We couldn't have done much of anything to stop Aurvandil no matter what. We field 12,000 CS max. No way we could stop Aurvandil's full force even if we wanted.
We could have reinforced the two most likely landing spots (Larur and Gretchew) inflicting heavy casualties on Aurvandil when they disembarked. It's also possible that we could have prevented their advance Northwards by fortifying Chesland. Remember, transporting siege engines over seas is expensive, so it's unlikely that Aurvandil's army has many of them; even low level fortifications like those in Chesland could make a difference. A combination of those two tactics could also work. Deploy 6,000 CS in both Larur and Gretchew to inflict casualties upon the event of Aurvandil's landfall, then, in that contingency, have them retreat after low casualties and fall back to Chesland with a bunch of militia waiting to support them. Had things gone well, Terran could have mounted a competent defence. At the least it could have caused some attrition to Aurvandil and prevented their strike from being a fatal blow.
As for Asylon engaging Terran's army. That is simply not a good idea for them. They don't need to engage Terran's army in order to hurt Terran. They merely need to loot the Northern lands, causing economic damage and drawing Terran's armies Northwards to allow Aurvandil to land unopposed. As it is, both Asylon and Aurvandil will suffer minimal casualties while Terran will suffer tremendous economic damage and be placed in a horrible strategic position, what with her entire army shadowing Asylon's in a futile chase in the far North, in the winter no less. Basically Terran has been placed in disarray and her enemies are now able to pick her apart at their leisure. It was a very good move on their part and well orchestrated too, as Noblesse said they've pulled off every step of their plan without a hitch.
