What a tide turner!
There was only, like, one round of melee! I should have lined up in FRONT!
But really, 53k vs 11k? Wow.
Quote from: Indirik on May 07, 2015, 02:32:43 AM
There was only, like, one round of melee! I should have lined up in FRONT!
But really, 53k vs 11k? Wow.
Well its not like Taselak were left many options in terms of re-enforcing.
Only people in the front lost units. That's what you get for not following the line settings!
Anyway, it was a very quick battle. It was so quick Toren's fort didn't take much damage :o
Quote from: Lapallanch on May 07, 2015, 02:57:35 AM
Only people in the front lost units. That's what you get for not following the line settings!
Anyway, it was a very quick battle. It was so quick Toren's fort didn't take much damage :o
One could argue that was a strategic mistake by Sandalak, handing a future enemy lvl 5 walls that need little maintenance.
Quote from: De-Legro on May 07, 2015, 03:43:32 AM
One could argue that was a strategic mistake by Sandalak, handing a future enemy lvl 5 walls that need little maintenance.
It will make our inevitable victory that much more satisfying!
Anyway, I don't really understand why so many people think Toren stronghold is such a horrible location. it will be great for Ikalak. Too bad they don't really have the nobles to hold on both fronts. How the Tassels spread out after their realm dies will really affect the future course of the war.
Quote from: Lapallanch on May 07, 2015, 02:57:35 AM
Only people in the front lost units. That's what you get for not following the line settings!
Anyway, it was a very quick battle. It was so quick Toren's fort didn't take much damage :o
People need to learn to listen to orders. Leaders giving out orders more than 1 time but still got people forget to follow, change accordingly. Sometimes this can cause a few surprises in battles especially closely fought ones.
Quote from: De-Legro on May 07, 2015, 03:43:32 AM
One could argue that was a strategic mistake by Sandalak, handing a future enemy lvl 5 walls that need little maintenance.
What to do? Deal is a deal, if you catch my drift.
Quote from: Indirik on May 07, 2015, 04:37:12 AM
How the Tassels spread out after their realm dies will really affect the future course of the war.
The general consensus right now is to join Sandalak just to get revenge on Ikalak, despite the long bruiser match that we had in the beginning of the war.
Quote from: Ketchum on May 07, 2015, 09:02:08 AM
People need to learn to listen to orders. Leaders giving out orders more than 1 time but still got people forget to follow, change accordingly. Sometimes this can cause a few surprises in battles especially closely fought ones.
What to do? Deal is a deal, if you catch my drift.
Had we been more restrained in our assault, the damage would have been far greater. Then again Ikalak has no shortage of gold, so in the long run it probably does not matter.
As a member of Sandalak I regularly protest in the realm against this course of action. We are more or less allying with infidels against infidels. Fanaticism clearly dictates all infidels must burn. Let's attack Ikalak!
Quote from: Fleugs on May 07, 2015, 01:24:11 PM
As a member of Sandalak I regularly protest in the realm against this course of action. We are more or less allying with infidels against infidels. Fanaticism clearly dictates all infidels must burn. Let's attack Ikalak!
Yes, but it is fun watching infidels burn each other.
>Ikalak
>win
HAH. The realm that wins will be the one that can get the most Taselakians to join it. I'm pretty blind to a lot of stuff, but Ikalak seems pretty craptastic when it comes to battles and "threatening" messages.
Lets just hope the Tassels looking to be on the winning side again won't all join Sandalak leading to a roflstomp
Quote from: Shizzle on May 09, 2015, 11:47:01 AM
Lets just hope the Tassels looking to be on the winning side again won't all join Sandalak leading to a roflstomp
Actually I wouldn't mind this, just to get to an island reset.
I'm not quite sure how Ikakak still thinks it has a chance now. I can't imagine the Sandals are going to let them have Taselak City, which is their only hope of lasting longer than a month after Taselak is gone. And if they do not have the city, they will likely not have very many defectors (except Aeneas maybe :p). The rest will join Sandalak or disappear.
So we are looking at a scenario where Sandalak has two cities and close to 100 nobles, and Ikalak has a city, Toren, and maybe 50 nobles.
