Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [wifdiscussion] Re: And why did they dig a canal?

Expand Messages
  • William Popovich
    There is a rule that says Suez is a port on both. although Suez is a coastal hex on the Red Sea, you can move naval units directly to Suez from the Eastern
    Message 1 of 20 , Mar 20, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      There is a rule that says Suez is a port on both.


      although Suez is a coastal hex on the Red Sea, you can move naval units
      directly to Suez from the Eastern Mediterranean and vice versa.
      There is no equivalent rule for Port Said.


      Suez is a port on both, but Port Said is only on the E Med.

      Land divides the two sea zones, and the canal itself is not part of either
      sea for determining anything including invasion hexes. (they are not all
      sea hexsides).

      Also,

      You can�t move naval units between the Eastern Mediterranean and the Red
      Sea, or between Suez and the Eastern Mediterranean, if a major power you
      are at war with controls any of the hexes adjacent to the Suez Canal.


      On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 3:29 PM, edfactor29 <edfactor29@...> wrote:

      > **
      >
      >
      > Why is there no line in the canal indicating where the East Med and Red
      > Sea meet? If there was a lin in the suez area it would be clear that the
      > suez was on both the East Mad and also the Red Sea. If there was a line in
      > the Port Said part of the canal it would be clear that Port Said was on
      > both the East Med and also the Red Sea.
      >
      > If you view the canal as part of the Red Sea, then it becomes clear why
      > the rules made an exception for Suez, it also becomes clear that Port Said
      > has access to the Red sea directly. If you view the canal as part of the
      > East Med then it is unclear as to why a rule was put in place to allow suez
      > access to the East Med when it would clearly have such access.
      >
      > Someone please ask them to put a simple line of demarcation on the map.
      >
      > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com, William Popovich <popovichwilliam@...>
      > wrote:
      > >
      > > No clarification is needed. The rule is clear, where there are exceptions
      > > they are noted. Port Said is no such exception.
      > >
      > > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 7:33 AM, Gratz, Herbert <herbert.gratz@
      > ...>wrote:
      > >
      > > > **
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > Well, as the rules specify an exception for Hamburg but not Port Said
      > the
      > > > situation is quite clear.
      > > > What you want is a rules change, not a clarification. But that is
      > > > legitimate too. You need Harry to rule it though.
      > > >
      > > > Von: wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com [mailto:
      > wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com]
      > > > Im Auftrag von kierhardie
      > > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 22. Mai 2012 13:20
      > > > An: wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com
      > > > Betreff: [wifdiscussion] Re: And why did they dig a canal?
      > > >
      > > > To be fair in real life Hamburg does not touch upon the North Sea. But
      > > > equally, it does not touch the North Sea on the WiF map either. In Wif
      > one
      > > > has to traverse a canalised section of the River Elbe, before you get
      > to
      > > > the coastal hexes. A European Hex is 100Km long and the Hamburg Port
      > is 110
      > > > Km from the coast, the Suez Canal is 163 Km long, just an extra couple
      > of
      > > > hours sailing. Equally the Suez and Port Said ports are actually built
      > > > adjacent to the Canal.
      > > >
      > > > What I am saying is that, if we accept the principle of the FAQ
      > > > clarification for Hamburg then we should accept that Port Said is
      > covered
      > > > by the same logic, either that or we need a formal clarification for
      > Port
      > > > Said also, because there is no arguable reason for one and not the
      > other.
      > > >
      > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
      > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, "Paul" <paul_wiffer@<mailto:
      > > > paul_wiffer@>> wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > The Port Said hex touches upon the Eastern Med. The Suez hex touches
      > > > upon the Red Sea. There is a special rule allowing ships based in Suez
      > to
      > > > enter the Eastern Med and count '1'. There is NO special rule for ships
      > > > based in Port Said to enter the Red Sea and count '1'.
      > > > >
      > > > > Hamburg's hex touches upon the North Sea and no other. There is a
      > > > clarification that Hamburg's hex is not a coastal hex, but it has a
      > port
      > > > symbol, so obviously it is an "inland port". There is no clarification
      > > > about Port Said's hex.
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
      > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, "kierhardie" <uk_cags@> wrote:
      > > > > >
      > > > > > The clarification is not about the location of the hex but the
      > > > location of the port "within" the hex.
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Therefore Port Said is actually on the Canal in exactly the same
      > way
      > > > as Suez is. QED my original point about Hamburg
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
      > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, William Popovich <popovichwilliam@>
      > > > wrote:
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > No. The location of the HEX is meaningful.
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 4:25 PM, kierhardie <uk_cags@> wrote:
