The Editor and the Readership
For over a year this reply had been laying dormant in our inbox. Apologies for that, but please don't ever hold back to send us a reaction to any published article. The easiest way is still by e-mail to the Editor, clearly stating which article you're reacting on.
Without further ado…
In the Zine Fall 2018 Lucas Kruijswijk has an article about Convoy Paradoxes with some comments about my articles about the subject.
First I would like to say that if you keep the present rules, where a paradox may happen, I totally agree with Lucas that the best way of solving the paradox is to use Szykman's (reworded) rule:
If a situation aríses in which a convoy order results in a paradoxical adjudication, the turn is adjudicated as if the convoying fleet had been ordered to hold.
The purpose of my articles is to investigate, if it is possible to add a new general rule that prevent paradoxes to happen without unacceptable side effects. Lucas writes that my rule needs some rewording. He does not like the term 'possible' and wants it replaced with a reference to whether the convoying fleet is dislodged or not. I'll try:
If a convoying fleet is attacked, it is first determined if the convoying fleet is dislodged without taking the convoyed attack into consideration. If there are several attacks of this kind, this is determined for these convoys without any of these attacks included. Afterwards the attacks using the not dislodged convoying fleets are added, and the total adjudication is done.
The convoying attack ordered using a fleet that is dislodged stays as normally in its position, and it can not receive support to hold as it has been ordered to move. The attack using a not-dislodged fleet is carried out and may succeed or bounce according to the total situation.
In the latter case you have one of the side effects of my rule, that it is possible that the total adjudication results in that the convoying fleet is dislodged, after the convoyed attack has been made, "behind the army's back" so to speak. If the attacks succeeds you just keep the result, but if the attack bounces you have to decide if you should stick to the present rule and say that the attacking army is kept in its starting position, or - as I suggest - that since the convoying fleet is dislodged, the army can not get back and is destroyed. You have to decide what you prefer.
Another side effect is that if you have several convoyed attacks, it may happen that a convoying fleet is apparently dislodged preventing the attack, but the total adjudication results in that the fleet is not dislodged after all. You just have to accept that and keep the attacking army in its starting position, where it can not receive support to hold.