253 réponses à ce sujet

[Realmzmaster]

@attackfighter,

You assume that the darkspawn were unorganized, that is not the case. The Archdemon was controlling them via the groupmind. Otherwise the darkspawn never leave the Deep Roads in great numbers. They were not unorganized. Otherwise why would you have generals and embasseries in their ranks.
How are they going to place glyphs down before the battle. The darkspawn is going to tell them when they are going to attack. Also you said the darkspawn were unorganized so their would be no enemy formations.
Formations are evidence of some form of intelligence, organization and command. If they are unorganized there is no formation. If you also notice in the cutscences the darkspawn used their spears as pikes against the dogs which is why they were quickly cut down. Yes, I know exactly how cavalry is used. But, that does not change the fact that you saw virtually no horses in Ferelden. No horses no cavalry.

I guess you assume that the darkspawn were running on dirt instead of grass. Last time I checked grass burns very well.

The archers had time to get off another volley. They had time to send in the dogs. In fact the dogs would help to slow the advance giving more time before the darkspawn reach the front lines and the archers were not on the front lines..

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 25 février 2010 - 11:12 .

[Curlain]

attackfighter wrote...

UFORocks wrote...

We'll have to agree to disagree, or not.  I'm sure that we both 'know we're right'. 

Name one historian who'd agree with your claim that Alexander was a great war strategist.

Let' see:

Robin Lane Fox

Peter Green

Lewis V Cummings

A.B. Bosworth

and the ancient biographers like Arian (who was a seasoned general in the Roman army of noted success, so his judgement has definite merit) 

And Plutarch

So many view him to to be one of the earliest commanders to use both strategy and battlefield tactics to brilliant effect

Edited for clarity

Modifié par Curlain, 25 février 2010 - 11:48 .

[attackfighter]

Realmzmaster wrote...

How about historian Jeremy Black in his book "Great Military Leaders and their Campaigns" in regards to Alexander the Great.

I searched Mr. Black's website but I couldn't find that book. Also when citing something you should really include a page number or a quote; it's kind of obvious you googled the thing when you just state a generic book title.

You assume that the darkspawn were unorganized, that is not the case.
The Archdemon was controlling them via the groupmind. Otherwise the
darkspawn never leave the Deep Roads in great numbers. They were not
unorganized. Otherwise why would you have generals and embasseries in
their ranks.
How are they going to place glyphs down before the
battle. The darkspawn is going to tell them when they are going to
attack. Also you said the darkspawn were unorganized so their would be
no enemy formations.
Formations are evidence of some form of
intelligence, organization and command. If they are unorganized there
is no formation. If you also notice in the cutscences the darkspawn
used their spears as pikes against the dogs which is why they were
quickly cut down.

They were not in formation. Furthermore, using spears to kill stuff is standard military practice for those wielding said spears - I don't see why you think it indicates intelligence...

Yes, I know exactly how cavalry is used. But, that does not change the
fact that you saw virtually no horses in Ferelden. No horses no cavalry.

You said that cavalry would be useless, don't change the subject.

I guess you assume that the darkspawn were running on dirt instead of grass. Last time I checked grass burns very well.

That grass was short, they could've just stomped the fire out if they wanted to (which they probably wouldn't considering they were on a giant stone castle (and because tiny burning grass is no need for alarm in any event)).

The archers had time to get off another volley. They had time to send
in the dogs. In fact the dogs would help to slow the advance giving
more time before the darkspawn reach the front lines and the archers
were not on the front lines.

The archers clearly were on the front lines when they fired, and the darkspawn were like 5 yards away from them (in some scenes - the distances were inconsistant due to all the cinematic moments crammed into the cutscene).

[attackfighter]

Curlain wrote...

Let' see:

Robin Lane Fox

Peter Green

Lewis V Cummings

A.B. Bosworth

and the ancient biographers like Arian (who was a seasoned general in the Roman army of noted success, so his judge has definite merit) 

And Plutarch

So many due view to to be one of the earliest commanders to use both strategy and battlefield tactics to brilliant effect

Let me clarify: name a historian who'd rank Alexander one of the greatest military strategists.

Also contemporary historians only. Ancient biographers, however seasoned they may be, are not very reliable (especially when documenting things before their own times).

Modifié par attackfighter, 25 février 2010 - 11:48 .