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > **
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > I see that there are the exceptions of Kiel and Panama and Suez
      > > > but I do
      > > > > > > > not think Port Said needs a written exception, not just
      > because in
      > > > reality
      > > > > > > > Port Said is actually on the Canal and is the main Northern
      > Port -
      > > > Check it
      > > > > > > > out on Google Earth if you don't believe me! But much more
      > > > important than
      > > > > > > > real life... In the clarifications it says ref
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > "Q2.1-1 2.1.2 11.4.2 Map
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > Q1 : Is the location within a hex
      > > > > > > > meaningful for ports?
      > > > > > > > Q2 : Does it make any difference what
      > > > > > > > side of a Sea Area Border the Port is on?
      > > > > > > > Q1 : Only if there are breaks in accessible
      > > > > > > > coastline on the hex (e.g. Panama).
      > > > > > > > Q2 : No.
      > > > > > > > Date 07/03/2008
      > > > > > > > 11.4.2: When you move a unit out of a port, you must
      > > > > > > > spend its first point to move it into a surrounding sea
      > > > > > > > area (...).
      > > > > > > > 07/03/2008
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > Ref Point 1 If the location of the port is not meaningful for
      > the
      > > > hex.
      > > > > > > > Ergo, as the Port Said Hex includes the Canal then once you
      > leave
      > > > Port Said
      > > > > > > > you can either be in the E.Med Sea Area or directly onto the
      > canal
      > > > and thus
      > > > > > > > access the Red Sea" In the same way as when one leaves the
      > Hamburg
      > > > Port you
      > > > > > > > traverse the Canalised River to gain access to the North Sea
      > and
      > > > spend the
      > > > > > > > first point to enter it. So the same must apply to Port Said.
      > One
      > > > leaves
      > > > > > > > the port actually onto the canal and thus like Hamburg spends
      > the
      > > > first
      > > > > > > > Naval movement point in accessing the Red Sea. I am afraid I
      > > > cannot see any
      > > > > > > > Logical arguable dfference.
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > If one argues that Port Said is on the Mediterranean coast only
      > > > then the
      > > > > > > > Ports location is meaningful and that negates the
      > clarification to
      > > > Point 1.
      > > > > > > > Or if on the other hand one says a ship cannot access the canal
      > > > from the
      > > > > > > > Port Said Hex, then why can you access the North Sea from
      > inland
      > > > Hamburg?
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
      > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, "kierhardie" <uk_cags@> wrote:
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > Granted you cannot land troops in Port Said from the Red Sea,
      > > > but can
      > > > > > > > you sail ships straight from Port Said to the Red Sea?
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
      > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, "Patrice Forno" <froonp@> wrote:
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > Hello,
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > Port Said (hex 1203) is coastal to the Eastern Med only.
      > Not
      > > > to the
      > > > > > > > Red Sea.
      > > > > > > > > > Hex 1302 is Suez, and it is coastal to the Red Sea only,
      > not
      > > > the
      > > > > > > > Eastern
      > > > > > > > > > Med.
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > RAW 11.4.2 says :
      > > > > > > > > > "� although Suez is a coastal hex on the Red Sea, you can
      > move
      > > > naval
      > > > > > > > > > units directly to Suez from the Eastern Mediterranean and
      > vice
      > > > versa."
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > This is it.
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > So you can't land units in Port Said from the Red Sea.
      > > > > > > > > > You can't either land units in Suez from the Eastern Med.
      > You
      > > > can just
      > > > > > > > "move
      > > > > > > > > > naval units directly to Suez from the Eastern
      > Mediterranean",
      > > > not
      > > > > > > > unload
      > > > > > > > > > units from the Eastern Med to Suez.
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > Best Regards
      > > > > > > > > > Patrice
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > > > > > > > > From: "Herbert Gratz" <herbert.gratz@>
      > > > > > > > > > To: <wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
      > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>>
      > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 4:59 PM
      > > > > > > > > > Subject: [wifdiscussion] And why did they dig a canal?
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > I've had this one recently: opponent wants to land at
      > Port
      > > > Said from
      > > > > > > > the
      > > > > > > > > > > Red SEA claiming that 1302/1203 hexside is a coastal
      > hexside
      > > > > > > > bordering the
      > > > > > > > > > > Red Sea. Was I correct in nixing this operation?
      > > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      >
      >
      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Paul
      Right. There is zero need for a sea zone boundary when land separates two sea zones. The special rule for Suez is all you need to know.
      Message 2 of 20 , Mar 21, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Right. There is zero need for a sea zone boundary when land separates two sea zones. The special rule for Suez is all you need to know.



