> This is a really important point - I know that we want this to
>be fun for the Lunars, but fundamentally the siege should be incredibly
>frustrating from the Lunar side. The Bat and the Shargashi are used,
>and are repulsed. The defenders are outnumbered 4:1, 10:1, 15:1 and
>Whitewall still doesn't fall. Ultimately, the Lunars feel they have to
>build up a 40:1 advantage before making the final assault. Boldhome
>fell relatively quickly - Whitewall is the persistent Rebel.
The numbers we're using only reach a peak of less than 25:1 and I think that represents an element of overkill by Tatius because he doesn't realise the numbers of defenders have fallen as low as they have towards the end. There's also the fact that something like a third of his army are average or poor quality troops whereas the defenders have a high proportion of heros and warriors.
> Yeah - I actually suspect that many of the Lunar attacks in 1621
>are at least in part rituals designed by Tatius to magically "fix" the
>identity of the defenders.
That's good, it gives Tatius a sound reason for launching attacks which otherwise would just be wasting resources. The other reason is attempts to achieve small victories to boost his troops morale which must be at rock bottom when he arrives. The steady minor defeats will also be the reason why the less committed defenders start to drift away.
-- Donald Oddy http://www.grove.demon.co.uk/
Powered by hypermail