253 réponses à ce sujet

[Lysaimachus]

Destrier77 wrote...



Name me two military conflict where weak force has held off and defeated a stronger force by hiding in a fortress?

Siege of Constantinople (626)
Siege of Constantinople (674)

Two quick ones, many more. Basically the idea is to hold out until the besieger is demoralized, runs out of supplies, or the campaign season is over (typically ends in fall with the onset of winter).

[soteria]

Castles are a defensive hideout or a staging area. They are not offensive. You dont go attack an enemy then build a castle outside his city. If you cant conquer him, you may build a castle to "defend" yourself while you build up. They are defensive.

Sigh. Non sequitor.... "proper" castles took years to build, so no, you wouldn't build a "castle." You should study medieval warfare some, though, because a besieging army would certainly set up defenses around a castle. Besieging a fortified location was dangerous business, as disease and famine could be as dangerous to the attackers as the defenders.

You retreat to your castle, repair the walls and prepare, and this is what your logistics gets you.



Starvation. You are surrounded now. Your "logistics" lines are gone. Most of the enemy has bypassed you to ravage the countryside. The entire army is trapped inside. By a smaller besieging force. Now what?

I'd like to see this smaller besieging force that can keep a larger army trapped inside a castle, because that sounds like quite a feat. What, are they riding armored bears or something? To answer your "now what" question, that small force that got left behind gets overwhelmed by sallying troops that now get to play hell will that army that bypassed them.



How much any of this applies to the darkspawn is up to conjecture, but seriously, you should read some books on medieval seige warfare and hopefully some specific battles as well. I'm wondering where you got your ideas.

[Destrier77]

First off smaller besieging force as in thats what armies did, they set a smaller besieging force and camped out waiting with the rest. These darkspawn are large enough to set a few aside for you and off with the remainder to pillage and rape and eat

Also I love when interweb people say that, go study. Like they know your background. Tis a bit rude no?
So without the insults,  we have your army besieged, my army outside. Im now the Rabble of darkspawn, you are the intelligent god who has studied medieval warfare.
We have :
 

soteria wrote...

disease and famine could be as dangerous to the attackers as the defenders.

So now, you have famine as i said, and disease as you nicely added, my army doesnt catch disease, well they are a disease... so thanks for that addition you strengthened my argument.
 

soteria wrote...
I'd like to see this smaller besieging force that can keep a larger army trapped inside a castle, because that sounds like quite a feat. What, are they riding armored bears or something?

Now how does this smaller besieging force keep me in the castle?!?!? You say, ohh you fool Destrier, you have armoured bears or something? Well, ogres... I guess they are almost as good as an armoured bear no?

So, you are clever, and i can tell, you wouldnt want to be proven wrong, since you know sooo much about medieval warfare, so now out you sally from your offensive fortress. Out from one of how many exits? Ohhh no, you slowly realise, there is only 1 exit? 2?. Here a realisation dawns on you, like the poor souls trapped in so many wonderful defensive castles. The same great thing which makes them defensible from the outside works in reverse when you come out. Your funnelled troops are slaughtered. The romans figured this out a few thousand years ago. Someone decides to hem themselves into a walled defence, sit it out. Or if you want to really show off, build a bigger wall around their wall to keep them from even deserting in small groups, that way you slaughter them all. Since our fortress in question has natural choke points no need of hemming walls.

So now where did you get? Ferelden has no army at all. 

So "seriously, you should read some books on medieval seige warfare and hopefully some specific battles as well. I'm wondering where you got your ideas."

[Destrier77]

Lysaimachus wrote...


Siege of Constantinople (626)
Siege of Constantinople (674)

Two quick ones, many more. Basically the idea is to hold out until the besieger is demoralized, runs out of supplies, or the campaign season is over (typically ends in fall with the onset of winter).

I was thinking of that aswell as sevastapol, but the difference was that they were cities, and had sea routes into the city. So were not really fully under seige. 