        --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com, William Popovich <popovichwilliam@...> wrote:
        >
        > There is a rule that says Suez is a port on both.
        >
        >
        > although Suez is a coastal hex on the Red Sea, you can move naval units
        > directly to Suez from the Eastern Mediterranean and vice versa.
        > There is no equivalent rule for Port Said.
        >
        >
        > Suez is a port on both, but Port Said is only on the E Med.
        >
        > Land divides the two sea zones, and the canal itself is not part of either
        > sea for determining anything including invasion hexes. (they are not all
        > sea hexsides).
        >
        > Also,
        >
        > You can't move naval units between the Eastern Mediterranean and the Red
        > Sea, or between Suez and the Eastern Mediterranean, if a major power you
        > are at war with controls any of the hexes adjacent to the Suez Canal.
        >
        >
        > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 3:29 PM, edfactor29 <edfactor29@...> wrote:
        >
        > > **
        > >
        > >
        > > Why is there no line in the canal indicating where the East Med and Red
        > > Sea meet? If there was a lin in the suez area it would be clear that the
        > > suez was on both the East Mad and also the Red Sea. If there was a line in
        > > the Port Said part of the canal it would be clear that Port Said was on
        > > both the East Med and also the Red Sea.
        > >
        > > If you view the canal as part of the Red Sea, then it becomes clear why
        > > the rules made an exception for Suez, it also becomes clear that Port Said
        > > has access to the Red sea directly. If you view the canal as part of the
        > > East Med then it is unclear as to why a rule was put in place to allow suez
        > > access to the East Med when it would clearly have such access.
        > >
        > > Someone please ask them to put a simple line of demarcation on the map.
        > >
        > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com, William Popovich <popovichwilliam@>
        > > wrote:
        > > >
        > > > No clarification is needed. The rule is clear, where there are exceptions
        > > > they are noted. Port Said is no such exception.
        > > >
        > > > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 7:33 AM, Gratz, Herbert <herbert.gratz@
        > > ...>wrote:
        > > >
        > > > > **
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > Well, as the rules specify an exception for Hamburg but not Port Said
        > > the
        > > > > situation is quite clear.
        > > > > What you want is a rules change, not a clarification. But that is
        > > > > legitimate too. You need Harry to rule it though.
        > > > >
        > > > > Von: wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com [mailto:
        > > wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com]
        > > > > Im Auftrag von kierhardie
        > > > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 22. Mai 2012 13:20
        > > > > An: wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com
        > > > > Betreff: [wifdiscussion] Re: And why did they dig a canal?
        > > > >
        > > > > To be fair in real life Hamburg does not touch upon the North Sea. But
        > > > > equally, it does not touch the North Sea on the WiF map either. In Wif
        > > one
        > > > > has to traverse a canalised section of the River Elbe, before you get
        > > to
        > > > > the coastal hexes. A European Hex is 100Km long and the Hamburg Port
        > > is 110
        > > > > Km from the coast, the Suez Canal is 163 Km long, just an extra couple
        > > of
        > > > > hours sailing. Equally the Suez and Port Said ports are actually built
        > > > > adjacent to the Canal.
        > > > >
        > > > > What I am saying is that, if we accept the principle of the FAQ
        > > > > clarification for Hamburg then we should accept that Port Said is
        > > covered
        > > > > by the same logic, either that or we need a formal clarification for
        > > Port
        > > > > Said also, because there is no arguable reason for one and not the
        > > other.
        > > > >
        > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
        > > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, "Paul" <paul_wiffer@<mailto:
        > > > > paul_wiffer@>> wrote:
        > > > > >
        > > > > > The Port Said hex touches upon the Eastern Med. The Suez hex touches
        > > > > upon the Red Sea. There is a special rule allowing ships based in Suez
        > > to
        > > > > enter the Eastern Med and count '1'. There is NO special rule for ships
        > > > > based in Port Said to enter the Red Sea and count '1'.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Hamburg's hex touches upon the North Sea and no other. There is a
        > > > > clarification that Hamburg's hex is not a coastal hex, but it has a
        > > port
        > > > > symbol, so obviously it is an "inland port". There is no clarification
        > > > > about Port Said's hex.
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
        > > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, "kierhardie" <uk_cags@> wrote:
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > The clarification is not about the location of the hex but the
        > > > > location of the port "within" the hex.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > Therefore Port Said is actually on the Canal in exactly the same
        > > way
        > > > > as Suez is. QED my original point about Hamburg
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
        > > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, William Popovich <popovichwilliam@>
        > > > > wrote:
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > No. The location of the HEX is meaningful.
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 4:25 PM, kierhardie <uk_cags@> wrote:
