295 réponses à ce sujet

[KnightofPhoenix]

Elhanan wrote...
Your opinion; mine differs.

This is not a matter of opinion. If we can't agree on this, there is no point arguing.

Seems to be as good as a position as Loghain had at the time. And why do I believe I missed the signal? Because of Alistair's outbursts? I thought your side could not believe his testimony as it was biased and emotional? Maybe his watch stopped....

Except Loghain stood there for a long time and had actually studied the battlefield and had noticed that the darkspawn are more numerous than expected.

And how does Alistair saying he's missed the signal make him biased and emotional vis a vis this particular issue? You are just arguing for the sake of arguing now. Alistair was in no position to know of the battle, but he was in a position to know about the signal that Duncan specifically said was his job to look for. 
Point is, the darkspawn at the tower most certainly made you late in lighting the beacon.

What we do know is that the the signal was lit, Loghain was still in position, and then took that as a time to retreat leaving the King, the Wardens, and a good sized portion of the army to die. Fotunate indeed.

Indeed, it probably saved Ferelden from what would have been at best a pyrrhic tactical victory and strategic defeat, or worse, a complete debacle.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 05 octobre 2010 - 06:14 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Just to make it clear, as I am sure someone will mention this. In-game, your character can believe that Loghain planned all this and he didn't care if the battle could be won. Your character can believe that Loghain wanted Cailan to die. Your character would be factually wrong, but they can believe that.

[Elhanan]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

This is not a matter of opinion. If we can't agree on this, there is no point arguing.

Except Loghain stood there for a long time and had actually studied the battlefield and had noticed that the darkspawn are more numerous than expected.

And how does Alistair saying he's missed the signal make him biased and emotional vis a vis this particular issue? You are just arguing for the sake of arguing now. Alistair was in no position to know of the battle, but he was in a position to know about the signal that Duncan specifically said was his job to look for. 
Point is, the darkspawn at the tower most certainly made you late in lighting the beacon.

Indeed, it probably saved Ferelden from what would have been at best a pyrrhic tactical victory and strategic defeat, or worse, a complete debacle.

I agree there is no point in arguing, as many on both sides have long since closed their minds on the subject. But since so many threads continue becoming so much posted spam and PM nonsense, I thought I would attempt to contain my utterances to a few extant threads. Do I care if all of this has been said before? Not really, as I have not bothered to read everything that has been said before. My bad....

As far as Alistair, I was not saying he was being emotional and biased; tis your common point in not calling him a valid witness. Just considering which way the teeter totters when your camp uses him. And you may not have gotten to the signal in time, but my Wardens are getting fairly good at it now.

So while I have spared Loghain for a moment when he yields due to the law, I choose to finish it there for the same reason, as it is allowed.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Elhanan wrote...
As far as Alistair, I was not saying he was being emotional and biased; tis your common point in not calling him a valid witness. Just considering which way the teeter totters when your camp uses him. And you may not have gotten to the signal in time, but my Wardens are getting fairly good at it now.

Don't try to run around in circles and try to understand what we are saying.
For the battlefield as a whole, Alistair was in no position to understand what is going on due to his very limited view of the battlefield. And him accusing Loghain of treason is very much influenced by his grief for Duncan and the Wardens. Hence why he is not a reliable source of ascertaining the battle as a whole and certainly not to judge Loghain's motivations.

However, this has nothing to do with him watching for the signal and concluding that you've missed it, as that's his primary job and what he was assigned to do. Unless you think Alistair is so incompetent that you'd rather not believe him about the signal, then your choice.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 05 octobre 2010 - 06:47 .

[Wulfram]

If you hadn't missed the signal, then lighting the beacon would be a pretty terrible mistake really

[Obadiah]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Obadiah wrote...
Maybe, or maybe Loghain's distaste for the origal plan or Cailin's behavior colored his judgement at a crucial moment. Aspersions to every witness who disputes Loghain's version of Ostagar doesn't make Loghain's account of the battle any more objective than theirs.

