Turkish fleet in * Constantinople*

The black sea can support a move from Constantinople to Bulgaria, north and south coast. That's the rules on this site and that is the rule in the official rules.
Have I missed the point of what you saying?

Would be logical, but isn't how the rules read. Support is given to the territory, not the specific coast. This site follows the rules to the letter.

He's saying that Russia should be allowed to pick which coast to support the move to.

Likewise a fleet in Bot can support Bar-StP.

I think the support is into the territory, rather than a specific coast. After all, a fleet in Gulf of Bothnia can support a fleet in Barents into St P (nc), even though it cannot physically move to that particular coastline.

Therefore, the Russian is supporting the Turk into Bulgaria - it's up to the Turk to decide where the fleet ends up (nc or sc).

Well its irrelevant for Russia as the coast doesn't matter (to be clear we are talking about a Russian fleet in the black sea issuing support Con-Bul) .

yeah like Pete U said

I know what the rules ARE, I'm asking what they SHOULD BE. :-P

Like I said, It's a rules debate, not a question. :-P

I'd argue the support should be to the coast, not the territory...

You confused me when you said the in some interpretations of the rules the support is valid while in others it is not. I have not come across the alternate ruling before. Where have you seen this?
Btw I am fine with the rules as it stands. While fleets may only enter or exit a territory with two coast from a certain coast, they still occupy the entire territory. If you may move to a territory you may support a move to it. I can't see a benefit to changing this rule. If we changed this rule it would weaken the power of fleets considerably.

The rules as they stand work fine and should not be changed.

I read it somewhere... I forget where. I think Black support Con > Bul (sc), Con > Bul (nc) should be an invalid support order though...

rlumly you're being a little ambiguous. Do you mean:
Is an invalid support order or should be an invalid support order?
As the official rules stand the order is valid.

This is what the rules say:

A Fleet that can move to a province with two separate coasts (a Fleet in the Mid-Atlantic, for example) can support another Army or Fleet into that province (in this case Spain), without regard to separate coastlines.

Ahhh!!! I know the rules. I meant what I said. I know that it is a valid order, and I think the rules should be changed. :-)

I know but you said "I read it somewhere"... that sounds like some kind of official endorsement. That is what I am finding ambiguous about your question. Just like early you said "under some interpretations". No matter... now we know where you stand.
Why do you think the rules should be changed. How will this improve game play?

Russia obviously wouldn't support a move when it's clear that move would be a stab... It's only logical.

You've lost me again rlumley, and you haven't answered my question.
And remember this doesn't just affect Russia and Turkey it affects any power that happens to control those territories (and that may change throughout the course of the game), and it does just affect Bul. It also affects StP and Spain.
How will changing this rule improve game play.

typo... *doesn't just affect Bul.

I thought I had... Obviously we're having a miscommunication.

Suppose Russia has reached an agreement with Turkey where he will support him into Bulgaria so that Turkey can go after Austria, who controls Bulgaria. If Turkey wanted to stab Russia, he could move to the NC of Bulgaria and go after Russia instead. Russia would then obviously not want to support this move, but under the rules, he has to.

Does that clarify it?

This isn't miss-communication but plain stupidity.

Thanks hellalt. :-)

What rlumley means is that a unit (ANY UNIT) supporting a fleet into a coasted land space (such as Bulgaria) should CLARIFY to wich coast the supported unit is moving into.

So, if I have an army in Mairselles and I want to support a fleet into Spain, I issue a support into Spain (NC), and if the fleet moves to the South coast, endangering Mairselles, the support is not valid (as if he had moved to a different country).

I'd just like to point out that StP doesn't really come into the conversation here since a fleet never has a choice of which coast it is moving to, so the supporter should (barring supreme idiocy) never be surprised by the coast of choice. Spain does still come into the conversation because a fleet moving from either MAO or Por could choose a coast that a supporting unit (in say, Marseilles) had no interest in helping it towards.

That said, the rules are what they are, and it's a risk you run when supporting fleets into these provinces... I'd tend to lean towards leaving it in place - if support is offered to the coast, then can a fleet still reasonably support the dislodgement of an army? Can a fleet in Gascony still support MAO->Spa(sc)? Much better as is. Just don't support a fleet into Bulgaria at all and you're fine ;)

Exactly Xapi. :-)

@ Selquest: Yes, a fleet in Gascony can support to Spain SC, which I also think is wrong, but not as bad.

There are two different issues.

The first issue is whether Black Sea should be capable to support to Bulgaria SC. The answer is yes. You might want to change that, but it won't change, because it would break with long history of Diplomacy. This has always been possible.

The second issue, is whether coast must be specified in a support order. This is disputed. The rules are not entirely clear. The rules say that the support is to a province, but it also says that a support order "must match". Clearly, without coast,
it doesn't match. The opinions are 50/50 on this issue. It is the most serious flaw in the rules. First, it is a real issue, it happens in games (not often, but it happens, it is not theoretical) and second there is no majority between the games for either side.

Lucas

Aaahh... now I get it. Sorry it was almost 3 am for me last night when I was reading your post, rlumley. I must have been over tired.
If the rule had been presented to me as you have suggested as "the rules" when I first started playing, I would have accepted it without question. As it happens I have accepted the actual rules without question too. I don't think I have played Russia or Turkey enough to have ever to ever think about, but now that you have brought it up I can during a game this thought could cross a players mind.
I think I prefer the rules as they are. The the supporting unit just gets to specify the territory. Which coast the moving unit chooses is its decision. This is simpler, and that is why it is better.