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > **
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > I see that there are the exceptions of Kiel and Panama and Suez
        > > > > but I do
        > > > > > > > > not think Port Said needs a written exception, not just
        > > because in
        > > > > reality
        > > > > > > > > Port Said is actually on the Canal and is the main Northern
        > > Port -
        > > > > Check it
        > > > > > > > > out on Google Earth if you don't believe me! But much more
        > > > > important than
        > > > > > > > > real life... In the clarifications it says ref
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > "Q2.1-1 2.1.2 11.4.2 Map
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > Q1 : Is the location within a hex
        > > > > > > > > meaningful for ports?
        > > > > > > > > Q2 : Does it make any difference what
        > > > > > > > > side of a Sea Area Border the Port is on?
        > > > > > > > > Q1 : Only if there are breaks in accessible
        > > > > > > > > coastline on the hex (e.g. Panama).
        > > > > > > > > Q2 : No.
        > > > > > > > > Date 07/03/2008
        > > > > > > > > 11.4.2: When you move a unit out of a port, you must
        > > > > > > > > spend its first point to move it into a surrounding sea
        > > > > > > > > area (...).
        > > > > > > > > 07/03/2008
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > Ref Point 1 If the location of the port is not meaningful for
        > > the
        > > > > hex.
        > > > > > > > > Ergo, as the Port Said Hex includes the Canal then once you
        > > leave
        > > > > Port Said
        > > > > > > > > you can either be in the E.Med Sea Area or directly onto the
        > > canal
        > > > > and thus
        > > > > > > > > access the Red Sea" In the same way as when one leaves the
        > > Hamburg
        > > > > Port you
        > > > > > > > > traverse the Canalised River to gain access to the North Sea
        > > and
        > > > > spend the
        > > > > > > > > first point to enter it. So the same must apply to Port Said.
        > > One
        > > > > leaves
        > > > > > > > > the port actually onto the canal and thus like Hamburg spends
        > > the
        > > > > first
        > > > > > > > > Naval movement point in accessing the Red Sea. I am afraid I
        > > > > cannot see any
        > > > > > > > > Logical arguable dfference.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > If one argues that Port Said is on the Mediterranean coast only
        > > > > then the
        > > > > > > > > Ports location is meaningful and that negates the
        > > clarification to
        > > > > Point 1.
        > > > > > > > > Or if on the other hand one says a ship cannot access the canal
        > > > > from the
        > > > > > > > > Port Said Hex, then why can you access the North Sea from
        > > inland
        > > > > Hamburg?
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
        > > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, "kierhardie" <uk_cags@> wrote:
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > Granted you cannot land troops in Port Said from the Red Sea,
        > > > > but can
        > > > > > > > > you sail ships straight from Port Said to the Red Sea?
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
        > > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, "Patrice Forno" <froonp@> wrote:
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > Hello,
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > Port Said (hex 1203) is coastal to the Eastern Med only.
        > > Not
        > > > > to the
        > > > > > > > > Red Sea.
        > > > > > > > > > > Hex 1302 is Suez, and it is coastal to the Red Sea only,
        > > not
        > > > > the
        > > > > > > > > Eastern
        > > > > > > > > > > Med.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > RAW 11.4.2 says :
        > > > > > > > > > > "ï although Suez is a coastal hex on the Red Sea, you can
        > > move
        > > > > naval
        > > > > > > > > > > units directly to Suez from the Eastern Mediterranean and
        > > vice
        > > > > versa."
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > This is it.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > So you can't land units in Port Said from the Red Sea.
        > > > > > > > > > > You can't either land units in Suez from the Eastern Med.
        > > You
        > > > > can just
        > > > > > > > > "move
        > > > > > > > > > > naval units directly to Suez from the Eastern
        > > Mediterranean",
        > > > > not
        > > > > > > > > unload
        > > > > > > > > > > units from the Eastern Med to Suez.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > Best Regards
        > > > > > > > > > > Patrice
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > > > > > > > > > From: "Herbert Gratz" <herbert.gratz@>
        > > > > > > > > > > To: <wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
        > > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>>
        > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 4:59 PM
        > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [wifdiscussion] And why did they dig a canal?
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > I've had this one recently: opponent wants to land at
        > > Port
        > > > > Said from
        > > > > > > > > the
        > > > > > > > > > > > Red SEA claiming that 1302/1203 hexside is a coastal
        > > hexside
        > > > > > > > > bordering the
        > > > > > > > > > > > Red Sea. Was I correct in nixing this operation?
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      • florent_wif
        Hello, I totally agree with you for the rules, but in the real life PS is as important as Suez for mouvements through Suez Canal (north and south convoys).
        Message 3 of 20 , Mar 21, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Hello,

