Aller au contenu

Photo

Could Ostagar have been won?


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
160 réponses à ce sujet

#151
InvaderErl

InvaderErl
  • Members
  • 3 884 messages
Maybe I'm just off, but when Loghain retreats you get a nice shot of his army in the background. It looked like he had THOUSANDS of men when he pulled back, certainly more than what was in the valley with the King.

A flanking attack with that force should have made a serious difference unless it was the entire blasted Horde attacking and I didn't get that impression.

And even if casualties were heavy it would have been worth it. We know that the army was relatively freshly assembled so it wasn't as if this was all of Ferelden's might and that many of the Arls and such hadn't yet sent troops, plus Orlesian Wardens were in bound. Holding Ostagar was critical.

Modifié par InvaderErl, 21 janvier 2010 - 03:19 .


#152
Asylumer

Asylumer
  • Members
  • 199 messages
Ostagar would not be the first time Darkspawn suddenly had a surge of numbers and overran their enemy. One of the Dwarf Codex entries described a similar scenario where the first few battles were easily defeated, and on the third a massive wave of Darkspawn near annihilated the defenders. They could have been attempting the same strategy at Ostagar, and if they did, it'd be rather hard to flank an army who's ranks were large enough to split in two and still be much larger than the entirety of Ferelden's army.



Cailan and Loghain were too busy going against each other to pay attention to basic Sun Tzu.



Oh, and to those who claim Gaider's reply in my thread was 100% fact:



He clearly stated that everything he said could not be taken as absolute fact concerning the story, and that we should use what we see in-game to come to our own conclusions. That's what makes it art. I may find a ton of views surrounding the event completely absurd and sometimes willfully ignorant, but they do nothing wrong trying to come to their own conclusions.



... that is until they accuse the developers of retconning something when it's them who didn't quite understand the depth of the work. It takes a great deal of pig-headedness to accuse the creator(s) of intentionally creating what the viewer thought the work was and then changing it based on pressure, when the original was what the creator(s) planned all along and there are plenty of clues that he/she simply missed or ignored.

#153
robertthebard

robertthebard
  • Members
  • 6 108 messages

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Costin_Razvan wrote...

No. It could not have been won, as proven in RTO.


I don't consider claims for a single soldier proof, especially since we have opposite claims too.

So you would take Alistair's word, despite him being standing at the beacon.  You would take the word of a Noble's son as to what his friend said, despite the Noble's son not being there.  These are the words that you consider the truth, despite Alistair not having any better view of what's going on than you did.


ESPECIALLY because of standing at the beacon. Top of a tall tower? HELOOOO? Talk about having a great overview of the situation. And yes, Al's perception might be colored too. Everyones can. So let's not trust anyone, shall we?

We got officers in camp confident of victory even if outnumbred. We have Duncan (who can sense darkspawn really well, being an old grey warden) not flinching from the battle at all. We have several other people in the game thinking it could have been won.
So yea.

But even if it wasn't winnable it still doesn't excuse Loghain. His battle plan was terrible, if there was no retreat option for the king. Heck, he didn't even send a runner to the king when he "saw" (of what little he could see) the numbers are great. He could have made an organized, fighting retreat. Yes, there would be losses if he went to get the king - but you're a kings general leading a kings army. Getting the king is your duty.
Basicly Loghain failed miserably at every point, long before the battle started.

We get a better view of the battle after lighting the beacon than Alistair.  We get a cutscene that shows Loghain ordering the retreat, and then of Cailan and Duncan biting the bullet.  Barring a telescope, or binoculars, there's no way to get that clear a view of what's going on, and even with that, there's no way to be sure we could find them specifically on the field.  Add to this the fact that anything Alistair can see, we should be able to see for ourselves.

I notice in a later post that you said it took you 10 minutes to get to the top of the tower.  Here's what I want you to do, I want you to find a four story building, walk a half a mile to it, and then walk to the stairs, go up one flight, then walk half way across the floor's length, then back, and go up another flight, and rinse and repeat.  Go up four flights with this pattern.  Note that this will establish the actual walk time, but will not cover the combat needed on each floor of the tower to get to the top.  Come back and post your results.  It may have taken you 10 minutes in real time, but in game time, it took considerably longer.  This isn't a real time game.  If it were, we'd just now be getting people finishing up the second or third quest lines, and no one would have finished the game yet.  After all, just because it only takes 30 seconds on the map to travel from Flemeth's hut to Denerim doesn't mean that's all it takes.

Regarding sending a runner, even if he tried, do you think the runner would have made it?  The bad thing about being the flanking force in the Hammer/Anvil strategy is that what you hope is the whole of the enemy's forces are between you and your other army.  While there's a slim chance, the most likely outcome is one more dead body on the field.  The officers in camp that are confident of victory are confident, oddly enough, because of Loghain.  However, confidence of victory is not an assurance of victory.  Confident troops definitely fight better, but that doesn't mean that they are likely to win.  Too many other options to include.

#154
eschilde

eschilde
  • Members
  • 528 messages
@Asylumer

DG's word is what you take it for, no more and no less. However, if you choose to take what he says to be accurate, it supports the idea that Loghain probably couldn't have won Ostagar. In any case, Loghain's failure to hold Ostagar would have immense repercussions, as is obvious throughout the rest of the game. People's main argument that he should have stayed--because if he had won Ostagar he would have been in an infinitely better position--should have been clear to him as well. He didn't leave to screw Cailan (well, not JUST that anyway), he left because he thought he would be annihilated if he went ahead.