At least it'll be somewhat gratifying to turbo-crush the Ikkies :)
Quote from: Sacha on May 09, 2015, 02:04:57 PM
I'm not quite sure how Ikakak still thinks it has a chance now. I can't imagine the Sandals are going to let them have Taselak City, which is their only hope of lasting longer than a month after Taselak is gone. And if they do not have the city, they will likely not have very many defectors (except Aeneas maybe :p). The rest will join Sandalak or disappear.
So we are looking at a scenario where Sandalak has two cities and close to 100 nobles, and Ikalak has a city, Toren, and maybe 50 nobles.
At least it'll be somewhat gratifying to turbo-crush the Ikkies :)
I may recall incorrectly, but I believe by the terms of the agreement Ikalak does indeed get Taselak City.
Then you'd be the fools for honoring it ;)
For once I agree with Sacha, they'd have to be beyond incompetent to let that happen.
Quote from: Sacha on May 09, 2015, 02:19:03 PM
Then you'd be the fools for honoring it ;)
Or warriors looking for a good fight instead of an easy victory.
Quote from: Penchant on May 09, 2015, 08:01:10 PM
Or warriors looking for a good fight instead of an easy victory.
I'm only mostly joking when I say maybe they chose the wrong realm to kill off if they wanted a good fight instead of an easy victory : p
Quote from: Hyral on May 10, 2015, 12:12:40 AM
I'm only mostly joking when I say maybe they chose the wrong realm to kill off if they wanted a good fight instead of an easy victory : p
What makes you think a choice was involved? There were not two separate opportunities to be weighed.
Quote from: De-Legro on May 10, 2015, 04:35:51 AM
What makes you think a choice was involved? There were not two separate opportunities to be weighed.
What makes you think a choice could not be involved? Regardless, I agree with Sandalak's choice. It'd be weird for them not to be pursuing the 2vTaselak.
god no more ooc 'gud fite' nonsense please
Quote from: Kai on May 10, 2015, 05:00:51 AM
god no more ooc 'gud fite' nonsense please
Kai, why do you have to be such a negative person? It was a good fight all around, in my opinion. From start to finish, both teams played excelently. I'm really honored to have been 'foes' of such an excellent group of people, and I'm really looking forward to the next map! Please add Toren back, this 2v1 thing has been so unfair.
Harking back to the days of the War Island minigame, the best map was the four player one. The three player maps were more often than not resolved by two players beating up on the third, and when that was not the case, when there was a more or less even three-way standoff happening, each player would hunker down and the game would drag on interminably. That seems to be the state of affairs in any three way game. It's the strategically optimal way to play.
So in the future I think it would be better to have a four realm island, with one realm being at Toren Stronghold. Even though it's not the ideal place for a fourth realm to be, it would still improve the strategic dynamic.
Quote from: Sacha on May 09, 2015, 02:04:57 PM
I'm not quite sure how Ikakak still thinks it has a chance now. I can't imagine the Sandals are going to let them have Taselak City, which is their only hope of lasting longer than a month after Taselak is gone. And if they do not have the city, they will likely not have very many defectors (except Aeneas maybe :p). The rest will join Sandalak or disappear.
So we are looking at a scenario where Sandalak has two cities and close to 100 nobles, and Ikalak has a city, Toren, and maybe 50 nobles.
At least it'll be somewhat gratifying to turbo-crush the Ikkies :)
This!
At this point I think a majority of the Taselakians might actually simply pause their chars, or have them die in death duels if they get accepted. From those leaving, I expect the majority to go to Sandalak, except Aeneas for sure :p, not Maybe Sacha. Ikalak would have to pull some rare stunts to get the Taselakians to join them on a larger scale rather than just getting the Lord Torturer in.
Quote from: Gabanus family on May 10, 2015, 01:01:49 PM
This!
At this point I think a majority of the Taselakians might actually simply pause their chars, or have them die in death duels if they get accepted. From those leaving, I expect the majority to go to Sandalak, except Aeneas for sure :p, not Maybe Sacha. Ikalak would have to pull some rare stunts to get the Taselakians to join them on a larger scale rather than just getting the Lord Torturer in.
I would find it preferable if most did pause, but then that is signing them up for boredom until the island resets.
Quote from: De-Legro on May 10, 2015, 01:08:25 PM
I would find it preferable if most did pause, but then that is signing them up for boredom until the island resets.
Just a tad less boring than a Sandalak vs Ikalak punch-up, I'd say :P
Quote from: De-Legro on May 10, 2015, 01:08:25 PM
I would find it preferable if most did pause, but then that is signing them up for boredom until the island resets.