          I totally agree with you for the rules, but in the real life PS is as important as Suez for mouvements through Suez Canal (north and south convoys).
          Today I play the rule as it's written but for me a change in the rule ( raw8? erratum? other?)can be a good thing.

          Flo

          --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com, "Paul" <paul_wiffer@...> wrote:
          >
          > Right. There is zero need for a sea zone boundary when land separates two sea zones. The special rule for Suez is all you need to know.
          >
          >
          >
          > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com, William Popovich <popovichwilliam@> wrote:
          > >
          > > There is a rule that says Suez is a port on both.
          > >
          > >
          > > although Suez is a coastal hex on the Red Sea, you can move naval units
          > > directly to Suez from the Eastern Mediterranean and vice versa.
          > > There is no equivalent rule for Port Said.
          > >
          > >
          > > Suez is a port on both, but Port Said is only on the E Med.
          > >
          > > Land divides the two sea zones, and the canal itself is not part of either
          > > sea for determining anything including invasion hexes. (they are not all
          > > sea hexsides).
          > >
          > > Also,
          > >
          > > You can't move naval units between the Eastern Mediterranean and the Red
          > > Sea, or between Suez and the Eastern Mediterranean, if a major power you
          > > are at war with controls any of the hexes adjacent to the Suez Canal.
          > >
          > >
          > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 3:29 PM, edfactor29 <edfactor29@> wrote:
          > >
          > > > **
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > Why is there no line in the canal indicating where the East Med and Red
          > > > Sea meet? If there was a lin in the suez area it would be clear that the
          > > > suez was on both the East Mad and also the Red Sea. If there was a line in
          > > > the Port Said part of the canal it would be clear that Port Said was on
          > > > both the East Med and also the Red Sea.
          > > >
          > > > If you view the canal as part of the Red Sea, then it becomes clear why
          > > > the rules made an exception for Suez, it also becomes clear that Port Said
          > > > has access to the Red sea directly. If you view the canal as part of the
          > > > East Med then it is unclear as to why a rule was put in place to allow suez
          > > > access to the East Med when it would clearly have such access.
          > > >
          > > > Someone please ask them to put a simple line of demarcation on the map.
          > > >
          > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com, William Popovich <popovichwilliam@>
          > > > wrote:
          > > > >
          > > > > No clarification is needed. The rule is clear, where there are exceptions
          > > > > they are noted. Port Said is no such exception.
          > > > >
          > > > > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 7:33 AM, Gratz, Herbert <herbert.gratz@
          > > > ...>wrote:
          > > > >
          > > > > > **
          > > > > >
          > > > > >
          > > > > > Well, as the rules specify an exception for Hamburg but not Port Said
          > > > the
          > > > > > situation is quite clear.
          > > > > > What you want is a rules change, not a clarification. But that is
          > > > > > legitimate too. You need Harry to rule it though.
          > > > > >
          > > > > > Von: wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com [mailto:
          > > > wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com]
          > > > > > Im Auftrag von kierhardie
          > > > > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 22. Mai 2012 13:20
          > > > > > An: wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com
          > > > > > Betreff: [wifdiscussion] Re: And why did they dig a canal?
          > > > > >
          > > > > > To be fair in real life Hamburg does not touch upon the North Sea. But
          > > > > > equally, it does not touch the North Sea on the WiF map either. In Wif
          > > > one
          > > > > > has to traverse a canalised section of the River Elbe, before you get
          > > > to
          > > > > > the coastal hexes. A European Hex is 100Km long and the Hamburg Port
          > > > is 110
          > > > > > Km from the coast, the Suez Canal is 163 Km long, just an extra couple
          > > > of
          > > > > > hours sailing. Equally the Suez and Port Said ports are actually built
          > > > > > adjacent to the Canal.
          > > > > >
          > > > > > What I am saying is that, if we accept the principle of the FAQ
          > > > > > clarification for Hamburg then we should accept that Port Said is
          > > > covered
          > > > > > by the same logic, either that or we need a formal clarification for
          > > > Port
          > > > > > Said also, because there is no arguable reason for one and not the
          > > > other.
          > > > > >
          > > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
          > > > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, "Paul" <paul_wiffer@<mailto:
          > > > > > paul_wiffer@>> wrote:
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > The Port Said hex touches upon the Eastern Med. The Suez hex touches
          > > > > > upon the Red Sea. There is a special rule allowing ships based in Suez
          > > > to
          > > > > > enter the Eastern Med and count '1'. There is NO special rule for ships
          > > > > > based in Port Said to enter the Red Sea and count '1'.
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > Hamburg's hex touches upon the North Sea and no other. There is a
          > > > > > clarification that Hamburg's hex is not a coastal hex, but it has a
          > > > port
          > > > > > symbol, so obviously it is an "inland port". There is no clarification
          > > > > > about Port Said's hex.
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
          > > > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, "kierhardie" <uk_cags@> wrote:
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > The clarification is not about the location of the hex but the
          > > > > > location of the port "within" the hex.
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > Therefore Port Said is actually on the Canal in exactly the same
          > > > way
          > > > > > as Suez is. QED my original point about Hamburg
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
          > > > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, William Popovich <popovichwilliam@>
          > > > > > wrote:
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > No. The location of the HEX is meaningful.