[Realmzmaster]

@attackfighter,

If you are going to quote me do it right I said the cavalry would be as useful as the dogs. In close quarters the cavalry becomes less effective. Also I will have to pull the book of my self to find the direct quote and since I am at work I cannot. No I did not google anything and if you go to amazon and type in Jeremy Black you can find the book and yes it is on his website.
Also Cailin's army was in the front of the giant stone castle not on it. Only certain troops were on the castle. If the army was on the castle how could they charge?
Have you ever tried to stomp out a grass fire? Try it sometime see how easy it is.
You were the one that mentioned enemy formations. Go back and read your post you stated the mages could throw AOE spells at the enemy formation.

I thought it required some form of intelligence to use a tool. Maybe I am wrong. And if I am not wrong darkspawn use magic, bows/arrows. I do believe it requires intelligence.

Also I did not change the subject on cavalry. In my ealier post I noted there very few horses in Ferelden. I also mentioned the brontos and hallas. So it ws in reference to that post I said no horses no cavalry.

They still had time to send out the dogs which means they had time to fire a volley.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 26 février 2010 - 12:06 .

[RangerSG]

attackfighter wrote...

Curlain wrote...

Let' see:

Robin Lane Fox

Peter Green

Lewis V Cummings

A.B. Bosworth

and the ancient biographers like Arian (who was a seasoned general in the Roman army of noted success, so his judge has definite merit) 

And Plutarch

So many due view to to be one of the earliest commanders to use both strategy and battlefield tactics to brilliant effect

Let me clarify: name a historian who'd rank Alexander one of the greatest military strategists.

Also contemporary historians only. Ancient biographers, however seasoned they may be, are not very reliable (especially when documenting things before their own times).

Erm...that last paragraph shows a very debatable premise in modern scholarship. That being that only people who think like moderns can be right.

I would call that assuming a conclusion. And is typically done by sub-standard modern historians. As a point of historical research, primary sources matter.

[attackfighter]

Realmzmaster wrote...

@attackfighter,

If you are going to quote me do it right I said the cavalry would be as useful as the dogs. In close quarters the cavalry becomes less effective. Also I will have to pull the book of my self to find the direct quote and since I am at work I cannot. No I did not google anything and if you go to amazon and type in Jeremy Black you can find the book and yes it is on his website.
Also Cailin's army was in the front of the giant stone castle not on it. Only certain troops were on the castle. If the army was on the castle how could they charge?
Have you ever tried to stomp out a grass fire? Try it sometime see how easy it is.
You were the one that mentioned enemy formations. Go back and read your post you stated the mages could throw AOE spells at the enemy formation.

I thought it required some form of intelligence to use a tool. Maybe I am wrong. And if I am not wrong darkspawn use magic, bows/arrows. I do believe it requires intelligence.

Also I did not change the subject on cavalry. In my ealier post I noted there very few horses in Ferelden. I also mentioned the brontos and hallas. So it ws in reference to that post I said no horses no cavalry.

They still had time to send out the dogs which means they had time to fire a volley.

- The cavalry wouldn't have had to engage in close quarters. Due to the loose and unorganized formations of the darkspawn, it would be easy for cavalry to simply harass their flanks with hit and run techniques.
- The castle was large enough to fit the entire Fereldan army. Go look at the cutscene again, the Fereldan army takes up a space as wide a bridge and only 6 ranks deep (at most).
- No I have never stomped out a grass fire, and neither have you. It's irrelevant anyways, as it's common sense that inch high flaming grass presents no danger to anything larger than a mouse.
- You implied the darkspawn were in an organized formation, while I pointed out that they weren't. Don't play semantics.

[attackfighter]

RangerSG wrote...

Erm...that last paragraph shows a very debatable premise in modern scholarship. That being that only people who think like moderns can be right.

I would call that assuming a conclusion. And is typically done by sub-standard modern historians. As a point of historical research, primary sources matter.

This isn't about historical research, it's about you (well, originally this was a challenge issued to that other guy...) finding a respected source backing the claim that Alexander is one of histories greatest military strategists. Historical sources such as Arian are biased in that they do not take into account any military strategists after their time (such as Napolean, Ghengis Kahn, etc.)

[Realmzmaster]

@attackfighter,

You have no idea what I have done in my life. But I assure you I have the burns to prove it. So speak about what you know and inch high flaming grass spreading across an area does prove a very significant problem.

