Can a convoyed army cut support aimed at the convoy

[FxFocus]

Hope that makes sense.
My instinct says no but I have been known to be wrong... once..!

[DarthPorg36]

isn't that the diplomacy paradox? I don't remember how it's resolved though

[Ferdack]

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.

[Chaqa]

I kinda feel like in the situation they provide, the german fleet should take the channel.

[Ferdack]

I kinda feel like in the situation they provide, the german fleet should take the channel.

But that's the whole premise of the paradox.

[kestasjk]

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."