Rule dispute

[ForGrandFenwick]

My ally and I are disputing whether if Unit A taps Unit B it cuts Unit C's support hold of Unit A. I argue that it does, they seem to be arguing that since Unit A does not move the hold goes through and they said they tested it on backstabber. I do not know what backstabber is or if it uses the same rules as this site. But while lying is part and parcel of this game, lying about the rules themselves seems unsportsmanlike. Of course it is also possible that one of us is simply wrong. Could we get a public ruling?

[Spartaculous]

My ally and I are disputing whether if Unit A taps Unit B it cuts Unit C's support hold of Unit A. I argue that it does, they seem to be arguing that since Unit A does not move the hold goes through and they said they tested it on backstabber. I do not know what backstabber is or if it uses the same rules as this site. But while lying is part and parcel of this game, lying about the rules themselves seems unsportsmanlike. Of course it is also possible that one of us is simply wrong. Could we get a public ruling?

If Unit A is ordered to move, then any support hold order of Unit A will fail.

[Ernst_Brenner]

They probably tested it on 'backstabbr' -- notice the missing 'e'.

Well, I shouldn't say that. They are probably claiming they tested it on backstabbr. I have no idea whether they did or not. You know diplomacy players, they're an unsavory lot.

[JECE]

My ally and I are disputing whether if Unit A taps Unit B it cuts Unit C's support hold of Unit A. I argue that it does, they seem to be arguing that since Unit A does not move the hold goes through and they said they tested it on backstabber. I do not know what backstabber is or if it uses the same rules as this site. But while lying is part and parcel of this game, lying about the rules themselves seems unsportsmanlike. Of course it is also possible that one of us is simply wrong. Could we get a public ruling?

If Unit A is ordered to move, then any support hold order of Unit A will fail.

This wasn't clear to me on my initial reading of the rules many years ago, but yes: a unit ordered to move, even if it fails to move, cannot receive any support hold.

If you have access to a computer, you can use this website to share a URL to the specific scenario that you are discussing with your ally:
http://gamesbyemail.com/Games/Politics/Judge

[David E. Cohen]

My ally and I are disputing whether if Unit A taps Unit B it cuts Unit C's support hold of Unit A. I argue that it does, they seem to be arguing that since Unit A does not move the hold goes through and they said they tested it on backstabber. I do not know what backstabber is or if it uses the same rules as this site. But while lying is part and parcel of this game, lying about the rules themselves seems unsportsmanlike. Of course it is also possible that one of us is simply wrong. Could we get a public ruling?

If Unit A is ordered to move, then any support hold order of Unit A will fail.

Not necessarily. The unit must have been ordered to make a LEGAL move, with legal meaning in conformity with the rules given the state of the map prior to adjudication.

So, A Sweden-Warsaw, A Sweden-Jupiter and A Sweden-Berlin (with no fleet olin the Baltic Sea) should all be adjudicated as Hold orders and A Sweden could receive support to hold.

[JECE]

My ally and I are disputing whether if Unit A taps Unit B it cuts Unit C's support hold of Unit A. I argue that it does, they seem to be arguing that since Unit A does not move the hold goes through and they said they tested it on backstabber. I do not know what backstabber is or if it uses the same rules as this site. But while lying is part and parcel of this game, lying about the rules themselves seems unsportsmanlike. Of course it is also possible that one of us is simply wrong. Could we get a public ruling?

If Unit A is ordered to move, then any support hold order of Unit A will fail.

Not necessarily. The unit must have been ordered to make a LEGAL move, with legal meaning in conformity with the rules given the state of the map prior to adjudication.

So, A Sweden-Warsaw, A Sweden-Jupiter and A Sweden-Berlin (with no fleet olin the Baltic Sea) should all be adjudicated as Hold orders and A Sweden could receive support to hold.

Well yes, but webDip doesn't let you order such illegal moves.

[VirtualBob]

Well yes, but webDip doesn't let you order such illegal moves.

True, though I do enjoy ordering odd convoys -- especially in Gunboat. A SWE->SPA (via ludicrously unlikely convoys in SKA, NTH, ENG, and MAO) are fun. But only when I do not need F BTH s A SWE H.