Like the russian city. ummm im tired now i forget... stalingrad? It was constantly being resupplied, so not really like a fortress or a castle. New troops, new food. you cant use them as a comparison for our Ostagar theory.

darkspawn demoralized?
darkspawn running out of food? Maybe. Im sure they would find things to kill.
I would agree with your campaign season in most cases but again, thats based on food or lack of it. Darkspawn are not eating farm crops, which is what made war impossible in winter in ancient times. Tinned food etc (available food) meant that modern warfare and siege doesnt stop for weather. I would say a quick trip into a village or the wilds for some tribals would mean well fed darkspawn. If they are anything like their lord of the rings counterparts they seem to take so much from, im sure they wouldnt be adverse to eating a few of the weaker ones to keep their strength up!!!

[soteria]

Destrier77 wrote...

First off smaller besieging force as in thats what armies did, they set a smaller besieging force and camped out waiting with the rest. These darkspawn are large enough to set a few aside for you and off with the remainder to pillage and rape and eat

Also I love when interweb people say that, go study. Like they know your background. Tis a bit rude no?
So without the insults,  we have your army besieged, my army outside. Im now the Rabble of darkspawn, you are the intelligent god who has studied medieval warfare.
We have :
 

soteria wrote...

disease and famine could be as dangerous to the attackers as the defenders.

So now, you have famine as i said, and disease as you nicely added, my army doesnt catch disease, well they are a disease... so thanks for that addition you strengthened my argument.
 

soteria wrote...
I'd like to see this smaller besieging force that can keep a larger army trapped inside a castle, because that sounds like quite a feat. What, are they riding armored bears or something?

Now how does this smaller besieging force keep me in the castle?!?!? You say, ohh you fool Destrier, you have armoured bears or something? Well, ogres... I guess they are almost as good as an armoured bear no?

So, you are clever, and i can tell, you wouldnt want to be proven wrong, since you know sooo much about medieval warfare, so now out you sally from your offensive fortress. Out from one of how many exits? Ohhh no, you slowly realise, there is only 1 exit? 2?. Here a realisation dawns on you, like the poor souls trapped in so many wonderful defensive castles. The same great thing which makes them defensible from the outside works in reverse when you come out. Your funnelled troops are slaughtered. The romans figured this out a few thousand years ago. Someone decides to hem themselves into a walled defence, sit it out. Or if you want to really show off, build a bigger wall around their wall to keep them from even deserting in small groups, that way you slaughter them all. Since our fortress in question has natural choke points no need of hemming walls.

So now where did you get? Ferelden has no army at all. 

So "seriously, you should read some books on medieval seige warfare and hopefully some specific battles as well. I'm wondering where you got your ideas."

It's hard for me to take you seriously when you preface your post saying "so without the insults," and then interject sarcastic insults into the rest of your post.  Also, "proving me wrong" would require something akin to proof, rather than just saying, "Your castle only has like 2 exits, you lose."  Especially since Ostagar had at least three (or four?), so...

I also find it interesting that you ignored the fact that I concluded my post by saying something like, "A lot of this wouldn't even apply to darkspawn."  I guess you felt it would be easier to argue my points if you ignored that?  classic straw man, construing the opposition to be saying something he is not.

[Inquisitor Recon]

You spineless elves need to stop questioning King Cailan's tactical brilliance! Charging huge forces of darkspawn is how we do things in Ferelden. And everything would have worked if Loghain hadn't had a grudge against the most badass King of Ferelden ever.

[Lysaimachus]

Destrier77 wrote...


I was thinking of that aswell as sevastapol, but the difference was that they were cities, and had sea routes into the city. So were not really fully under seige. 

Like the russian city. ummm im tired now i forget... stalingrad? It was constantly being resupplied, so not really like a fortress or a castle. New troops, new food. you cant use them as a comparison for our Ostagar theory.

It's an easy comparison, Ostagar blocked a pass, so it could only be beseiged from one side (think of the classic battles from Chinese history involving the numerous "gates" that blocked key passes in those days), leaving the other side open for resupply and reinforcement (which we know were on their way, not only from Orlais but also from other Teyrns and Banns in Fereldan).