It depends, it's not like it's your only char. Curious to see though how many Taselakians will actually turn, or will they even die? I mean Taselak City hasn't fallen yet and won't go as easily as Toren Stronghold did of course.
Quote from: Gabanus family on May 10, 2015, 02:05:36 PM
It depends, it's not like it's your only char. Curious to see though how many Taselakians will actually turn, or will they even die? I mean Taselak City hasn't fallen yet and won't go as easily as Toren Stronghold did of course.
Not their only character, but I would think you will find most people consider their War Island character to be the most enjoyable.
Nah, I didn't like it at all.
Quote from: De-Legro on May 10, 2015, 02:19:31 PM
Not their only character, but I would think you will find most people consider their War Island character to be the most enjoyable.
I don't know, for me I enjoy most of them quite a bit actually. But for others this might be true.
Quote from: Gabanus family on May 10, 2015, 02:05:36 PM
It depends, it's not like it's your only char. Curious to see though how many Taselakians will actually turn, or will they even die? I mean Taselak City hasn't fallen yet and won't go as easily as Toren Stronghold did of course.
If my character doesn't seem like a good fit for joining Sandalak (let alone Ikalak) then I'd probably delete him if he died and make a new one for the other realm. My other three characters are in Dwilight and Atamara, so very little exciting ever happens to them. Largely thanks to Dwilight's extremely long travel times and poor geographic design, and a lack of nobles.
Quote from: Clearkill on May 10, 2015, 05:28:21 AM
Kai, why do you have to be such a negative person? It was a good fight all around, in my opinion. From start to finish, both teams played excelently. I'm really honored to have been 'foes' of such an excellent group of people, and I'm really looking forward to the next map! Please add Toren back, this 2v1 thing has been so unfair.
Nah I'm referring to the ridiculous agreements which let realms survive when they should have died. It makes the whole WI a joke because the result is manipulated by some old players OOC. Even now, Taselak is being carved up OOC in order to ensure a "gud fite" between Sandalak and Ikalak.
Kai is probably bitter that Taselak lost despite being so ahead initially.
It was really obvious though. If you take Toren Stronghold early, you will have a timer going for your realm. If you can't overwhelm your enemies quickly, you will lose period.
Taselak was pretty diplomatic at the beginning then once they solidified their grip on Toren Stronghold, they became arrogant and pretty much insulted both Sandalak and Ikalak constantly. They had many chances to win.
There was only one OoC agreement this whole time. Not killing off Ikalak right away when Sandalak sacked their capital. Sandalak pulled out right away because I felt bad about what happened in Ikalak. They had a really rough start when people were flaming each other oocly which caused their realm to fall apart rapidly.
Quote from: Kai on May 16, 2015, 07:17:02 AM
Nah I'm referring to the ridiculous agreements which let realms survive when they should have died. It makes the whole WI a joke because the result is manipulated by some old players OOC. Even now, Taselak is being carved up OOC in order to ensure a "gud fite" between Sandalak and Ikalak.
There is no OOC agreement for a "Gus Fite". Even your limited grasp of logic would spot that without most of Taselak joinin Ikalak there won't be anything of a real contest between the two. There was and is a IC agreement to concentrate on Taselak first.
Nah I left Taselak cause the lords were neo capitalist libertarian gold hoarders who would use RP to deny the existence of game mechanics.
Quote from: Kai on May 16, 2015, 10:18:37 AM
Nah I left Taselak cause the lords were neo capitalist libertarian gold hoarders who would use RP to deny the existence of game mechanics.
By all means, do explain
Well, as long as there are more than two realms on the island, one is always going to get ganged up on by the others.
So I've wondered how the war would play out if there were only two realms instead of three. For instance, remove the city of Ikalak and replace it with a Toren-esque stronghold, or just remove it completely. Then you'd have Taselak and Sandalak, relatively close to each other's capitals, but with large swathes of useful land further north. You might end up with a more dynamic war too, compared to the typical "SEND ALL THE TROOPS TO THAT ONE PLACE!" battles. Fighting in the north and south would happen simultaneously.
Ikalak v Taselak might work like that, too.
Ikalak is in a weaker location than the other two realms, that's why it always loses (in BM as well as the War Island minigame).
