The Marrocidenian war

[Woelfy]

Maybe the 'moot shouldn't have sent spies to cause dissent in Luria.

Just sayin.

[Vellos]

Maybe the 'moot shouldn't have sent spies to cause dissent in Luria.

Just sayin.

.... maybe you missed the part where that spy ring was actually trying to destabilize the Moot, and using the Lurias as a tool to do that?

From our perspective, it looks a wee bit more like the Lurias were using spies to destabilize us. We had mass banishments and near rebellion– you had a few spies.

[Woelfy]

* Woelfy shrugs.

I'm giving you how it looked from the Lurian side of the map.

[Anaris]

Actually, we came way closer to rebellion over it than we should have, too, at least if we were any normal powerbloc.

It ain't easy trying to lead Lurians.

[Feylonis]

Heh, do you mean Luria also fell for the "send a letter to someoneB allegedly from someoneA to someoneC taking about a takedown in somewhereD", like the Zuma against the Moot? After the first time you think we'd learn and be smarter a bit :p

[Chenier]

Heh, do you mean Luria also fell for the "send a letter to someoneB allegedly from someoneA to someoneC taking about a takedown in somewhereD", like the Zuma against the Moot? After the first time you think we'd learn and be smarter a bit :p

We are constantly reminded by the stupidity of foreigners thanks to events like this.

Egamma: removed Glaumring comment at his request.

[Chenier]

Sorry. Not buying it. Your actions during the war showed nothing but self-interest and disregard for your allies. Even your allies say that.

Indeed. At first, Machiavel and Glaumring agreed much on Terran going too far and not avoiding a conflict that could have avoided.

Then, you went on your own to make the conflict even worse...

[Feylonis]

Best intentions, maybe, but very poorly executed. At the time that Asylon decided to attack Kabrinskia, the north was near-defenseless (hence, Astrum was able to take Wallershire with ease, and immediately pose a threat to the Itau duchy). This was despite the fact that even before the war, alarms were raised by some regarding the weakness of the northern border.

Kabrinskia also managed to plunder the regions between Itau and Via, virtually splitting Asylon in two. When concerns were raised over this, Glaumring remarked that Kybcyell and Uppervia were "useless anyway", despite the fact that the two regions were the ones feeding Via and Itau. I expect that contributed to the extreme starvation in Asylon (and that certainly helped alleviate starvation in Kabrinskia, in addition to allied supply :D).

[Chenier]

Uh... yes. You keep bringing up how "Terran betrayed your friendship" and how "the Moot is poor communicators" and you're the one who brought all of this back in a thread unrelated to it just to say "na na, look how dumb you were you should stuck with me and we would have beaten the world!!"

You do care. Because you literally can't get off of the topic of this alternate reality you have constructed in which Terran, and everyone else, betrayed you. But mostly Terran. Somehow. Even though we didn't change our stance throughout the whole war. And you did. Multiple times. In tiny time spans. Multiple times. But we were wrong. Yeah.

Indeed. If you don't care, then don't keep bringing it up... Otherwise, don't blame the 'moot for ditching you.

[Vellos]

Egamma: removed Glaumring comment at his request.

So... how 'bout Paisly?

I guess both sides now are racing for their refits?

[Lanyon]

and Glaumring throws a left hook at Anaris. oh what is this? Indirik supplexed glaumring. Proceed with the group teabagging. JKJK

Really though, Glaumring I don't think you are giving everyone else enough credit in interpreting the situation. They probably knew quite a bit about what was going on especially the older ones with their ties that bind and such.

[NoblesseChevaleresque]

Actually, this was a thread about the Maroccidental war.

So... how 'bout Paisly?

I guess both sides now are racing for their refits?

I imagine Terran are, but Aurvandil can afford to delay since we now have the Motte and Bailey in Paisland, and Terran can at best bring south 12,000 C.S. and usually they bring very little infantry and usually the same amount in Cavalry.

Though, it'll be interesting to see how things plays out once Paisly secedes and either side can either go to war with the new realm to fight the other, or go through Barca which seems to be struggling just to exist at the moment, which should be soon since Aurvandil likes to give its cities the boot as soon as possible and tell them to make it on their own and to stop free loading on the Commonwealth.

[Vellos]

I imagine Terran are, but Aurvandil can afford to delay since we now have the Motte and Bailey in Paisland, and Terran can at best bring south 12,000 C.S. and usually they bring very little infantry and usually the same amount in Cavalry.

Though, it'll be interesting to see how things plays out once Paisly secedes and either side can either go to war with the new realm to fight the other, or go through Barca which seems to be struggling just to exist at the moment, which should be soon since Aurvandil likes to give its cities the boot as soon as possible and tell them to make it on their own and to stop free loading on the Commonwealth.

Indeed, if/when you spin off Paisly, that'll be a very interesting dynamic.

That said, I do think Aurvandil is overtrusting in infantry. In battles where the wind doesn't screw up the archers, we have inflicted substantively heavier casualties on you than you have on us. Admittedly, that weather factor does add a major risk element– but I can't help thinking that your lack of cav and much ranged power is gonna come back to bite you if we ever get in a situation with CS-parity.

[Zakilevo]

Indeed, if/when you spin off Paisly, that'll be a very interesting dynamic.

That said, I do think Aurvandil is overtrusting in infantry. In battles where the wind doesn't screw up the archers, we have inflicted substantively heavier casualties on you than you have on us. Admittedly, that weather factor does add a major risk element– but I can't help thinking that your lack of cav and much ranged power is gonna come back to bite you if we ever get in a situation with CS-parity.

I can confirm this. I had to lead Enweil's archer heavy army against Riombara and we still managed to repel Riombara, even when we had 3k less than them. But mostly the weather in BM isn't so great. I'd rather invest in getting cavalry units and constantly repeat charge/retreat tactic.

[Chenier]

I can confirm this. I had to lead Enweil's archer heavy army against Riombara and we still managed to repel Riombara, even when we had 3k less than them. But mostly the weather in BM isn't so great. I'd rather invest in getting cavalry units and constantly repeat charge/retreat tactic.

It's not just the army composition, though, it's also the line settings both sides use.

When I was Enweil's general, I optimized the line settings according to what we had, what the enemy had, and what we knew the enemy liked to use, which helped us do better with less (overall, mostly just helped compensate for sub-par movement rates though).

On the other hand, you could have a lot of archers, good weather, more CS than the enemy, and still get stomped, if you use poor settings and the enemy uses good ones. I like archers, but overall, infantry-heavy armies tend to be a lot more reliable imo.