RE: Outside the gates?

From: Jeff Richard <richj_at_...>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 10:42:09 -0800

Donald raises a very good point:

> If the breach is easily accessible from an early stage
there's no

> reason for Tatius's massive magical and troop build up. He

> be able to mount an effective assault on the breach at the
end of

> 1620. I envisage the key being Tarkalor's Gate. With that in

> hands the breach can be forced pretty easily but without that

> there's just no way of getting enough troops to the breach.

        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.          

> I'm not sure how much serious attacking goes on during the

> anyway. Jorkandros attacks early on and then tries to use the
> Bat. I don't think there are further assaults until after

> arrives and he seems to adopt a sledgehammer/nut policy

> on building up his strength and cutting off access rather

> launching attacks. That's why I think Tarkalor's Gate falls

> treachery rather than assault in late 1620 and Broyan has to

> it - that's the time he's got the warriors, particularly if

> Lunars are slow to bring up sufficent troops.

        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.          


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Powered by hypermail