Hope that makes sense.
My instinct says no but I have been known to be wrong... once..!
Can a convoyed army cut support aimed at the convoy
Forum rules
This is an area for new members or members looking for help with the site or Diplomacy. Off topic threads and replies will be moved to the appropriate category.
This is an area for new members or members looking for help with the site or Diplomacy. Off topic threads and replies will be moved to the appropriate category.
-
- Posts: 682
- Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 4:15 pm
- Location: Michigan
- Contact:
Re: Can a convoyed army cut support aimed at the convoy
isn't that the diplomacy paradox? I don't remember how it's resolved though
Re: Can a convoyed army cut support aimed at the convoy
http://uk.diplom.org/pouch/Zine/F1999R/ ... radox.html
http://uk.diplom.org/pouch/Zine/F2018M/ ... n_won.html
The alternative resolution is to hold all affected units.
http://uk.diplom.org/pouch/Zine/F2018M/ ... n_won.html
The alternative resolution is to hold all affected units.
- Chaqa
- Bronze Donator
- Posts: 13697
- Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:33 pm
- Location: Allentown, PA, USA
- Contact:
Re: Can a convoyed army cut support aimed at the convoy
I kinda feel like in the situation they provide, the german fleet should take the channel.
Re: Can a convoyed army cut support aimed at the convoy
But that's the whole premise of the paradox.
Re: Can a convoyed army cut support aimed at the convoy
Here are our DATC tests on convoys: https://webdiplomacy.net/datc.php#section6
If you see 6.F.14 - TEST CASE, SIMPLE CONVOY PARADOX
It doesn't cut support, the original test case is here: http://web.inter.nl.net/users/L.B.Kruijswijk/#6.F.14
The justification is here: http://web.inter.nl.net/users/L.B.Kruijswijk/#4.A.2
It amounts to: The 2000 rulebook says "A convoyed Army does not cut the support of a unit supporting an attack against one of the fleets necessary for the army to convoy." but this is a bit vague, doesn't account for certain situations, and conflicts with other rules.
So the "Simon Szykman rule" is used, which gives the same results for the most part but isn't ambiguous or contradictory with other rules: "If a situation arises in which an army's convoy order results in a paradoxical adjudication, the moves of all involved convoying armies fail and have no effect on the place where they were ordered to convoy."
If you see 6.F.14 - TEST CASE, SIMPLE CONVOY PARADOX
It doesn't cut support, the original test case is here: http://web.inter.nl.net/users/L.B.Kruijswijk/#6.F.14
The justification is here: http://web.inter.nl.net/users/L.B.Kruijswijk/#4.A.2
It amounts to: The 2000 rulebook says "A convoyed Army does not cut the support of a unit supporting an attack against one of the fleets necessary for the army to convoy." but this is a bit vague, doesn't account for certain situations, and conflicts with other rules.
So the "Simon Szykman rule" is used, which gives the same results for the most part but isn't ambiguous or contradictory with other rules: "If a situation arises in which an army's convoy order results in a paradoxical adjudication, the moves of all involved convoying armies fail and have no effect on the place where they were ordered to convoy."
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users