Quote from: The Red Foliot on May 16, 2015, 07:51:24 PM
Ikalak is in a weaker location than the other two realms, that's why it always loses (in BM as well as the War Island minigame).
Unfortunately, in this particular incarnation of the War Island, Ikalak's situation cannot be attributed to anything but its own complete dysfunction in the early days of the island.
However, I strongly suspect you are correct in this assessment. I'd be very open to suggestions as to the minimal changes needed to remove this disadvantage of Ikalak's.
Their main weakness is that it takes them so long to move from one battle front to the other. If their army is in Neralle fighting Taselak, say, and they get attacked in Triewa by Sandalak, it would take them at least six turns to respond to Sandalak. It's the bane of a crescent-shaped empire.
You could alleviate this disadvantage to some extent by adding a sea route from Kail to Unagae, or thereabouts.
Quote from: The Red Foliot on May 16, 2015, 09:18:46 PM
Their main weakness is that it takes them so long to move from one battle front to the other. If their army is in Neralle fighting Taselak, say, and they get attacked in Triewa by Sandalak, it would take them at least six turns to respond to Sandalak. It's the bane of a crescent-shaped empire.
You could alleviate this disadvantage to some extent by adding a sea route from Kail to Unagae, or thereabouts.
Don't the other two have essentially the same issue? How long does it take to get from Moeth to Seggelin?
Quote from: Anaris on May 16, 2015, 09:48:52 PM
Don't the other two have essentially the same issue? How long does it take to get from Moeth to Seggelin?
It takes three turns, or half as much time as it takes Ikalak.
Quote from: Sacha on May 16, 2015, 04:03:08 PM
Well, as long as there are more than two realms on the island, one is always going to get ganged up on by the others.
So I've wondered how the war would play out if there were only two realms instead of three. For instance, remove the city of Ikalak and replace it with a Toren-esque stronghold, or just remove it completely. Then you'd have Taselak and Sandalak, relatively close to each other's capitals, but with large swathes of useful land further north. You might end up with a more dynamic war too, compared to the typical "SEND ALL THE TROOPS TO THAT ONE PLACE!" battles. Fighting in the north and south would happen simultaneously.
The problem with 1 V 1 should be obvious. If we ended up with an island where on realm has Ikalaks noble count, and the other had Sandalaks or Taselaks (at its height) then you don't have a very entertaining island at all. 1 V 1 V 1 allows for the weaker realms to combine to have a chance against the stronger. Generally this leads to constantly shifting alliances as one realm gets the upper hand, as was seen in original war island. This incarnation Taselak simply pissed off the other two realms enough that no one is now willing to ally with them.
Plus, the constant torture means that no one can have secrets. Sandalak knows a few of Taselak's proposals to join another realm and then rebel, etc.
QuoteGenerally this leads to constantly shifting alliances as one realm gets the upper hand, as was seen in original war island.
Then it becomes a game of diplomacy, which can seem equally arbitrary as noble count. It's in the best interest of the two weakest realms to kill the strongest realm, so the strategy becomes about influencing that perception. You want to appear weaker than you actually are, and the two realms that appear the weakest will want to kill the one that appears to be the strongest.
Once that is done, the strongest competitor has been killed off and the remaining two realms are in the same position they'd be in if there were only two realms to begin with. That is, it becomes primarily about noble count.
Noble count isn't just random. I suspect that Ikalak gets far fewer nobles in part because some players recognize its bad topographic position and don't want to be on the handicapped team. Another influence is the atmosphere of a realm, where realms that are active and fun attract and retain more nobles than realms that don't. Atmosphere doesn't just mean roleplays and banter; having a general who is competent helps augment it. In any case, the noble counts of Taselak and Sandalak have been close to even for awhile, although Taselak's seems to be diminishing as the war comes to a close. I think that when two realms occupy roughly even territories on the map, and when they both meet rough standards for atmosphere, as Taselak and Sandalak do now, they will attain roughly equal totals of nobles.
I like the idea of a two-realm war island. I like it because it diminishes the diplomacy component and therefore increases the importance of everything else. A four-way island would also be a good option, as it could turn into an equal 2vs2 war or a true free for all. Three-way wars would logically end in what I described above, the two weaker realms killing the strongest to optimize their own odds, then fighting a delayed 1vs1 - but with a guilty conscience.
