Wag the Dog

[nbarclay]

Keep in mind that retreating riders could end up on mountains far enough away that only our knights could get to them. If they see that they're losing and keep part of their stack healthy, retreating knights get to live to fight another day and there's probably not a lot we can do about it. Under such circumstances, I'm a lot less unhappy about using knights rather than pikes to defend than I would be more normally.

[vulture]

If we can persuade them to wait a turn, their average losses go up to 6.9, while ours go down to 5.1 (2 retreats again). That means they lose over 200 shields worth of units more than we do (note edit in my previous post estimating shield losses if they attack immediately). And we have some uninjured knights and MI to try and finish off wounded riders if any are left within reach, although they'll probably be back on the mountains.

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by Arrian


Very true. Delay helps us from a tactical perspective in Toledo. It may hurt us, however, from a strategic perspective re: RP vs. ND.

Agreed. It really depends on the RNG. In a major GoW attack, odds would probably be about 50-50 whether the fortification bonus would cause us to end up with one more unit and them with one fewer or not. How much that's worth from a strategic perspective is debatable.

By the way, if GoW plays it smart and fortifies three riders on a mountain to protect retreating units, we won't be able to completely smash their offensive in the battle for Toledo. On the other hand, if they get hurt badly enough and we still have units to spare, they just might sue for peace.

[nbarclay]

Vulture, are your calculations taking our four cats into account?

[vulture]

Originally posted by nbarclay


Agreed. It really depends on the RNG. In a major GoW attack, odds would probably be about 50-50 whether the fortification bonus would cause us to end up with one more unit and them with one fewer or not. How much that's worth from a strategic perspective is debatable.

As far as I can tell, it saves us 0.9 units on average (40% chance of same losses, 40% chance we lose 1 less, 20% chance we save 2 or more units), and costs GoW 0.6 units (less change their due to retreat chances of course). It's not a huge difference - Nathan's estimate is quite close really

[vulture]

Yes, cats are included. Approximately (I'm assuming a 50% success rate for defensive cat fire).

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by vulture


As far as I can tell, it saves us 0.9 units on average (40% chance of same losses, 40% chance we lose 1 less, 20% chance we save 2 or more units), and costs GoW 0.6 units (less change their due to retreat chances of course). It's not a huge difference - Nathan's estimate is quite close really

And that's assuming GoW attacks with all 14 units, right? I'm thinking there's a good chance they won't do that when they see how well-defended the city is and start worrying about possible counterattacks against their wounded, and took that into account in my estimate.

I'd really hoped the odds would be more in our favor, though.

[Arrian]

Nathan,

Do you think it might be worth it to park a knight on the mountain & fortify it? edit: ****, we don't have time to fortify, do we?

It would be a 6.75 defens(edit: 6 defense), from which Riders cannot retreat. I bet they would leave it the hell alone... and if they didn't, good for us.

Whatcha think?

-Arrian

[Shiber]

Actually, we can send one of the knights that will reach Toledo just in time to that mountain instead, and then he'll have time to fortify. We can send more than one knight, if we're feeling lucky.

[Shiber]

A knight fortified on a hill against a rider has a 76.1% chance of defending against the first rider that attacks. That's much better than inside the city.
I suggest to park one knight on that mountain. It will give GoW a choice - either move there, but probably lose a rider and have another wounded afterwards, or move somewhere less favorable.

[Theseus]

We ask for one of RP's workers to build an outpost on the mountain.

[Aeson]

I think of it as more an opportunity to just bypass the public drama about the NAP. If GoW hesitates a turn or two, great, we take a bit fewer losses and can rush another Pike in Toledo. If they hesitate 3+ turns, they become all but insignificant. If GoW starts seeing red, great, they'll lose their stack on Toledo. I don't see it hurting us in any way to try.

If we are going to send something, it needs to be very soon.

[DeepO]

agree Aeson. The discussion is drifting... I vote to send the thing, possibly adjusted to not give them any 'proof' we're provoking them.

DeepO

[Aeson]

How about 2-3 Knights? That would leave us with 7 in the city, and probably result in 2-3 extra fights where Med Inf are defending. Given the defense:shield ratio, having the Med Inf defend isn't that bad a deal. How would only having 6 Knights in Toledo affect our odds vulture?

The other idea would be to send 2-3 Knights W to help RP deal with ND. It sounds like they will lose Z (they are out of Pikes, and at least 7 Ansars survived), but between us we could counter with 5-6 Knights, which should be enough to retake the city and kill off the rest of the Ansars.

[Aeson]

Glory of War,

The rantings of an insane man about broken treaties holds no water. The fact remains that GS has not acted against GoW. GoW is now demanding that GS honor not only it's agreements with GoW, but GoW's agreements to ND? This is completely unacceptable. GS cannot be held responsible for the agreements that GoW enters into, or GoW's (in)ability to honor those agreements. GS does not exist to facillitate GoW's military ambitions at the cost of GS' wellbeing, and neither does the NAP.

The NAP is still in effect in GS' estimation.

It becomes clear the NAP is not what GoW wishes, and that it will not keep GoW from further threatening GS cities. Both parties signed an agreement without fully understanding the limitations it would place on them in the very near future. GS has hoped that both teams could find a way to honor the NAP in light of these unforseen events, but realizes the difficulty of the situation GoW now finds itself in. GS wishes to help rectify this situation. To allow GoW to keep their honor intact, and prevent the spectacle of uninformed opinion that public debates become.

GS offers to agree to a mutual cancellation of the NAP if GoW reciprocates. GS asks one condition, a single turn of respite from being attacked by GoW or having GoW units moved further into (or through) GS territory. GoW will receive the same guarantees, that GS will not attack GoW and will respect GoW's borders for the duration of the cease fire.

This is an offer that GoW may retain it's honor, while still having full right to act against GS to fulfill contracts. The single turn cease fire item may be negotiated, or others added, but the offer is off the table if GoW were to attack GS or move further into (or through) GS territory before an agreement is reached.

That is all,

Gathering Storm