Because the German fleet moved from Sweden to Norway, the English fleet can't move to Sweden from Norway. Units can't swap locations, and the support makes Germany overpower England.

And two units moving are not the same as one unit supporting another unit's move.

Alright, thanks. I knew it worked, I just couldn't state why, and I thank you both.

SD, go here:
http://www.diplom.org/~diparch/resources/rulebooks/2000AH4th.pdf

Page 9, left hand column, just under diagram 12. "A dislodged unit, even with support, has no effect on the province that dislodged it."

I think he might have been wondering why 2 on 2 wasn't a stalemate, which it would have been had the German fleet in GoB not been German and had supported England's F Norway to Sweden.

No, Alderian had exactly the rule I wanted.

Thank you, Alderian. Again, where's my manners today.

Since the "you can't swap provinces" rule was mentioned, I'd like to qualify that:
You -can- swap provinces if one of the units moving is convoyed. I believe the specific example here was fleets, so obviously this rule doesn't apply, but I'm putting it here in case noobs read it.

To further clarify that, the rule states that the move can't affect the province that the dislodging attack is coming from, so, if there was a F Skag that was convoying an A Norway to Sweden and the rest of the moves were the same, would F Gulf of Bothnia still make it in? I'd say yes, since Norway is the source of the move, but just curious.

At first I was sure the answer would be yes. But then in looking through the DATC, there is a test where the attacker was convoyed and there was a bounce from where the attack came from.

http://www.webdiplomacy.net/datc.php#section7
Test 6.G.10

http://web.inter.nl.net/users/L.B.Kruijswijk/#6.G.10

Now I'm not sure for your example where the dislodged unit was the one being convoyed.

Ah, 6.G.14 appears to be the case where the dislodged unit was the one being convoyed. And it indicates a bounce will happen. Just a bit further down on that first page I linked.

How unexpected.

I can't imagine that ever coming in useful, but it's nice to know, thank you, Alderian.

i think the bounce is correct, but i don't know if/why the rules back me up...

alderian, where's the link?

Yes, of course. Fortknox is exactly right. You can swap if one of the swapping parties is an army and is convoyed.

6.G.14 is great, the rules aren't perfectly clear, because the convoy route is used....

i'm using that as a test of the rules today :)

What is the rule about convoy's and swapping with convoys? Perhaps the answer lies in that?

Sorry, working through my lacrosse rules book and back to my football rules for a summer clinic. Finding obtuse rules are a practiced thing for me, but I don't have the official dip rules handy.

No, this is very clear..... if Nwy was an army, and there was a fleet in ska, so:
Germany:
F Swe to Nwy
A STP S F Swe to Nw
F Bot to Swe.

England:
A Nwy to Swe
F Ska C A Nwy to Swe

Basically Swe and Nwy are 'switching' by convoy. Even though there are supports from swe-nwy, it is a switch:
F Swe-Nwy succeeds
A Nwy-Swe stands off with F Bot-Swe (this move still goes, because of the convoy 'switch' rule), but since Swe-Nwy had Stp support, A Nwy is displaced.
F Bot bounced with A Nwy and remains in Bot.

Make sense?

Wait... crap... I guess it doesn't (sorry, I should have looked at the test case, first). Maybe we should get someone like Edi to explain that??

I think it you use the 4.A.7 rule b interpretation, then G.6.14 should result in A Swe successfully landing in Nwy, because the power of three on the power of two from Norwegian... Sorry for the multiple continuous postings...

Sorry, here's an interpretation where it looks like Kestas got his DATC from... and his interpretation to the rules still doesn't fly with me... still seems like Nwy should succeed...

Forgot the link:
http://web.inter.nl.net/users/L.B.Kruijswijk/#4.A.7

I'm bumping this to see if anyone has good insight on this... or at least a good enough interpretation that can hold up to some arguments...

Your case form 6 posts back seems pretty correct to me. I also have no rules to back it up, but if this was not the way it worked I would be very surprised. The convoy move exists and is bounced by Bot, causing the army to be dislodged.

Crap, ignore my rambling. It all works as I had expected. I thought 6.G.14 was a 3 on 2 with the convoy, but it is a 2 on 2, hence the bounce in nwy.
6.G.17 shows what I thought wasn't happening:
http://www.webdiplomacy.net/datc.php#section7
(go to 6.G.17)
The exchange happens as I figured it would. Haven't been on my game today it seems...

the question is what happens to norwegian sea...

ok, france supports his own fleet into norway (with 2, norwegian sea supported by north sea)

england convoy norway to sweden (germany fleet convoying) and supports with finland and denmark (3 in)

russia sends army sweden to norway (supported by a fleet in barents)

so ignoring france, what happens is a simple swap.

but as france and russia both have two into norway, it's should be a bounce.

BUT if sweden remains in sweden it is forced to retreat (by the convoyed army from norway), thus a particular rule kicks in.

Sweden is retreating, thus it can't affect the territory the attack came from.

The question is, does norway's convoyed attack count as coming from norway or ska?

if norway, then france takes norway. if ska (via convoy) then sweden can boucne france out (2 vs 2)

yes, since 'swapping' is allowed with a convoy (basically an exception to the 'affect the territory the attack came from' rule), the attack comes from swe, but through ska and is allowed... though both are valid interpretations, the one where the move succeeds and norwegian is bounced out of norway is what works here. If swe-nwy had a power of 3, it would succeed and overpower norwegian and swe/nor would switch places.