If you want a seige where the besieger controlled the waves and the defenders still held out assault after assault: Siege of Malta (1565)

Here's a couple where the attackers withdraw because of lack of supply:

Siege of Ansi
fortress (645)

Siege of Vienna (1529)

One where the attackers are basically beaten off, without having to wait for reinforcement (basically sitting in their fortress):

Siege of Jinju (1592)

Siege of Toda Castle (1542-1543)

Siege of Hachigata (1568)

First and Second Sieges of Nagashima (1570)s

Siege of Ueda (1600)

One more for fun, where reinforcements arrive (as they would have at Ostagar):
Siege of Damascus 1148

Basically you went too far in saying that the besieged never win by sitting in their fortress. It happens.

darkspawn demoralized?
darkspawn running out of food? Maybe. Im sure they would find things to kill.
I would agree with your campaign season in most cases but again, thats based on food or lack of it. Darkspawn are not eating farm crops, which is what made war impossible in winter in ancient times. Tinned food etc (available food) meant that modern warfare and siege doesnt stop for weather. I would say a quick trip into a village or the wilds for some tribals would mean well fed darkspawn. If they are anything like their lord of the rings counterparts they seem to take so much from, im sure they wouldnt be adverse to eating a few of the weaker ones to keep their strength up!!!

The wilds were all but depopulated by this time, remember there was a mass exodus of Chasind into Ferelden once the Darkspawn arrived. Most of the others died if we're to believe what the Chasind are saying in Lothering; so there's no food supply there. They could kill game, and forage, which is what a lot of armies do anyways when crops aren't available; but this will be exhausted with the quickly approaching winter (and by then reinforcements would have arrived).

They could eat their weak and diminish their numbers, while their enemy is getting reinforced... not a good option.

@ Soteria
I generally agree with you but I can think of an instance where a smaller force beseiged a larger force. I'm thinking of the early stages of the Seige of Alesia. Also, if we looked, I'm sure we'd find some in the Mongol conquests. Generally when the defending force feels its troops are inferior, albeit more numerous, than the attacker, it withdraws.

Modifié par Lysaimachus, 02 mars 2010 - 07:11 .

[Andorfiend]

Destrier77 wrote...
The romans figured this out a few thousand years ago. 

You do know the Romans were famous for their fortifications don't you? That they would fortify their camping spots every night and do so well enough that their camping spots can still be spotted by ariel survey to this day? They did larger fortifications too, Hadrian's wall ring any bells? 

Granted they were also famous beseigers. The Romans were damm fine engineers all around, but they certainly did not think fortifications were a poor idea. I cannot concieve were someone might come by that notion.

That all being said I think we are also all in agreement that we have no idea how suseptible to starvation, disease and servered supply lines the darkspawn are, and these things are the nightmare of a beseiging army. Therefore a defensive seige as such may not be a great idea.

That having been said I didn't start this thread claiming they should have tried to force the Darkspawn to seige. I merely said that tacticaly chargeing into an oncoming enemy is really stupid when you have the option of sitting behind a pallisade or breastwork and poking them in the face with spears and pikes while your archers pour death on them from those nice fireing platforms 200' up the cliff.

[A Puzzled Mind]

Any smart fortress builder would choose a location where there is preferably a highpoint and one that is near or next to a river. And mind you, the medieval age had an amazing lever system that transported water up into the castle. Vlad Tepes' castle is such an example.



In regards to Ostagar, yes Cailan was sure an idiot. He could have done what Caesar did and that was to build a series of ditches, spiked fields and walls, and the ground covered with 4 pronged metal spikes. That way, you slow the enemy's advance, thereby making it a killing field.

[Fluffykeith]

I know I do this a lot, but I have a question...



Did the Darkspawn have troops behind Ostagar? I ask because if memory serves, the part of the Wilds you get sent into to gather stuff for the ritual is on the other side of Ostagar from the pass were the actual battle to place. (or am I getting mixed up?)