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 4:25 PM, kierhardie <uk_cags@> wrote:
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > **
          > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > I see that there are the exceptions of Kiel and Panama and Suez
          > > > > > but I do
          > > > > > > > > > not think Port Said needs a written exception, not just
          > > > because in
          > > > > > reality
          > > > > > > > > > Port Said is actually on the Canal and is the main Northern
          > > > Port -
          > > > > > Check it
          > > > > > > > > > out on Google Earth if you don't believe me! But much more
          > > > > > important than
          > > > > > > > > > real life... In the clarifications it says ref
          > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > "Q2.1-1 2.1.2 11.4.2 Map
          > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > Q1 : Is the location within a hex
          > > > > > > > > > meaningful for ports?
          > > > > > > > > > Q2 : Does it make any difference what
          > > > > > > > > > side of a Sea Area Border the Port is on?
          > > > > > > > > > Q1 : Only if there are breaks in accessible
          > > > > > > > > > coastline on the hex (e.g. Panama).
          > > > > > > > > > Q2 : No.
          > > > > > > > > > Date 07/03/2008
          > > > > > > > > > 11.4.2: When you move a unit out of a port, you must
          > > > > > > > > > spend its first point to move it into a surrounding sea
          > > > > > > > > > area (...).
          > > > > > > > > > 07/03/2008
          > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > Ref Point 1 If the location of the port is not meaningful for
          > > > the
          > > > > > hex.
          > > > > > > > > > Ergo, as the Port Said Hex includes the Canal then once you
          > > > leave
          > > > > > Port Said
          > > > > > > > > > you can either be in the E.Med Sea Area or directly onto the
          > > > canal
          > > > > > and thus
          > > > > > > > > > access the Red Sea" In the same way as when one leaves the
          > > > Hamburg
          > > > > > Port you
          > > > > > > > > > traverse the Canalised River to gain access to the North Sea
          > > > and
          > > > > > spend the
          > > > > > > > > > first point to enter it. So the same must apply to Port Said.
          > > > One
          > > > > > leaves
          > > > > > > > > > the port actually onto the canal and thus like Hamburg spends
          > > > the
          > > > > > first
          > > > > > > > > > Naval movement point in accessing the Red Sea. I am afraid I
          > > > > > cannot see any
          > > > > > > > > > Logical arguable dfference.
          > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > If one argues that Port Said is on the Mediterranean coast only
          > > > > > then the
          > > > > > > > > > Ports location is meaningful and that negates the
          > > > clarification to
          > > > > > Point 1.
          > > > > > > > > > Or if on the other hand one says a ship cannot access the canal
          > > > > > from the
          > > > > > > > > > Port Said Hex, then why can you access the North Sea from
          > > > inland
          > > > > > Hamburg?
          > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
          > > > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, "kierhardie" <uk_cags@> wrote:
          > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > Granted you cannot land troops in Port Said from the Red Sea,
          > > > > > but can
          > > > > > > > > > you sail ships straight from Port Said to the Red Sea?
          > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
          > > > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, "Patrice Forno" <froonp@> wrote:
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > Hello,
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > Port Said (hex 1203) is coastal to the Eastern Med only.
          > > > Not
          > > > > > to the
          > > > > > > > > > Red Sea.
          > > > > > > > > > > > Hex 1302 is Suez, and it is coastal to the Red Sea only,
          > > > not
          > > > > > the
          > > > > > > > > > Eastern
          > > > > > > > > > > > Med.
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > RAW 11.4.2 says :
          > > > > > > > > > > > "ï although Suez is a coastal hex on the Red Sea, you can
          > > > move
          > > > > > naval
          > > > > > > > > > > > units directly to Suez from the Eastern Mediterranean and
          > > > vice
          > > > > > versa."
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > This is it.
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > So you can't land units in Port Said from the Red Sea.
          > > > > > > > > > > > You can't either land units in Suez from the Eastern Med.
          > > > You
          > > > > > can just
          > > > > > > > > > "move
          > > > > > > > > > > > naval units directly to Suez from the Eastern
          > > > Mediterranean",
          > > > > > not
          > > > > > > > > > unload
          > > > > > > > > > > > units from the Eastern Med to Suez.
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > Best Regards
          > > > > > > > > > > > Patrice
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
          > > > > > > > > > > > From: "Herbert Gratz" <herbert.gratz@>
          > > > > > > > > > > > To: <wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
          > > > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>>
          > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 4:59 PM
          > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [wifdiscussion] And why did they dig a canal?
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > > I've had this one recently: opponent wants to land at
          > > > Port
          > > > > > Said from
          > > > > > > > > > the
          > > > > > > > > > > > > Red SEA claiming that 1302/1203 hexside is a coastal
          > > > hexside
          > > > > > > > > > bordering the
          > > > > > > > > > > > > Red Sea. Was I correct in nixing this operation?
          > > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > >
          > > > > >
          > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > > > > >
          > > > > >
          > > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > >
          > >
          > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > >
          >
        • William Popovich
          And they can use the Suez to move through.. They just wind up in a lower box because they have to expose themselves in the E Med on the way. ... [Non-text
          Message 4 of 20 , Mar 21, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            And they can use the Suez to move through.. They just wind up in a lower
            box because they have to expose themselves in the E Med on the way.

