Rule Problem 17: Convoy attack against a unit of same nationality as convoyed fleet

[David E. Cohen]

If a player convoys another player's unit to a space occupied by one of the convoying player's units, the convoyed unit will

Alternative A: not succeed in dislodging or cutting support being given by the unit being attacked.

Alternative B: not succeed in dislodging the unit being attacked, but will succeed in cutting the support being given by the unit being attacked if it is otherwise allowed to do so.

Alternative C: succeed in dislodging the unit being attacked if it has received enough valid support to do so, and will succeed in cutting the support being given by the unit being attacked if it is otherwise allowed to do so.

[Edi Birsan]

You can not dislodge your own units or cut your own support.

[David E. Cohen]

You can not dislodge your own units or cut your own support.Quite true, Edi, but perhaps not relevant to the question posed, since here the unit is convoying, not dislodging or cutting support.

[RuHurt]

I'd have to say that, since convoying is an integral part of the attack, it would qualify as an attempt at dislodgment, and would result in a bounce (or whatever the rules for dislodging one's own units say).

[David E. Cohen]

I'd have to say that, since convoying is an integral part of the attack, it would qualify as an attempt at dislodgment, and would result in a bounce (or whatever the rules for dislodging one's own units say).Is it an integral part of the attack? Unlike support, it adds no strength to the attack. And as Edi inadvertently pointed out, the rulebook does not cover this directly, speaking only of dislodging or cutting support.

[GROGnads]

This bears having to specifically point out which Unit is conducting which action. A 'Convoyed' Unit could be the one making the 'Attack' to either dislodge or cut the support of another Unit, while the 'Convoying' Unit is still going to 'Convoy' unless it is 'Attacked' and/or dislodged, in which case, it will not allow the 'Convoying' to occur. Even if the 'Attack' involves a Unit from the player providing the 'Convoying' Unit, it's still going to take place, unless the previously mentioned action occurs.

To clarify further from the 'O'riginal inquiry:
A-This depends on the amount of Support the Attacking Unit has into the Attacked Area. At the very least, it does 'CUT' any Support that the 'Attacked' Unit is providing.
B-Same as before with ONLY the 'one' consideration, that is it DOES 'Cut' the Support that the Attacked Unit is providing.
C- If the Attacked Unit is dislodged, then any Support it was providing is 'Cut'.

The 'Convoying' does not even have to result in ANY Attacks by the 'Convoyed' unit.

[msjells]

I would treat this like one of the player's own units moving into this space - in other words, the move would only succeed if the existing piece moved out of the space, and otherwise I'd go with Edi's interpretation.

Who loses track of things so badly that they convoy someone else's piece to a space where they have a unit giving support, anyway? I think this is more of a theoretical problem than an actual one. I suppose one might "accidentally" write this type of bad orders, but I've never seen this situation come up.

[David E. Cohen]

I would treat this like one of the player's own units moving into this space - in other words, the move would only succeed if the existing piece moved out of the space, and otherwise I'd go with Edi's interpretation.

Who loses track of things so badly that they convoy someone else's piece to a space where they have a unit giving support, anyway? I think this is more of a theoretical problem than an actual one. I suppose one might "accidentally" write this type of bad orders, but I've never seen this situation come up.

I can think of several scenarios where this could come in handy. For example, this could be used to swap dots, or to force a disband.

[msjells]

I can agree to the extent that one might wish to see that unit out of there, but if that's the case why is it being given a support order? About the only thing I can think of would be the limited case where you half-expect a stab, and you're writing a support order that stabs the person you're convoying if he doesn't write the convoy move. It just seems like there ought to be something better that you could do with a unit than issue a support that you yourself expect to help cut. Are you playing Devil's Advocate or do you actively support solution C?

[David E. Cohen]

Perhaps an example is in order. Here is one where the players are arranging a dot swap.

France:
A Nap-Tun
F NAf-Supports A Nap-Tun

Austria:
F Ion-Convoys A Nap-Tun
A Tun Holds
A Rom-Nap

The rules are silent about this, and there is certainly nothing in the rules which explicitly forbids the interpretation in Alternative C. Whether it *should* be permitted is another question, but as of right now, some people (and, from what I understand, some adjudication programs) permit it, because it is not forbidden by the rules. With regard to your thought on question, I think that logically it should be all one way or the other. If dislodgement is permitted, support cutting should be permitted as well, and if dislodgement is forbidden, support-cutting should be forbidden, too.

[msjells]

Well, I can see your point about the loophole in the rules, and I fully agree with your last sentence. To my mind, the prohibition against dislodging one's own units is an easy stepping stone to not be able to convoy an opponent against yourself (I know it's a VERY abstract simulation, but can you imagine the British Navy convoying a German army to attack Dover??), and I wouldn't allow either dislodgement or support cutting.