Loghain can certainly be more objective on his own motives. You choose to believe him or not.

Based on what? Loghain's judgement was obviously flawed in several instances, why not at Ostagar?

Modifié par Obadiah, 05 octobre 2010 - 07:28 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Obadiah wrote...
Based on what? The Loghain's judgement was obviously flawed in several instances, why not at Ostagar?

On what he tells you. You choose to believe him or not. Same old story. If you don't, then you don't. 

Now I have to go to university. Cheers.

[Obadiah]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
...
At some point you mean for 5 minutes? That's enough to surmise that you and Alsitair were able to see the battlefield completely and determine its outcome? You were on that bridge for a few minutes, unless you decided to stand there like an idiot for an hour.
You were not in a position to determine whether the front was standing or collapsing, when you are at the tower. All you know is that you've missed the signal.

The Warden and Alistair were clearly supposed to have a view of the battlefield in order to know when to give the signal. I take it as a game engine restriction that we do not once they reach the top of the Tower of Ishal. Hence, they probably had a pretty good view of the battlefield and could have an opinion on the battle.

[Monica21]

Obadiah wrote...
The Warden and Alistair were clearly supposed to have a view of the battlefield in order to know when to give the signal. I take it as a game engine restriction that we do not once they reach the top of the Tower of Ishal. Hence, they probably had a pretty good view of the battlefield and could have an opinion on the battle.

No, they were only supposed to see the signal. That does not pre-suppose that they were supposed to have a clear view of the battlefield.

[Obadiah]

Monica21 wrote...

Obadiah wrote...
The Warden and Alistair were clearly supposed to have a view of the battlefield in order to know when to give the signal. I take it as a game engine restriction that we do not once they reach the top of the Tower of Ishal. Hence, they probably had a pretty good view of the battlefield and could have an opinion on the battle.

No, they were only supposed to see the signal. That does not pre-suppose that they were supposed to have a clear view of the battlefield.

How are they supposed to see the signal, if they don't have a clear view of the battlefield? Remember the tower is right above the battle field anyway. If they could see anything outside, they could probably see the battlefield.

[Sarah1281]

Obadiah wrote...

Monica21 wrote...

Obadiah wrote...
The Warden and Alistair were clearly supposed to have a view of the battlefield in order to know when to give the signal. I take it as a game engine restriction that we do not once they reach the top of the Tower of Ishal. Hence, they probably had a pretty good view of the battlefield and could have an opinion on the battle.

No, they were only supposed to see the signal. That does not pre-suppose that they were supposed to have a clear view of the battlefield.

How are they supposed to see the signal, if they don't have a clear view of the battlefield? Remember the tower is right above the battle field anyway. If they could see anything outside, they could probably see the battlefield.

We don't even know what the signal is and nobody saw anything. Alistair doesn't need to be able to see the entire battlefield, he only needs to be able to see the signal. Maybe Cailan gave the order to give the signal and it set off a series of torches every so many feet and Alistair was supposed to be looking for the last one. Him seeing one area to see a mysterious signal =/= Alistair had a clear view of the battlefield.

[Obadiah]

Sarah1281 wrote...
...
We don't even know what the signal is and nobody saw anything. Alistair doesn't need to be able to see the entire battlefield, he only needs to be able to see the signal. Maybe Cailan gave the order to give the signal and it set off a series of torches every so many feet and Alistair was supposed to be looking for the last one. Him seeing one area to see a mysterious signal =/= Alistair had a clear view of the battlefield.

The highest tower in a fort logically would have the best view of the battlefield, and probably most of the surroundings as well. I don't think it is a safe assumption that from that position one could only see some area necessary to receive a signal.

Modifié par Obadiah, 05 octobre 2010 - 08:43 .

[CalJones]

Logically, yes. Except the bloody thing has no windows.

[Obadiah]

CalJones wrote...