[Mlai00]

@ Destrier 77:



You have no clue what you're talking about. Please go take some courses on military history before mouthing off about the disadvantages of staging warfare from fortifications.

[Karlojey]

Hey, the writers haven't been in a war so they wouldn't have know what you guys have been suggesting.



The main thing is that we enjoyed the game even with the story flaws

[zaim298]

siege? i thought the main mission is to destroy the darkspawns? not holding them back.

[Destrier77]

lol at soteria, why are you even in this argument, its about darkspawn. So if your argument doesnt apply to darkspawn then, laterz.... (i thought you seemed confused thats why i ignored it) classic losing argument try to change the focus tactic. Well... not so classic, desperate...



@ andorfiend, romans were famous for defense yes. They didnt want to get caught out and built forts in hostile territory for defence and staging areas, built temp forts for their armies. Adrianos wall was an entirely different thing, most likely to control trade and funnel an army through certain points, and give warning of an attack. It wouldnt hold anything off, i can climb over it without too much touble. Its not a great wall of china. Look at the great crusades, when did any army sit in its castle and wait for battle? Castles are not an offensive tool. You dont sit in a castle waiting for a war full stop. Its a defensive aid to allow you to survive a little longer. Fereldens armies were not cowards out to protect themselves till the army passed.



In the end you have to defeat your enemy in the field thats war. Sit at home they siege you or bypass you. If you are put undersiege you are waiting for reinforcements or starvation to break the stalemate. Since the fortress was falling down, and reinforcements were not on their way, i know who would win there.



If yuo look at the pictures of the fortress its pretty much sat on a cliff and holds the pass sitting in the fortress you could just walk through the pass pretty much unhindered even if you sat in the castle.



@andorfiend all i saw lately was people saying to sit in the castle, so i had to make a comment, i mean calling people stupid/uneducated then saying that warranted a reaction!



So i think you have it there with the most intelligent solution of building posts and defending that funnel point. The problem is that the enemy were already finding ways around, i mean, they were through undergruond passages into the tower, and most likely had parties they had sent over the hills too. So who is to say after defending the staked out pass for a few days that you dont become the anvil in this hammer and anvil mentioned earlier.



Also the problem with this holding back tactic is you will never win. Its just holding back the inevitable. I would say our world example would be the defence the "300" put up made famous by the movie lately. They held them off giving armies chance to build and prepare. But thats all, they were never going to win (and there were more than 300 there in reality a few thousand).

I think thats all a pass defence would achieve, hoding them off for a while.



@puzzled mind, they didnt have time to be so detailed in defence for sure.

@fluffykieth well spotted, and usually the case in static defence.

@zaim hurah someone gets it!! They couldnt have even held them back long.

@Mlai00 ... just i cant think of a nice reaction to this so i will keep quiet. I mean my first reaction is to... must hold back... lol if you want to add something constructive, do so. If you have no intelligent input... Atleast soteria tried to argue at first. You just say shut up lol



So i would say they made the right decision, with hindsight maybe not but who knew about the betrayal.



I just thought of an example where holding out did win a battle without support arriving. Roarks drift. But the only reason the zulus left in the end was through respect of the amazing tenacity of the British. For a few hundred to last out against thousands meant they were great warriors, i doubt darkspawn would cheer the fereldans and march off after a few days of siege

[Fluffykeith]

The reason I asked about the Darkspawn in the Wilds us because it raises interesting questions regarding why the Darkspawn were attacking Ostagar. If they could get scouting parties past the keep into the wilds (the ones you kill when gathering blood for the ritual) and tunnel up into the Tower, then it suggests that they might not have needed to attack the keep at all...which suggests to me that the attacks there were to deliberatly draw Fereldens forces to one place, to make it easier for the Darkspawn to cripple the countries chances of defence. This is just a suggestion tho.



As for Hadrians Wall, I believe you have an erroneous perception of it. Don't take it's current condition as an indicator of what it was like when it was built. Studies have shown that it included a high wooden palisade on a stone foundation, together with between 14 and 17 forts. Not something you could climb over. While current evidence suggests it wouldn't have stopped a full scale assault, it would have seriously discouraged one, as well as being a powerful symbol of the Roman border at that time.