Quote from: The Red Foliot on May 17, 2015, 02:45:48 AM
Then it becomes a game of diplomacy, which can seem equally arbitrary as noble count. It's in the best interest of the two weakest realms to kill the strongest realm, so the strategy becomes about influencing that perception. You want to appear weaker than you actually are, and the two realms that appear the weakest will want to kill the one that appears to be the strongest.
Once that is done, the strongest competitor has been killed off and the remaining two realms are in the same position they'd be in if there were only two realms to begin with. That is, it becomes primarily about noble count.
Noble count isn't just random. I suspect that Ikalak gets far fewer nobles in part because some players recognize its bad topographic position and don't want to be on the handicapped team. Another influence is the atmosphere of a realm, where realms that are active and fun attract and retain more nobles than realms that don't. Atmosphere doesn't just mean roleplays and banter; having a general who is competent helps augment it. In any case, the noble counts of Taselak and Sandalak have been close to even for awhile, although Taselak's seems to be diminishing as the war comes to a close. I think that when two realms occupy roughly even territories on the map, and when they both meet rough standards for atmosphere, as Taselak and Sandalak do now, they will attain roughly equal totals of nobles.
I like the idea of a two-realm war island. I like it because it diminishes the diplomacy component and therefore increases the importance of everything else. A four-way island would also be a good option, as it could turn into an equal 2vs2 war or a true free for all. Three-way wars would logically end in what I described above, the two weaker realms killing the strongest to optimize their own odds, then fighting a delayed 1vs1 - but with a guilty conscience.
Not quite, it is in there interest to team up against the strongest, only until the point where they are no longer the strongest, not to their death. Then generally what occurs is the weaker of the two allied realms starts to look to what will happen with the enemy gone, and decide that perhaps it is time for a new alliance against the new strongest realm.
Logically anyone that has spent any time playing war games in 1 v 1 v 1 know this effect, it generally keeps games from ending with the constant shift against whomever is currently the strongest. And yes given that one scenario is to attempt to feign weakness such that your ally does not consider you a threat.
I very much doubt either Ikalak or Sandalak have a guilty conscience, nor will they. They have both played in a manner to maximise the situation they found themselves in, and so far have been successful in doing so. That is in the end the very nature of war, seeking the advantage where ever it can be found.
Quote from: De-Legro on May 17, 2015, 11:49:16 AM
Not quite, it is in there interest to team up against the strongest, only until the point where they are no longer the strongest, not to their death. Then generally what occurs is the weaker of the two allied realms starts to look to what will happen with the enemy gone, and decide that perhaps it is time for a new alliance against the new strongest realm.
Logically anyone that has spent any time playing war games in 1 v 1 v 1 know this effect, it generally keeps games from ending with the constant shift against whomever is currently the strongest. And yes given that one scenario is to attempt to feign weakness such that your ally does not consider you a threat.
I very much doubt either Ikalak or Sandalak have a guilty conscience, nor will they. They have both played in a manner to maximise the situation they found themselves in, and so far have been successful in doing so. That is in the end the very nature of war, seeking the advantage where ever it can be found.
Except that didn't happen De-Legro. Ikalak and Sandalak have gone full tilt against Takelak, long past the point where it could be considered the strongest realm. If it worked as you said, Ikalak would have long ago seeked an alliance against Sandalak with Takelak, but that never happened.
That's because Taselak pissed everyone off. Do that, and you deserve what you get.
Quote from: GundamMerc on May 17, 2015, 06:57:19 PM
Except that didn't happen De-Legro. Ikalak and Sandalak have gone full tilt against Takelak, long past the point where it could be considered the strongest realm. If it worked as you said, Ikalak would have long ago seeked an alliance against Sandalak with Takelak, but that never happened.
Eh... Taselak has insulted their enemies every time they met them. Sure, you guys could afford to do that when you were enjoying the RC advantage but should really have changed your attitude when you started to lose.
But you know, people never learn.
We insulted the Sandies and the Sandies insulted us back, that's how our battles went. We traded blows and mocking letters.
As far as Ikalak is concerned, we mainly picked on Hans and the Sandies even agreed when we called them names.
This being the war island, Taselak is doing the right amount of (cleverly written) insulting. Our lack of conflict with Ikalak prevents us from experiencing their insults. A shame!