Logically, yes. Except the bloody thing has no windows.

Hence, the reason I put it down to game engine limitation, since Alistair would have to see the signal somehow.

[CalJones]

Yes, bit of an oversight that. Also the fact that Morrigan says Flemeth rescued you by turning into a giant bird and plucking you off the top of the tower, one in each talon. Which could be a bit difficult given there was a sodding great roof in the way.

Anyway, it's all supposition. We can postulate all we want but ultimately none of us know exactly how the battle went down.We just have to decide for ourselves how our own characters will view it.

[mousestalker]

Actually, we do know one thing. The darkspawn overwhelmed the Tower of Ishal. Which means they were in front of Cailan, behind Cailan and under Cailan. He was doomed regardless of what Loghain did. The archdemon did to the Fereldan army what Loghain planned to do to the darkspawn.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Obadiah wrote...
The Warden and Alistair were clearly supposed to have a view of the battlefield in order to know when to give the signal. I take it as a game engine restriction that we do not once they reach the top of the Tower of Ishal. Hence, they probably had a pretty good view of the battlefield and could have an opinion on the battle.

Didn't happen. We lit the beacon under the assumption that the signal was already sent. The plan was that we and Alistair and Loghain's men would keep watch for the signal and lit the beacon. That plan no longer works when the darkspawn have invaded the tower, so we lit the beacon without waiting for the signal, as it was most probably already sent. 

Case in point, we did not go on the top of the tower, the beacon is lit from inside, under the assumption that the signal was already sent. The darkspawn own us inside the tower. Us being at the top of the tower didn't happen, and thus you can't use it as evidence. Maybe in your playthroughs you can pretend that, but I don't have to care about it. We lit the beacon from the inside immediately because we assumed that the signal was already sent. 

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 05 octobre 2010 - 10:15 .

[Obadiah]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
...
Didn't happen. We lit the beacon under the assumption that the signal was already sent. The plan was that we and Alistair and Loghain's men would keep watch for the signal and lit the beacon. That plan no longer works when the darkspawn have invaded the tower, so we lit the beacon without waiting for the signal, as it was most probably already sent. 

Case in point, we did not go on the top of the tower, the beacon is lit from inside, under the assumption that the signal was already sent. The darkspawn own us inside the tower. Us being at the top of the tower didn't happen, and thus you can't use it as evidence. Maybe in your playthroughs you can pretend that, but I don't have to care about it. We lit the beacon from the inside immediately because we assumed that the signal was already sent. 

There is no "up" from the level of the tower in which the beacon is lit, hence the top is where we were. Maybe in your playthroughs you can pretend otherwise, but I don't have to care about it. The lack of being able to see outside the tower is an obvious game engine limitation.

Modifié par Obadiah, 05 octobre 2010 - 10:35 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Obadiah wrote...
There is no "up" from the level of the tower in which the beacon is lit, hence the top is where we were. Maybe in your playthroughs you can pretend otherwise, but I don't have to care about it. The lack of being able to see outside the tower is an obvious game engine limitation.

Nope, there is clearly a top of the tower



How else could have Flemeth saved you.
The beacon doesn't take that much space, someone could be posted on the roof to watch for the signal.
And what game limitation? It's not difficult to do it, they did it with the bridge. 

But let's assume, for the sake of argument, that you could indeed see the battlefield from a closed room with no windows (because of "game limitations"), you were there for only a few minutes before the darkspawn show up. So you didn't see anything.

[Obadiah]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Obadiah wrote...
There is no "up" from the level of the tower in which the beacon is lit, hence the top is where we were. Maybe in your playthroughs you can pretend otherwise, but I don't have to care about it. The lack of being able to see outside the tower is an obvious game engine limitation.

Nope, there is clearly a top of the tower



How else could have Flemeth saved you.
The beacon doesn't take that much space, someone could be posted on the roof to watch for the signal.
And what game limitation? It's not difficult to do it, they did it with the bridge. 