[The_KFD_Case]

Andorfiend wrote...

I just bought DA:O. I'm really enjoying it (although the loading times are long enough to make me think I should spend them productively, by learning another language for example.) But I'm fairly well convinced I could conquer Ferelden with a pack of cub scouts. None of these people seem to have the tactical sense of George Custer.

I'm speaking only having seen the battle of Ostramar and the preparations for the defense of Redcliff, but Yikes! These people seem to have no clue to the tactical value of a wall! (Except the Darkspawn. They use them against me. *facepalm*)

It's a minor gripe in a fantasy game I suppose, but if you've got a brilliant defensive advantage like, oh say, a fortress then leaving it's walls and charging a hundred yards to meet an enemy that's already advancing towards you is really stupid. So is throwing away wardogs against disorganized but aggressive infantry. You use dogs to destroy archers or breakup formations. Darkspawn don't use formations, so you save the dogs to harry flanks, or attack the rear.

Agreed. From both strategic and tactical perspectives the headlong charge makes little sense. Especially since it extends the front thus granting an increasing advantage to the Darkspawn and their superior numbers. Use the damn chokepoint where it's tightest to full advantage! And more archers! The longer you can keep the enemy from effectively reaching you while you are still able to "reach out and touch them," the better. 

Enjoyed your humorously scathing critique. Cheers.

[Ahisgewaya]

Andorfiend wrote...

When you're holding a defensive position you don't get to pick the time of battle. The mobile Darkspawn got to pick, and they chose night, for pretty much the reasons you cite.

However as far as the Hammer and Anvil thing... Anvils work better when they are hard. Walls are hard. Shield walls are less hard but still hard. A chargeing line of disordered infantry is not hard, it is porus and easily overwhelmed by larger numbers.

During that fight I looked down from that bridge and saw a vast horde being funneled by geography into a narrow pass. And I looked at the open field they were crossing and thought "Why they hell didn't they put in a mound and ditch with a wooden pallisade?" Why were their archers on the field instead of in the castle 100' above raining down fire?

Yes Loghain's betrayal was what lost the day, but it was hardly needed. Even if they hadn't pulled out the 'Anvil' might still have gotten their asses kicked and the Hammer would only have served to hurry the Darkspawn on their way north.

I mean I get that the Felderens are basically barbarians with shiny pants, but from what I'm told so far by the codex they just beat back the Orlanians in the last 30 years. From the sound of it the Orlanians are basically the french with a similar reliance on heavy cav chevaliers. Infantry doesn't beat heavy Cav with disorganized charges, you beat them with ordered and disciplined pike formations, and good usage of terrain and defensive fortifications. So how has that military skill and tradition been lost already?

This makes me think that maybe Loghain (traitorous ass that he is) was actually right, that Cailen was an idiot playing war. Maybe the strategy (which definately sucks) was the only one that Cailen would agree upon.

[Ahisgewaya]

And anyone who knows anything about strategy can see what a stupid strategy the king used in the Ostagar attack. I remember thinking that the first time I saw that cutscene. Mages should be healing and placing glyphs if they can't get a good AoE in there without hurting troops. Archers should be higher up. They did indeed have a fortress right behind them they could have used. There isn't a single barricade built by the non darkspawn forces.

[Realmzmaster]

The plan was Loghain not King Cailan's. Loghain came up with this plan. If you remember King Cailan suggested waiting for the forces from Orlais. Loghain blew a fuse at that suggestion. During the War council Loghain lays out the plan for Cailan.

[Andorfiend]

Thanks KFD.

Guys the rocks thing is really off topic. Yes slings are effective weapons against light armour. Against heavy infantry not so much. Against shieldless monster things with rotting skull heads I have no idea. Against Ogres, worthless. Thrown rocks are less effective than slings, unless of course you can drop them from a height. In fact if King Calin had just held his men back and had the guys on top of the causeway dump wagon loads of rocks on the Darkspawn he would have done a lot better.

Re. Alexander: Irrelevant to the discussion. Besides if you want a tactical genius with no clue how to win an actual war you want Hannibal.

Re Fire: 1" tall wet green grass in a rainstorm does not burn with noticable effect. Forests however do. One well placed fireball could have won the bleeding day, but apparently no one told the Fereldens that wood burns. ("And what do we burn apart from witches?")