Quote from: GundamMerc on May 17, 2015, 06:57:19 PM
Except that didn't happen De-Legro. Ikalak and Sandalak have gone full tilt against Takelak, long past the point where it could be considered the strongest realm. If it worked as you said, Ikalak would have long ago seeked an alliance against Sandalak with Takelak, but that never happened.
There are always going to be exceptions. As I understand it Taselak rubbished everyone's attempt at diplomacy in quite an insulting manner until their own backs were against the wall. Sometimes you reap what you sow.
Another possibility is that Taselak was simply so exceptional no one is willing to give them breathing space.
Quote from: Fleugs on May 17, 2015, 10:34:29 PM
This being the war island, Taselak is doing the right amount of (cleverly written) insulting. Our lack of conflict with Ikalak prevents us from experiencing their insults. A shame!
I don't even read messages after a battle anymore. It is like
listen to a bunch of 20 year old football hooligans at a match.
I found Ikalakian post-battle banter to be the worst written more often than not. Though there certainly is poorly written stuff from every side. There used to be some really hilarious stuff though. RIP Moto.
Quote from: Lapallanch on May 17, 2015, 08:14:26 PM
Eh... Taselak has insulted their enemies every time they met them. Sure, you guys could afford to do that when you were enjoying the RC advantage but should really have changed your attitude when you started to lose.
But you know, people never learn.
You can never not afford insulting your enemies. They're your enemies! And when your enemies are so puny they need to gang up on you to defeat you, then by the gods, you insult them even more!
I shall miss the poetry battles between The Most Honorable Man on the Island and The Hound of Sandalak
I'm surprised it took this long for them to attack Taselak, I expected it to happen like two months ago.
Quote from: Ossan on May 28, 2015, 12:55:49 AM
I'm surprised it took this long for them to attack Taselak, I expected it to happen like two months ago.
Two months ago they were still taking outer regions from Taselak. Even now the assault is likely to fail, had they thrown away their armies while Taselak had substantial holdings remaining, that would have given Taselak an edge for a while to make gain. The theory now would be that Taselak is wounded enough that after the assault fails they won't be able to do much before a refit can occur and a 2nd assault begin.
There is only about a 10k difference in attacker vs defender, and that is after the ability for Taselak to field a mobile force was significantly reduced.
Quote from: Ossan on May 28, 2015, 12:55:49 AM
I'm surprised it took this long for them to attack Taselak, I expected it to happen like two months ago.
One of the biggest mistakes generals make in Battlemaster is assaulting a city too early. Assaulting a city and failing can often be the turning point in a war. I've seen it happen so many times.
Few things...
1) Taselak's Mobile CS - They have 13~15k at most now. Even if this siege fails, what are they going to do with their mobile armies? Refit? I don't think so. You guys are out of gold probably at this point. Run TOs? At most you will get two regions only to lose them in less than 2 days. So at this point, Taselak has been weakened enough and their mobile CS is no longer a threat.
2) Militia - You can't mobilize militia for two weeks. If a battle happens, the timer resets. So Taselak just has a lot of non-mobile units they can't really use. Reinforcing it will cost a lot again.
3) Wall - If you haven't noticed, it is expensive to rebuild walls on SI. Very expensive.
So to sum up, Taselak is incapable of doing all three things at once. Eventually, they will crumble. Also, Taselak's noble count seems to be going down pretty rapidly meaning after few battles, most Tasels will be gone and the city will probably be empty enough to be conquered.
All I have to do is lose a duel and we've got 500 more gold!
Quote from: Indirik on May 28, 2015, 03:25:48 AM
One of the biggest mistakes generals make in Battlemaster is assaulting a city too early. Assaulting a city and failing can often be the turning point in a war. I've seen it happen so many times.
Oh I agree, been there and done that too. I just feel like they should have been able to take those regions a lot faster, if they were better coordinated and led anyway.
Quote from: Ossan on May 28, 2015, 07:14:12 AM
All I have to do is lose a duel and we've got 500 more gold!
Oh I agree, been there and done that too. I just feel like they should have been able to take those regions a lot faster, if they were better coordinated and led anyway.
Sandalak has constantly shown it ability to TO regions faster then any other realm on the island. Ikalak on the other hand doesn't have the mobile force to match the speeds of the other two realms. Combine that with the increasing issue of distance from the capital VS Taselaks decreasing distance in order to reverse TO's and you are pretty much playing paper general here, and poorly.