[Dansayshi]

Im willing to put money on vigils keep being at a valley floor, with a cliff mooring on 1 of its sides, and some tunnel network "nobody knows about" and some stupid retard manning the gate, leaving it open.



Darkspawn have all the fun

[Samurai_Steve_In_Paris]

Well Its only like that just to give you a dramatic battle scene and to make the game more dynamic. And besides, King Calian wanted to be like the kings of old and fight the blight head-on. he wanted a glorious battle and not to be remembered for hiding behind a wall. Its not to different from some generals today.

[Lysaimachus]

@Destrier77

I like how you ignore counter arguments.

My post gave all the reasons why a besieged army can win and gave specific examples, and included variables for the Darkspawn. Please, if you're not going to address counter arguments don't continue making your argument, that's illogical.

Modifié par Lysaimachus, 02 mars 2010 - 09:54 .

[zaim298]

lots of examples where besieged army outlasted or won against the sieging army. Castles/forts are for both defensive and offensive purposes. There is however a big difference between holing up or using such fortified point as a platform to launch an offensive engagement. In the case of Ostagar, I agree with Andorfiend that they should make full use of vantage positions and chokepoint rather than charging head on against the Darkspawn. This still baffled me, why the hell did Cailan ordered the charge?

They have a good defensive position for staging an offensive engagement with the Darkspawn. Holing up is not an option as they are not planning on delaying the Darkspawn threat or hope for the Darkspawn to get bored/tired and give up.

Edit: had they planned to wait for reinforcement from Orlais and other banns etc, then yes, holing up while waiting for reinforcement then go on the offensive is an option. But as far as Loghain is concerned reinforcement from Orlais is not an option, and Cailan seems to get it in his head he can easily defeat the Darkspawns with only the troops he have at that time.

Oh one more thing, how did they know the Darkspawns gonna march towards Ostagar 'tomorrow'? If memory serves me correctly, Cailan said "we'll march for battle tomorrow". It is just weird that if the Darkspawn determine the time of battle, how are they so certain that they're going to battle tomorrow. Scouts definitely provide the location and distance of the Darkspawns army, but it still doesn't make sense at all.

Modifié par zaim298, 03 mars 2010 - 12:15 .

[LetterDead]

i think the point of charging was to keep the enemy at a vulnerable and disorganized position while the massive 2nd army was supposed to swoop down from above.

[zaim298]

LetterDead wrote...

i think the point of charging was to keep the enemy at a vulnerable and disorganized position while the massive 2nd army was supposed to swoop down from above.

Well, they said it is gonna be lure and flank, since the meager amount of troops is gonna be the lure, it is stil not recommended to charge the enemy, in fact if they hold their ground with rank and file of shields they'll last much longer. When you're an army facing the only pass towards your objective (rest of Ferelden), and that pass is blocked by hostile army, your only option is to charge and take hold of the pass. The only thing that the defending army need to do is funnel in the charging army, wait for the opportune moment for the designated flanking troops to join in and harrass the enemies. That is why the anvil need to be a solid and immovable (a proper defensive ranks backed by a fortified point) and the hammer is the moving and hard hitting army.

[attackfighter]

soteria wrote...

It's hard for me to take you seriously when you preface your post saying "so without the insults," and then interject sarcastic insults into the rest of your post.

Boo hoo, what are you going to do, cry? Maybe he's "insulting" you because you're an idiot<_<

[Fluffykeith]

Well, that was an unneccessarily nasty (not to mention childish) thing to post...

Come on, this isn't a playground, we're not toddlers...is hurling pointless insults about really the best use of your Internet time? Really?



In any case Soteria made a perfectly valid point. It's a big daft for someone to act superiour about not using insults and then proceeding to fill their post with insults, isn't it? It doesn't exactly enhance their credibility.

[DA_legend]

If the guys in ferelden are geniuses they wouldn't need our help to save their land.