It was really strange that the Humans had no heavy siege, but the mindless evil horde did. It was a weird battle all around. :/

Modifié par Andorfiend, 26 février 2010 - 02:28 .

[Ahisgewaya]

Hannibal is awesome. Bringing Elephants over the Alps just to see the look on the romans faces.....

awesome.

[Destrier77]

As far as i know the fereldens had some heavy weapons, as yuo cross the bridge they get blown up? Or am i remembering things wrong? Also thats harsh on Hannibal, i mean my father is a roman so i will go with them any day but Hannibal almost destroyed the fledgling roman empire. It wasnt so much that he didnt know how to win a war as Romans didnt know how to lose. They didnt give up where just about any other force in those days would have. They just kept building new armies to throw at him.



On Alexander I would rate him as a great general. He was lucky like most "great" generals to either inherit or create a military advantage (he was to inherit it) but he did make the most of it. His charge across Asia has to be one of the greatest military campaigns ever known imho.

[Ahisgewaya]

Anyone who can scare the **** out of the romans is awesome.

[Curlain]

Destrier77 wrote...

As far as i know the fereldens had some heavy weapons, as yuo cross the bridge they get blown up? Or am i remembering things wrong? Also thats harsh on Hannibal, i mean my father is a roman so i will go with them any day but Hannibal almost destroyed the fledgling roman empire. It wasnt so much that he didnt know how to win a war as Romans didnt know how to lose. They didnt give up where just about any other force in those days would have. They just kept building new armies to throw at him.

On Alexander I would rate him as a great general. He was lucky like most "great" generals to either inherit or create a military advantage (he was to inherit it) but he did make the most of it. His charge across Asia has to be one of the greatest military campaigns ever known imho.

Hannibal's problem was he had the forces he needed to win field battles, but he didn't have forces to besiege and take Rome, and as long as Rome stood the war was never going to be over.

And one of the great debates with Alexander, who was greater, Alexander of Philip? 

[attackfighter]

Realmzmaster wrote...

@attackfighter,
You have no idea what I have done in my life. But I assure you I have the burns to prove it. So speak about what you know and inch high flaming grass spreading across an area does prove a very significant problem.

If you have burns from a grass fire then you're likely retarded.

Also the grass wouldn't burn all at once as you seem to think; it would slowly spread across the field as a thin line. Again, only a retard could be burned by 2 inch high flames moving 1 km/h.

[Ahisgewaya]

Most historians I've read think that Hannibal could have taken Rome.

IF he hadn't stopped outside and sat on his laurels for some reason. He had the element of surprise plus they were terrified of him. By waiting, he gave them time to prepare and more importantly, muster their courage.

[zaim298]

i'm thinkin the number of Darkspawns at Ostagar to be around 10k...the defending force have around 500-1000 troops with less than 50 mages...if i recall correctly, there are manned ballistas on the wall when u try to light the beacon...Loghain probably have around 2k-3k troops with him...i'm sure the mages probably cast aoe n damage spells during the battle (but doesn't show in the battle scene) and buffs for the troops...the Darkspawns also have their own mages...if there are any cavs at all, they're probably with Loghain (cavs are effective for flanking and tearing unorganized army)...i have to agree that due to distances between the two army, archers can only get 1 volley at the Darkspawn...i think the Mabaris are used to break the line of the charging darkspawn (so pretty much just fodder)...



so they did manned their towers and walls...the reason why the bulk of the infantry are outside the gate is because of the "draw them in and flank them" battleplan. I'm sure even if the defending forces (including Loghain's) are outnumber 3 to 1, they have a good chance of winning the battle. The key point is 'how many will remain in the end'? Loghain knew it is either total defeat or victory with great loss if he order the flanking...either way, there will be little hope to defend Ferelden IF the said reinforcement from Orlais get past the border and decided to take Ferelden...so he opted for retreat...he was so sure the real threat is not the Darkspawns (he didn't think it was a real Blight) but the Orlesians...



So I do think there is nothing wrong with the battle or their art of wars or whatever you call them...



The things that amaze are the details to the storyline and plot...imagine if Loghain didn't withdraw, lose or win, we would have no chance at all in the Final Battle...so call him whatever we like, but with the troops he had withdraw at Ostagar, it gave the lifeline for Ferelden in the end...

[zaim298]

Stoomkal wrote...

There were eight mages at Ostagar...

forgive me for not knowing this, i'm only doing an estimation... may I know how you know this?