Again, it would matter little in the end. No, Aurvandil and Asylon are not strategic masterminds to realize that having 4 times the Nobles count and being on opposite ends of Terran will result in an easy victory. It simply is not a winnable or sustainable war for Terran. Or anyone. Regardless of it we had the greatest General on the face of the planet. You can't win a BM war when your enemy has over 100 nobles between two realms, one in your North and one in your South. BM wars just don't work like that.
Sure, like I said, we could have prepped and engaged Aurvandil and caused some causulties, but it would have only been an inconvenience to Aurvandil. They are far to strong, to numerous, and to well organized for it to ultimately make a difference.
Also, I never said it was smart for Asylon to engage us, I said it was ultimately irrelevant to Terran's fate. The result would be the same: we would be unable to properly engage Aurvandil (even if we wanted to) whether they engaged us or not.
Sure, Terran's loss was inevitable, assuming the war would go on long enough. I am not doubting that. What Asylon's maneuver changed, however, is the totality and abruptness of Terran's defeat. Only a week ago the horrible position that Terran is in now was unthinkable. A week ago, Terran's rurals were intact and it's cities were defensible. Now, it's rurals are in ruins and it's cities are at the complete mercy of Aurvandil. This cataclysmic turn of events was well orchestrated and is responsible for
forcing Terran to sue for peace. Before, peace was a luxury that most people were willing to support. Now, it's an absolute necessity, as even the capital is poised to fall. Before, Terran was in steady decline. Heck, perhaps it was even treading water; there
was some optimism of defeating Falkirk and, eventually, Aurvandil. Now, Terran is in complete free-fall and nothing can be done to save it from defeat.
