768312

[WillLi]

@Kamelpov I meant the mongol's opponents were unfamiliar with it, not the mongols themselves. The MC's opponents would be familiar with forest combat, so that advantage is gone. Also you're 100% wrong about "no well developed tactics" because the ones doing the tactics are modern people. It's about how much the player knows about tactics. And 'common teenagers' can be very infomred about tactics because they have this thing called the internet. Look at how much random people can learn about guns just because it's something they like. Just because they don't have advanced technology doesn't mean they can't use advanced tactics.(that's exactly what the MC does).

Your entire argument is that "MC is better at strategy than the bad guys" but if the MC isn't then he's screwed. And he doesn't -know- that he's better than them, so tactically it's a horrible choice to rely on that. Also for the record, the majority of medieval combat didn't happen in forest like movies want you to think. It was in wide open plains. Here's a post that explains it. https://www.quora.com/How-did-medieval-armies-battle-in-forests

 

[Kamelpov]

@WillLi Already seen that. And yes it is the MC and of course i'm right why else MC was introduced as best player did you see the chapter 0.5 all starting input are here.
"Undefeated" say it all. No need to know "And he doesn't -know- that he's better than them, so tactically it's a horrible choice to rely on that" Oh really 100% win rate sorry lad but big amount of battle and no loss mean this guy will win whatever destiny will throw in. If he wasn't the MC he's screwed.
Of course you are right about that but we are all in this story. Like if it wasn't for gandalf the balrog shall pass.

 

[WillLi]

@Kamelpov The MC played during a beta phase, that not everyone was allowed to play during. So yes it is possible someone with better tactics than him could be playing now. And even if -we- know he is the best because she's MC, he doesn't know that. And even if she does, if your strategy relies on having better tactical knowledge than your opponent, by definition that is not a 'good strategy'. A good strategy can turn out a win even if you have a disadvantage.

Edit: For clarification, the question here isn't whether or not the MC could've beat the people in the forest with his cavalry. The question is whether or not that was the -right- choice. Which the story has already proven wasn't because of the immediate retaliation to it, which caused them to lose a few troops and still not attack the forest.

 

[Kamelpov]

@WillLi We reader know he is the best, just that because it's a story about him. Rely on better tactical knowledge yea like leader "skill check dice in wargame." i have early +3 on my dice.
I have 50% more in firepower moral check than you but you don't know about that. On the paper it turn a win like napoleon does in multiple time with like nearly always inferior troops count.
Edit : MC choice outcome is win in plain or win in forest whatever he does is followed by siege assault and bad guy miscalculating. If I was those PK I would assure a 4:1 superiority first.

Spoiler

Then green girl with intel will talk to MC and break the siege due to the big threat incoming.

 

[WillLi]

@Kamelpov except the MC's plan that we're talking about -already failed-. We're not talking about him sieging the fortress. WE're talking about how dumb it was that instead of sending infantry to the forest, he sent Cavalry. If he sent Infantry he might've been able to mop up the PKs in the forest because the fortress wouldn't have attacked him, and even if they did attack, he doesn't need the infantry to repel the bandit's attack, he uses the cavalry for that. So yes, the MC screwed up.

 

[Kamelpov]

@WillLi Plan may fail but it's still a win for him. They got massive death rate Falcon team just scratch. As as fellow wargamer you know all is in the kill/death ratio difference between both at the end of the skirmish or battle. It's a decisive victory. Did he lose some cav by sending to the forest no. Did they lose unit in the forest no. No event. Do you remember Austerlitz It's the same deal we all have a plan but sometime it's a miss but at the end only result count.

 

[WillLi]

@Kamelpov What do you mean? no one in the forest died because of his plan. But the basecamp of the MC -did- lose units when the Cav went to the forest. But then the Cavs had to come back to kill the bandits. So he sent people to the forest, had to call them back before they could do anything -and- lost some people at base camp. That is 100% a failure of a plan are you like not actually reading what happened? It doesn't matter that eventually he'll win the whole siege, he still lost troops for no reason at all.