            On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 10:49 AM, florent_wif <wif-florent@...> wrote:

            > **
            >
            >
            > Hello,
            >
            > I totally agree with you for the rules, but in the real life PS is as
            > important as Suez for mouvements through Suez Canal (north and south
            > convoys).
            > Today I play the rule as it's written but for me a change in the rule (
            > raw8? erratum? other?)can be a good thing.
            >
            > Flo
            >
            > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com, "Paul" <paul_wiffer@...> wrote:
            > >
            > > Right. There is zero need for a sea zone boundary when land separates
            > two sea zones. The special rule for Suez is all you need to know.
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com, William Popovich <popovichwilliam@>
            > wrote:
            > > >
            > > > There is a rule that says Suez is a port on both.
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > although Suez is a coastal hex on the Red Sea, you can move naval units
            > > > directly to Suez from the Eastern Mediterranean and vice versa.
            > > > There is no equivalent rule for Port Said.
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > Suez is a port on both, but Port Said is only on the E Med.
            > > >
            > > > Land divides the two sea zones, and the canal itself is not part of
            > either
            > > > sea for determining anything including invasion hexes. (they are not
            > all
            > > > sea hexsides).
            > > >
            > > > Also,
            > > >
            > > > You can't move naval units between the Eastern Mediterranean and the
            > Red
            > > > Sea, or between Suez and the Eastern Mediterranean, if a major power
            > you
            > > > are at war with controls any of the hexes adjacent to the Suez Canal.
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 3:29 PM, edfactor29 <edfactor29@> wrote:
            > > >
            > > > > **
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > Why is there no line in the canal indicating where the East Med and
            > Red
            > > > > Sea meet? If there was a lin in the suez area it would be clear that
            > the
            > > > > suez was on both the East Mad and also the Red Sea. If there was a
            > line in
            > > > > the Port Said part of the canal it would be clear that Port Said was
            > on
            > > > > both the East Med and also the Red Sea.
            > > > >
            > > > > If you view the canal as part of the Red Sea, then it becomes clear
            > why
            > > > > the rules made an exception for Suez, it also becomes clear that
            > Port Said
            > > > > has access to the Red sea directly. If you view the canal as part of
            > the
            > > > > East Med then it is unclear as to why a rule was put in place to
            > allow suez
            > > > > access to the East Med when it would clearly have such access.
            > > > >
            > > > > Someone please ask them to put a simple line of demarcation on the
            > map.
            > > > >
            > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com, William Popovich
            > <popovichwilliam@>
            > > > > wrote:
            > > > > >
            > > > > > No clarification is needed. The rule is clear, where there are
            > exceptions
            > > > > > they are noted. Port Said is no such exception.
            > > > > >
            > > > > > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 7:33 AM, Gratz, Herbert <herbert.gratz@
            > > > > ...>wrote:
            > > > > >
            > > > > > > **
            > > > > > >
            > > > > > >
            > > > > > > Well, as the rules specify an exception for Hamburg but not Port
            > Said
            > > > > the
            > > > > > > situation is quite clear.
            > > > > > > What you want is a rules change, not a clarification. But that is
            > > > > > > legitimate too. You need Harry to rule it though.
            > > > > > >
            > > > > > > Von: wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com [mailto:
            > > > > wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com]
            > > > > > > Im Auftrag von kierhardie
            > > > > > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 22. Mai 2012 13:20
            > > > > > > An: wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com
            > > > > > > Betreff: [wifdiscussion] Re: And why did they dig a canal?
            > > > > > >
            > > > > > > To be fair in real life Hamburg does not touch upon the North
            > Sea. But
            > > > > > > equally, it does not touch the North Sea on the WiF map either.
            > In Wif
            > > > > one
            > > > > > > has to traverse a canalised section of the River Elbe, before
            > you get
            > > > > to
            > > > > > > the coastal hexes. A European Hex is 100Km long and the Hamburg
            > Port
            > > > > is 110
            > > > > > > Km from the coast, the Suez Canal is 163 Km long, just an extra
            > couple
            > > > > of
            > > > > > > hours sailing. Equally the Suez and Port Said ports are actually
            > built
            > > > > > > adjacent to the Canal.
            > > > > > >
            > > > > > > What I am saying is that, if we accept the principle of the FAQ
            > > > > > > clarification for Hamburg then we should accept that Port Said is
            > > > > covered
            > > > > > > by the same logic, either that or we need a formal clarification
            > for
            > > > > Port
            > > > > > > Said also, because there is no arguable reason for one and not
            > the
            > > > > other.
            > > > > > >
            > > > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
            > > > > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, "Paul" <paul_wiffer@<mailto:
            > > > > > > paul_wiffer@>> wrote:
            > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > The Port Said hex touches upon the Eastern Med. The Suez hex
            > touches
            > > > > > > upon the Red Sea. There is a special rule allowing ships based
            > in Suez
            > > > > to
            > > > > > > enter the Eastern Med and count '1'. There is NO special rule
            > for ships
            > > > > > > based in Port Said to enter the Red Sea and count '1'.
            > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > Hamburg's hex touches upon the North Sea and no other. There
            > is a
            > > > > > > clarification that Hamburg's hex is not a coastal hex, but it
            > has a
            > > > > port
            > > > > > > symbol, so obviously it is an "inland port". There is no
            > clarification
            > > > > > > about Port Said's hex.
            > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
            > > > > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, "kierhardie" <uk_cags@> wrote:
            > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > The clarification is not about the location of the hex but
            > the
            > > > > > > location of the port "within" the hex.
            > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > Therefore Port Said is actually on the Canal in exactly the
            > same
            > > > > way
            > > > > > > as Suez is. QED my original point about Hamburg
            > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
            > > > > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, William Popovich
