Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Maldevious]

"Well, as of now, given that we don't know their exact disposition, we will march in force to their land. We will ask for their surrender. If they fail to provide it, we will deploy for battle. Archers will loose a few volleys, light cavalry will keep them penned in, then heavy cavalry will charge. Spears will protect the archers, while our other foot will advance behind the heavy cavalry charge to mop them up."

[Gotdamnmiracle]

"May I make a suggestion?"

[Origami_Psycho]

We could have some of our men led around behind their force, so we can also cut off their mode of retreat.

[10ebbor10]

We could have some of our men led around behind their force, so we can also cut off their mode of retreat.

We don't need to prevent retreat. Once they retreat, the rebellion is over.

[Gotdamnmiracle]

We could have some of our men led around behind their force, so we can also cut off their mode of retreat.

We don't need to prevent retreat. Once they retreat, the rebellion is over.

Lol yeah. This isn't a slaughter.

[Origami_Psycho]

We could have some of our men led around behind their force, so we can also cut off their mode of retreat.

We don't need to prevent retreat. Once they retreat, the rebellion is over.

Lol yeah. This isn't a slaughter.

No, this is war.  Which requires the complete breaking of the enemy, to ensure that he will never defy you again.  Systemic slaughter is only one of a myriad of ways to accomplish this.

[Gotdamnmiracle]

"Why not set up our troops for an attack prior to demanding their surrender. If they do not comply then, we will be set up much quicker than they are. We will tell them our numbers of course and demand surrender, as to not swindle them or something malicious, but they will not have seen our placement and will only have moments to set up before we loose upon them, bringing about fear and cowardice will prevail, causing their relent. Do you agree?"

[10ebbor10]

So, usefull stuff to know:
        -Why was the rebellion started?
             -If it was started over a triviality, we could try to diminish rebellion support tremendously.
                   -After all, peasants are used to do what they are told.
        -How's the situation around the hill. We don't want to charge our cavalery into the hill.*

*Even an untrained and irregular militia can stop a cavalery charge with a big enough terrain advantage.

No, this is war.  Which requires the complete breaking of the enemy, to ensure that he will never defy you again.  Systemic slaughter is only one of a myriad of ways to accomplish this.

This is a simple rebellion. Just smash the leaders, and rest turn to brigands or flee, and the rebellion dies down. Remember, most of them are peasants, they'll run when the first deaths start to fall. If we don't give them that option, they'll fight to the death, with serious casualities as a result.

((Besides, just let them run. Leave a gap in our attack. The lands are flat and the cavalery can easily run them down. We need to drawn the enemy from the hill in order for our cavalery to be truly effective.))

[Gotdamnmiracle]

We could have some of our men led around behind their force, so we can also cut off their mode of retreat.

We don't need to prevent retreat. Once they retreat, the rebellion is over.

Lol yeah. This isn't a slaughter.

No, this is war.  Which requires the complete breaking of the enemy, to ensure that he will never defy you again.  Systemic slaughter is only one of a myriad of ways to accomplish this.

Alright. You know what does a very good job of that and is much more cost effective than routing a bunch of enemies till your troops collapse? Capture of key personnel and public execution. Sadam Hussein's army wasn't very deadly after it was forced to surrender, he was captured and executed. Massive effects showing what would happen if you were an enemy and also showing that the war was over and the Republican guard had nothing to fight for at that point. It's almost like it's war or something...

These are untrained peasents the lot. They won't fight till the death unless cornered.

Oh. And this isn't a war this is a revolution attempt. Most nations do not recognize this group therefore they are still of this nation with opposing beliefs. This more closely falls under general civil unrest than a civil war.

[Origami_Psycho]

So, usefull stuff to know:
        -Why was the rebellion started?
             -If it was started over a triviality, we could try to diminish rebellion support tremendously.
                   -After all, peasants are used to do what they are told.
        -How's the situation around the hill. We don't want to charge our cavalery into the hill.*

*Even an untrained and irregular militia can stop a cavalery charge with a big enough terrain advantage.

No, this is war.  Which requires the complete breaking of the enemy, to ensure that he will never defy you again.  Systemic slaughter is only one of a myriad of ways to accomplish this.

This is a simple rebellion. Just smash the leaders, and rest turn to brigands or flee, and the rebellion dies down. Remember, most of them are peasants, they'll run when the first deaths start to fall. If we don't give them that option, they'll fight to the death, with serious casualities as a result.

((Besides, just let them run. Leave a gap in our attack. The lands are flat and the cavalery can easily run them down. We need to drawn the enemy from the hill in order for our cavalery to be truly effective.))

And if they all turn to brigands then it takes even longer to eradicate them.  And if we volunteer ourselves for such an auspicious part of the fight we may gain some standing amongst the lords, if only as a ruthless warrior.

[Origami_Psycho]

We could have some of our men led around behind their force, so we can also cut off their mode of retreat.

We don't need to prevent retreat. Once they retreat, the rebellion is over.

Lol yeah. This isn't a slaughter.

No, this is war.  Which requires the complete breaking of the enemy, to ensure that he will never defy you again.  Systemic slaughter is only one of a myriad of ways to accomplish this.

Alright. You know what does a very good job of that and is much more cost effective than routing a bunch of enemies till your troops collapse? Capture of key personnel and public execution. Sadam Hussein's army wasn't very deadly after it was forced to surrender, he was captured and executed. Massive effects showing what would happen if you were an enemy and also showing that the war was over and the Republican guard had nothing to fight for at that point. It's almost like it's war or something...

I would like to point out the bit that says One of many ways.  Also, didn't they have a small problem with a terrorist group for a little while?  About 10 years?

[Gotdamnmiracle]

I won't continue fighting.

I disagree with your suggestion. That's all I'll say on that.

[Maldevious]

"The rebellion, I believe, was started in response to..." His voice drops. "Sir Joffin was not a very effective steward of the land, and he was a cruel man. I imagine most of his subjects were glad to see him go, and are now working with the militia simply out of self preservation."

[Origami_Psycho]

I won't continue fighting.

I disagree with your suggestion. That's all I'll say on that.

Okay.

Also, I say that in light of that, we march in a manner that hides our numbers, and makes them look larger.  Mayhap at night with all the soldiers carrying two torches?

[Gotdamnmiracle]

I won't continue fighting.

I disagree with your suggestion. That's all I'll say on that.

Okay.

Also, I say that in light of that, we march in a manner that hides our numbers, and makes them look larger.  Mayhap at night with all the soldiers carrying two torches?

I can get behind that. Also, arrows should be fired in squads, and not volleys, that way they will not know when the next volley will come and have to remain in cover.