 

[Kamelpov]

@WillLi No one care about that it's just not an optimized run. Also unit in the base wasn't his own retinue. He won't pay for it.
In wargame do you care about unit that isn't your core unit in campaign. Well same deal here.
Edit : OOB : MC with his cav
His friends : scout archer green hair
purple women: archer too
Shield guy : spearman (shield) and engineer guy with engineer
They upgrade some with gold. Lose some = lose gold
End of the quest : win lots of gold. In order to lose effectively they need to get wiped out and get kicked of the quest or pay too much buck loss for the quest.
Check 8.01 He has too much soldier and need to throw them. What he has planned is to get a high lvl quest to "suicide" them to not pay maintainance fees.
As planned.

 

[WillLi]

@Kamelpov Everything you just said...was absolutely stupid. Firstly, the specific thing I was talking about -was- that this specific move was dumb, so yes people care about that, that's literally the entire discussion we're having. Second, the base wasn't his personal units no, but it was his -friends'- units. Or did you forget his friends are real people too. So their retinue got damaged by his dumb strategy. Second, this isn't a 'war game' like modern. They have to hire and pay for each individual unit, so each unit lost is literally money that disappears, so yes that is a bad thing. He's literally wasting money. They also can't just wait and have new units show up, they wont get them back until they either capture more or go to a mercenary building and hire more soldiers.

Edit: Oh my god you are so dumb. He does not plan to suicide his units, they -dismissed- all the surplus of units before the mission. Your reading comprehension is obviously not that great, because your understanding of what is actually happening in the plot is just wrong on several levels.

Also have you forgotten the purpose of this is to train the black hair'd girl to get better? Showing her wasteful stupid tactics isn't gonna make her better. She needs to win a competition against other people who have actual military tactics training.

 

[Kamelpov]

@WillLi Oh well my bad for the dismissed. but his goal is to get high rank enough+tournament. Just mission count in my opinion you can lose unit nobody still care as it's NPC not humans and you aren't their best friend.
She can't see stupid tactic if she was defender of the camp and deal with it she can do it herself all loss are for them. MMO-RTS wise.
I don't think you have played this kind of game. They lose unit = resillience skill or gain bloody perk too in some case.
Do play that kind of game first you will see all you care about it's your unit, guild one are bonus and they can improve themselves no need for always babysit. Cash shop are only for you too.
Or just play Mount and Blade if you want to learn in solo/multiplayer.

 

[WillLi]

@Kamelpov firstly I have played the kind of game you're talking about. The problem here is this game is -not- the kind of game you play. None of us have played this kind of game because it doesn't exist. You keep trying to compare it to modern games, but it's not like them at all. This is why all your logic is just wrong, because this game doesn't work like any game either of us have played, the technology for this game to work doesn't exist.

And yes the girl -can- see the stupid tactic. She saw him leave like it was a good idea, and saw what happened because of it. So yes, it was a stupid tactic, yes it was a failure, and no they did not gain anything from it. I'm going to just stop replying to you now because you keep trying to move the goal post, and your understanding of military tactics is founded entirely on numbers in a game, with almost no logical reasoning. You just simply don't know what you're talking about if it's not the game you play all the time.

 

[Kamelpov]

@WillLi You learn from others failure firsthand. If we keep your logic. Check Bannerlord Multiplayer it looks like that. You the avatar, your guys, your goals. Gold is just number while the story don't really care about that.
Edit : And you about inserting how it don't looks like modern game while the whole story is based on it like an advert. Logical reasonning. They put warning signal.(people sleeping) As the defender you are in a camp cav in a camp is shit and must be in the open you got one squad out where do you go ? midway where is it ? in the forest ? infantry travel time huh no they are sleeping in the siege camp they power buff ballista defense fort. Sending out mean fort has only archer and cav and is easy kill while fort with archer and inf is the standard. Else just put the question on Quora and let them answer.
Edit 2 : Yea run away when you have nothing to prove that number in game value is all. This thing is a game even on a quantum computer. a programmer still require to input value and differ from real condition as all damage are also in number.

Spoiler

And at the end they need to intercept the leader of the fort running away with cavalry if they were used earlier to defend the fort instead of infantry they would fail to intercept due to red player forces and fail the quest.