Slitherine

I am STATE1 at war with STATE2. It should be noted that STATE2 is also at war with STATE3. STATE3 is neutral with STATE1.

There three cases.

STATE1 can march upon REGION (owned and controlled by STATE2). --- I assume TRUE.

STATE1 can march upon REGION (owned by STATE3 and controlled by STATE2). T/F?

STATE1 can march upon REGION (owned by STATE2 and controlled by STATE3). T/F?

Thank you.

PS: This does not even consider yet other third parties, diplomatic arrangements, and then diplomatic agreements which occur in the turn, but I was trying to keep this simple. This is important to me, since it determines whether I will get to form my province or not and enact imperial legions.

What matters is the de facto controller for passage right, not the de jure one.

So cases 1 and 2 are true, 3 is not.

In case 2 if STATE1 wins over STATE2 then STATE1 will control the region owned by STATE3.

Will that region be part of a peace treaty with STATE2 or STATE3 or?

It should return to state 3.

And the army of STATE1 would be repelled from that region I guess (because STATE1 and 3 are neutral to each other). Nice thanks for helping out...

I can't think of a good in game solution for 3 to show gratitude to 1 - maybe it could trigger a free 'gift' event if you liberate a region for another nation.

Pocus wrote: ↑Fri Jul 24, 2020 2:45 pm It should return to state 3.

Pocus, are you sure about this? Recently, I was Persia, at war with Thracia, who was at war with Macedon. I have no relations with Macedon.

Thracia occupies Epidamnia (Epirus), and it is hatched, so originally it belongs to Macedon. I take over the rest of Thracia, and Thracia is still alive. I enter and conquer Epidamnia, Thracia finally dies, I own everything. Epidamnia is not returned to Macedon.

Well, it is not only the static state that results in head scratching, but the sequence in which diplomatic proposals are processed and battle resolutions.

Especially some of Empires wars remind me of the "Demolition Derby" as a kid (for those who don't know that bit of US history, just think of the term "free for all" in English). So, all I can say, it is confusing. As best as I understand it:

(1) If I can enter a region during a turn and military hold the region when the last line of turn code is processed, then it is mine.

(2) So, the move command provides an effective test of how the UN circa 300 BCE would rule on the situation.

I will give just one example the non-intuitive rules. Barbarians seize my region. I do not know if they were indigenous or came from the neighboring region. In any case, they win and my region is owned by savages.

Next turn, I order the Roman Home Guard in to restore order. It is a long move which requires 2 turns of marching. Well, what do you expect from Roman legionaries and not Mongol horsemen?

By the next turn, the barbarians seeing how much trouble they are in join a neighboring state. By Empire rules, I cannot march upon this state without a declaration of war. But the prior march order still stands.

I got my region back, but the Senate is still debating the legality of my General's actions! This is why Roman generals lead from the front ... it reduces debate.

---

For Pocus ... when I was with Panther and whenever such an issues came up for Dave O'Connor he would not try to formulate an answer. He would simply post 100 lines of C code to the forums. Because, as we all know, all of life's mysteries can be reduced to 100 lines of C.