            > <popovichwilliam@>
            > > > > > > wrote:
            > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > No. The location of the HEX is meaningful.
            > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 4:25 PM, kierhardie <uk_cags@>
            > wrote:
            > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > **
            > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > I see that there are the exceptions of Kiel and Panama
            > and Suez
            > > > > > > but I do
            > > > > > > > > > > not think Port Said needs a written exception, not just
            > > > > because in
            > > > > > > reality
            > > > > > > > > > > Port Said is actually on the Canal and is the main
            > Northern
            > > > > Port -
            > > > > > > Check it
            > > > > > > > > > > out on Google Earth if you don't believe me! But much
            > more
            > > > > > > important than
            > > > > > > > > > > real life... In the clarifications it says ref
            > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > "Q2.1-1 2.1.2 11.4.2 Map
            > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > Q1 : Is the location within a hex
            > > > > > > > > > > meaningful for ports?
            > > > > > > > > > > Q2 : Does it make any difference what
            > > > > > > > > > > side of a Sea Area Border the Port is on?
            > > > > > > > > > > Q1 : Only if there are breaks in accessible
            > > > > > > > > > > coastline on the hex (e.g. Panama).
            > > > > > > > > > > Q2 : No.
            > > > > > > > > > > Date 07/03/2008
            > > > > > > > > > > 11.4.2: When you move a unit out of a port, you must
            > > > > > > > > > > spend its first point to move it into a surrounding sea
            > > > > > > > > > > area (...).
            > > > > > > > > > > 07/03/2008
            > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > Ref Point 1 If the location of the port is not
            > meaningful for
            > > > > the
            > > > > > > hex.
            > > > > > > > > > > Ergo, as the Port Said Hex includes the Canal then once
            > you
            > > > > leave
            > > > > > > Port Said
            > > > > > > > > > > you can either be in the E.Med Sea Area or directly onto
            > the
            > > > > canal
            > > > > > > and thus
            > > > > > > > > > > access the Red Sea" In the same way as when one leaves
            > the
            > > > > Hamburg
            > > > > > > Port you
            > > > > > > > > > > traverse the Canalised River to gain access to the North
            > Sea
            > > > > and
            > > > > > > spend the
            > > > > > > > > > > first point to enter it. So the same must apply to Port
            > Said.
            > > > > One
            > > > > > > leaves
            > > > > > > > > > > the port actually onto the canal and thus like Hamburg
            > spends
            > > > > the
            > > > > > > first
            > > > > > > > > > > Naval movement point in accessing the Red Sea. I am
            > afraid I
            > > > > > > cannot see any
            > > > > > > > > > > Logical arguable dfference.
            > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > If one argues that Port Said is on the Mediterranean
            > coast only
            > > > > > > then the
            > > > > > > > > > > Ports location is meaningful and that negates the
            > > > > clarification to
            > > > > > > Point 1.
            > > > > > > > > > > Or if on the other hand one says a ship cannot access
            > the canal
            > > > > > > from the
            > > > > > > > > > > Port Said Hex, then why can you access the North Sea from
            > > > > inland
            > > > > > > Hamburg?
            > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
            > > > > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, "kierhardie" <uk_cags@> wrote:
            > > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > > Granted you cannot land troops in Port Said from the
            > Red Sea,
            > > > > > > but can
            > > > > > > > > > > you sail ships straight from Port Said to the Red Sea?
            > > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > > --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
            > > > > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>, "Patrice Forno" <froonp@>
            > wrote:
            > > > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello,
            > > > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > > > Port Said (hex 1203) is coastal to the Eastern Med
            > only.
            > > > > Not
            > > > > > > to the
            > > > > > > > > > > Red Sea.
            > > > > > > > > > > > > Hex 1302 is Suez, and it is coastal to the Red Sea
            > only,
            > > > > not
            > > > > > > the
            > > > > > > > > > > Eastern
            > > > > > > > > > > > > Med.
            > > > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > > > RAW 11.4.2 says :
            > > > > > > > > > > > > "� although Suez is a coastal hex on the Red Sea,
            > you can
            > > > > move
            > > > > > > naval
            > > > > > > > > > > > > units directly to Suez from the Eastern
            > Mediterranean and
            > > > > vice
            > > > > > > versa."
            > > > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > > > This is it.
            > > > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > > > So you can't land units in Port Said from the Red
            > Sea.
            > > > > > > > > > > > > You can't either land units in Suez from the Eastern
            > Med.
            > > > > You
            > > > > > > can just
            > > > > > > > > > > "move
            > > > > > > > > > > > > naval units directly to Suez from the Eastern
            > > > > Mediterranean",
            > > > > > > not
            > > > > > > > > > > unload
            > > > > > > > > > > > > units from the Eastern Med to Suez.
            > > > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > > > Best Regards
            > > > > > > > > > > > > Patrice
            > > > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
            > > > > > > > > > > > > From: "Herbert Gratz" <herbert.gratz@>
            > > > > > > > > > > > > To: <wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com<mailto:
            > > > > > > wifdiscussion%40yahoogroups.com>>
            > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 4:59 PM
            > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [wifdiscussion] And why did they dig a
            > canal?
            > > > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've had this one recently: opponent wants to land
            > at
            > > > > Port
            > > > > > > Said from
            > > > > > > > > > > the
            > > > > > > > > > > > > > Red SEA claiming that 1302/1203 hexside is a
            > coastal
            > > > > hexside
            > > > > > > > > > > bordering the
            > > > > > > > > > > > > > Red Sea. Was I correct in nixing this operation?
            > > > > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            > > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > > >
            > > > > > > >
            > > > > > >
            > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            > > > > > >
            > > > > > >
            > > > > > >
            > > > > >
            > > > > >
            > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            > > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            > > >
            > >
            >
            >
            >


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.