Stacking in Computer EiA

[yammahoper]

look under optional rules for the depot limitations (and many others).
 
yamma

[La Provence]

ORIGINAL: yammahoper@yahoo.com

look under optional rules for the depot limitations (and many others).

Where ?????
Is it possible to have a copy (or a file ?) of the totality of the optional rules ?
....perhaps a site with ?

[Montbrun]

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/eih/files/

[Monadman]

Update:

EiANW will now have a 30-counter per area section stack limitation (lifted from the previously mentioned 15-counter limitation).

Meanwhile, a restriction that limits the number of corps that can draw from a single depot will not be implemented due to the way that the supply function was originally coded.

Richard

[j-s]

ORIGINAL: Monadman

Update:

EiANW will now have a 30-counter per area section stack limitation (lifted from the previously mentioned 15-counter limitation).

Good!
That will help much but why to do that limit at all?

ORIGINAL: Monadman
Meanwhile, a restriction that limits the number of corps that can draw from a single depot will not be implemented due to the way that the supply function was originally coded.

Too bad.
That's one of the best optional rules in original game. If there is not that limit (4 corps/depot), it will make game a much easier. This can be added as an optional in update when it comes out, please?

[j-s]

We have had a face-to-face game going on in last few weeks. Every week there has been stacks about 18 corps + leaders (usually Charles).

I was wondering how big advantage this original idea of stacking limit is to France, becouse biggest stack that I had (I play France) was 14 corps, 1 debot and 5 leaders. In that time, Germans had a stack of 20 corps+leaders and I won that fight. France had 233 factors present and germans had 233 factors.

So please, no stacking limits.
(ok, that 30 would be better, but I still don't see a reason why to do this)

[oldtimer]

ORIGINAL: j-s

We have had a face-to-face game going on in last few weeks. Every week there has been stacks about 18 corps + leaders (usually Charles).

I was wondering how big advantage this original idea of stacking limit is to France, becouse biggest stack that I had (I play France) was 14 corps, 1 debot and 5 leaders. In that time, Germans had a stack of 20 corps+leaders and I won that fight. France had 233 factors present and germans had 233 factors.

So please, no stacking limits.
(ok, that 30 would be better, but I still don't see a reason why to do this)

Your own example answers your question. France wouldn't be able to have all that they did in the stack. You have 20 items stacked (5 ldrs, 1 depot, 14 corp) what 5 items wil you remove from your stack.

As for the coalition you said 20 corp + leaders what 5+ items are they to remove from their stack? Now there is no way for the coalition to have equal numbers or superior numbers so the coalition strategy of attrition pretty much goes out the door.

This is now a mute point since they raised it to 30 items in a stack as I have never seen that much in a stack ever.

Now on to Monadman's reply concerning the stacking being raised to 30 (thanks). As to unlimited depot supply while that is in line with the original rules I thank a future optional rule to change that to 4 corp per depot may need to be seriously looked at. That is one optional rule I have NEVER seen left out of a game. So I guess in truth I do not know how the boardgame would play without that rule. I thank it favors the French more because of their superior movement and without it it gives a BIG advantage to the coalition forces because it make HUGE stacks and supply lines MUCH easier.

I mean in winter 20 corp and 1 depot costs you $20 to supply. This makes winter combat very practical. With the optional rule you may be shelling out $20 to feed 12 corp and foraging with 8 corp. For a very costly loss of troops. Makes winter combat very expensive.

This changes strategy greatly because now winter can't be as readily used to spread corp, cut costs, and get a break from battle. This allows coalition forces to continually attack with the greater amount of income generated by the coalition forces. Spain and Turkey are typically a drain on the French Empire, whereas only Prussia is really the drain on the coalition forces. They will ave more money to operate with and force France to possibly forage more in winter due to lack of funds. This can actually balance the game greatly in favor of the coalition forces in forcing France to surrender unconditionally as their army can't survive through winter and the French can't recruit troops to save money.

Just a quick a dirty thought on a coalition strategy plan.

[oldtimer]

Geesh I just realized I contradict my own statement about the depot supply. In one case I say it favors the French (unlimited supply) then I turn around and give a strategy on how it favors the coalition.

That's what happens when you just sit down and type to fast.

I'll try to explain things a little clearer here:

PROS
1) Cheaper to launch campaigns
2) Really reduces need to forage

CONS
1) Enhances desire for "Monster Stacks" which everyone says they hate (makes them affordable)
2) Increases coalition ability to launch "Winter Campaigns" since they have far more money combined then the French and thus the French will have limited ability to rebuild over the Winter. They will need to greatly increase there reserve money to cover expenses over a winter campaign
3) Reduces need to forage. Yes this is also a con because it removes the decision of do I really want to move this many corp because I might lose 'X' number of troops due to poor forage rolls.

In the long run I think the unlimited supply from a depot favors the coalition forces simply because of the money. It makes "monster stacks" a much more common ideal simply because the coalition can really attrition the French player to death. Now if the French can really do a number in diplomacy they may be able to offset this, but they better spout sugar when they talk.

[Russian Guard]

While I find it interesting that this thread I started has led to a change in design (courtesy of all of the great input in the thread), I must say that I'm somewhat dismayed at the outcome [X(]

While I did find the limited stacking to significantly favor the French, the rules as now stated will greatly enable monster-stacks - exactly what I was hoping the game would discourage...

Ahh well...I'll buy this game anyway [:D]