3/18/2004
From: Maryland
Status: offline
My point was that if a MP gains random temporary control of a minor then it doesn't really control it until a lapse of war occurs, and then it could be considered fully controlled for things like creating kingdoms, etc. Alternatively, an influenced minor could be considered fully controlled by the influencing MP. The game could differentiate between temporary and full control and resolve the quirks?

Update. Thinking more on this. If "control" counts regardless and this is not likely to get changed in the game, then players need to understand these "quirks" that could happen. This puts more emphasis on minor country diplomacy for players to influence certain minors and/or deny their opponents from gaining influence. Maybe just a game feature for players to deal with?

< Message edited by pzgndr -- 3/5/2011 3:42:38 PM >

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)
Post #: 11
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815 >> Tech Support >> Ottoman Empire 'quirk' Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.137