That's a nice picture.

I just went back up to the top room in the Tower of Ishal. There are windows all around it in every direction, and some are broken. There is no way up, not a broken or impassable starcase or anything. I think that the literal view with only gray behind the windows, and of the glass completely opaque is, as I said, a game engine limitation.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
But let's assume, for the sake of argument, that you could indeed see
the battlefield from a closed room with no windows (because of "game
limitations"), you were there for only a few minutes before the
darkspawn show up. So you didn't see anything.

A few minutes from that vantage point is certainly enough time to judge whether another force of the size of Loghains flanking the enemy would mean defeat or victory.

Modifié par Obadiah, 05 octobre 2010 - 10:55 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Obadiah wrote...
A few minutes from that vantage point is certainly enough time to judge whether another force of the size of Loghains flanking the enemy would mean defeat or victory.

Sure, says the recruit with no military experience, from a tower so tall you can barely see the battlefield properly and which isn't designed to observe the battlefield, it was designed to spot enemy movement from afar.
But whatever.  I am tired of the argument. Loghain did not have the luxury of being on that tower to know.

[Obadiah]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Obadiah wrote...
A few minutes from that vantage point is certainly enough time to judge whether another force of the size of Loghains flanking the enemy would mean defeat or victory.

Sure, says the recruit with no military experience, from a tower so tall you can barely see the battlefield properly and which isn't designed to observe the battlefield, it was designed to spot enemy movement from afar.

Who says that tower isn't designed to observe the battlefield, or that one could "barely see the battlefield properly" from it's vantage point?

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
But whatever.  I am tired of the argument. Loghain did not have the luxury of being on that tower to know.

That's true. The point is, there were other views of the battlefield at Ostagar (obscured or not) and the other characters in the game who witnessed that battle and have opinions on Loghain's actions that don't agree with his ought not to be dismissed out of hand because they're recruits, inexperienced, or biased (which Loghain himself obviously is as well).

Modifié par Obadiah, 05 octobre 2010 - 11:26 .

[TJPags]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Hey, nobody forces you Loghain people to defend him in EVERY thread. 

Frankly, I enjoy the debates - but maybe I'm weird. 

By that thinking, no one forces people (you) to attack Loghain in EVERY thread.

Nope, nobody does.  But I actually enjoy discussing this, and I'm not the one complaining about the need to do it again and again.

As Monica said, I enjoy the debates, I try to be respectful, and try to discuss it logically.  Would I like to change someone's mind?  Sure.  If not, I'd at least like it for people to actually debate it.  The day I fall back on "Loghain is obviously evil, so you must kill him", you're justifed in responding "No, he's god, and should live".  But I've never resorted to that as an argument - in fact, I think he is more insane than he is actually evil, but that's not the point.

New people want to discuss this topic often, and I think that's a good thing.  People who don't want to discuss it simply don't have to.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Obadiah wrote...
Who says that tower isn't designed to observe the battlefield, or that one could "barely see the battlefield properly" from it's vantage point?

Because it was designed to spot the wilders from afar (dust, torches..etc). Judging from its height, I highly doubt you can see the battlefield properly and that's not its purpose, otherwise you wouldnt' need a signal to light the beacon, you can decide when the perfect time is when you are up there.  Regardless, you were there for a few minutes only and I'd hardly call that enough to discern the battlefield.

That's true. The point is, there were other views of the battlefield at Ostagar (obscured or not) and the other characters in the game who have opinions on Loghain's actions that don't agree with his ought not to be dismissed out of hand because they're recruits, inexperienced, or biased (which Loghain himself obviously is as well).

When presented as factual evidence, they can and should be dismissed. As hints and opinions? Sure, you can take them into account if you want. 

Irrespective of the fact that we cannot know for certain whether the battle could or could not have been won, the sheer uncertainty alone is enough to justify Loghain's retreat.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 05 octobre 2010 - 11:35 .