#155
WilliamShatner

WilliamShatner
  • Members
  • 2 216 messages
If they didn't send me on that stupid lighting mission and let me kick their ass single-handedly then yes it would have been won.

#156
robertthebard

robertthebard
  • Members
  • 6 108 messages

InvaderErl wrote...

Maybe I'm just off, but when Loghain retreats you get a nice shot of his army in the background. It looked like he had THOUSANDS of men when he pulled back, certainly more than what was in the valley with the King.

A flanking attack with that force should have made a serious difference unless it was the entire blasted Horde attacking and I didn't get that impression.

And even if casualties were heavy it would have been worth it. We know that the army was relatively freshly assembled so it wasn't as if this was all of Ferelden's might and that many of the Arls and such hadn't yet sent troops, plus Orlesian Wardens were in bound. Holding Ostagar was critical.

He did indeed seem to have a lot of troops back there.

However, even with the flanking attack, and making any difference, the people on the previous front line aren't going to automatically survive.  As you say, there would likely be heavy casualties.  Based on the cutscene, which is all we have to go on, are the events sequential, or happening at the same time?  Loghain sees the beacon lit, and gives the order to withdraw.  However, when it cuts to Cailan, is the beacon lit yet?  All we know is that the beacon is lit when Duncan gets killed, but we know that because he looks up to see that it is.  However, we have no idea how long it's been lit.  It's entirely possible that it just got lit.  We don't know.  What I can tell you from checking things in the background at that time is that the battle isn't going very well.  That the Ostagar forces are outnumbered is obvious, even before the battle Duncan will comment on that fact.  This does not spell an automatic loss, but it doesn't bode well for the chance of success.  Remember, the horde is bigger in this battle than it was in the previous battles, despite losing those battles.  This means that while "endless" is probably not the correct word, the darkspawn had a lot of forces to commit to the battle.

Orlesian forces were not coming.  They were turned back at the border by Loghain.  The only Arl that we know didn't have troops at the battle was Eamon.  While at the Denerim stage we do have a lot of human soldiers, this is the combined armies from the Civil War, and Eamon's troops.  Ideally, holding at Ostagar was important.  However, with the forces available, it wasn't going to be possible, even if that battle did get won, the next horde, following the pattern from the previous battle, would have been larger still, and the defenders would have been less than what we had at the last battle.  Especially since the darkspawn pulled the same strategy on Ferelden's forces that had been laid out for the Ferelden troops.  The darkspawn coming in through the Tower of Ishal had flanked the army of Ferelden, and now had it in a hammer and anvil.

#157
Asylumer

Asylumer
  • Members
  • 199 messages

eschilde wrote...

@Asylumer...


Erm... that is my position as well. I'm not sure what you're trying to get at here.

I'm simply saying that using Word of God isn't a great argument when it comes to interpreting art, because one of art's purposes is to be interpreted in different ways and make us think about it. It may give us a push in a certain direction, but we shouldn't base our entire views on a single writer's word of what he clearly says only may have happened, and he personally leans towards that interpretation, but he isn't canonizing it.

If Gaider flat-out said (without "I think" or other statements of opinion) that Loghain couldn't have won the battle and made it canon, it would be "fact" within fiction, but hopefully he'd only do that if it served some greater purpose in furthering the story.

#158
Series5Ranger

Series5Ranger
  • Members
  • 279 messages

cachx wrote...

I thought it was Loghain's plan to let Cailan die there all along.
Well, even with the Dwarves+elf+human+mage armies combined it was said that the darkspawn outnumbered them at least 3 to 1. So, kinda hard for the humans to win alone. (assuming that most of the darkspawn horde were at Ostagar).


No it wasn't his intent to let Cailan die. Replay the Meeting where Cailan has you and Alistair go to the Tower. Loghain tries to convince him to not be on the Front Lines, but Cailan wants to be with the Wardens and the Glory.

#159
eschilde

eschilde
  • Members
  • 528 messages
@Asylumer

I'm not trying to get at anything in particular, other than that I don't really want to write a disclaimer any time I quote DG. There's plenty of ways to justify the motives at Ostagar without bringing devs into it. I'm not telling anyone to take what DG writes on the forum as canon. It's not in the game. But if you want to discuss this subject, it's worth quoting.

#160
Asylumer

Asylumer
  • Members
  • 199 messages
@eschilde



My reply was directed at the sentiment (at least the sentiment I saw) that naysayers should keep their mouths shut because of what David Gaider said, not at you, or anybody, in particular. I saw it a few times in this thread and didn't care who said it, I just wanted to address it.



We can't think about art if we don't discuss it openly.

#161
eschilde

eschilde
  • Members
  • 528 messages
@Asylumer

I don't disagree with you, but part of the discussion certainly involves creator thoughts. That is all I meant to say. The work is up to interpretation; what the developers were thinking about the characters is also of interest.



In any case, I thought the tower of Ishal was missing a nice glass paned window for you to get a nice view from, so it seemed a bit strange that Alistair knew anything at all about what the battlefield looked like. It would have been more informative to get a nice map table with little models to show you what exactly was happening on the field, instead of that silly cut scene. Silly artists.