loannes Posted November 30, 2009 Report Share Posted November 30, 2009 OOC: They're running around your entire army... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagato the Great Posted November 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2009 The horse archers scooted away, losing a dozen men to the archers. They remained ahead of the Russian cavalry, firing their arrows at the vulnerable riders. A number of the horse archers laughed, for the thought of infantry chasing horses was amusing to them. They were only wearing themselves out, running in full battle garb.The chief of the tribe smiled. "For freedom!" he roared. The other 2600 horse archers rode up a small slope and onto ground level with the Russians, and spread out. They began a loop around the infantry, firing their arrows as they went, in a modified, giant version of the Cantabrian Circle. OOC: I beg to differ, as do your own words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loannes Posted November 30, 2009 Report Share Posted November 30, 2009 OOC: Then they're running around your entire infantry force. Either way, you're losing more than 20 men. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tahsir Posted November 30, 2009 Report Share Posted November 30, 2009 OOC: I beg to differ, as do your own words. OOC: didn't your entire army of infantry go, together, in one direction, along with the cavalry? Sounds like you got baited into trapping your entire army in a death trap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagato the Great Posted November 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2009 OOC: Yes, but after half a minute, they can't really kill more than 20 people. Especially not with: 1. My infantry hacking at the legs of their horses 2. My cavalry attacking them as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loannes Posted November 30, 2009 Report Share Posted November 30, 2009 OOC: 1. Your troops can't have traveled 100+ yards to the cavalry ring, which can shift AWAY from your infantry. 2. Your cavalry would have to run back from chasing my other horse archers, and would have those same archers shooting at them from behind as they withdrew. You lost more than 20 men. Edit it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagato the Great Posted November 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2009 OOC: Edited. Respond. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loannes Posted November 30, 2009 Report Share Posted November 30, 2009 OOC: 50 is no better. This is 2600 people, firing at least 2 arrows a minute each. 5200 arrows, plus those 400 other horse archers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagato the Great Posted November 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2009 OOC: 50 is no better. This is 2600 people, firing at least 2 arrows a minute each. 5200 arrows, plus those 400 other horse archers. OOC: And at the same time, for the third time: 1. My infantry is hacking at the legs of their horses 2. My cavalry is attacking them as well. 100 is the most I'm willing to go. More than that is unreasonable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tahsir Posted November 30, 2009 Report Share Posted November 30, 2009 OOC: And at the same time, for the third time:1. My infantry is hacking at the legs of their horses 2. My cavalry is attacking them as well. 100 is the most I'm willing to go. More than that is unreasonable. OOC: the Huns slaughtered entire armies ten times larger than yours using this tactic. How is over 100 unreasonable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagato the Great Posted November 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2009 OOC: Tahsir, these are not the Huns. The Huns numbered a few hundred thousand. This is about 2,600 horsemen. And in half a damn minute you don't slaughter all my infantry. In half a minute, hell even 100 is pushing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loannes Posted November 30, 2009 Report Share Posted November 30, 2009 OOC: Let me repeat. You have 2600 men firing arrows at yours. They are moving very fast in a circle around your men. If your guys get too close, that horse archer is able to scoot out of the way. Your men are stuck in a death trap, with thousands of arrows flying at them. More than 50 men. And these odds aren't far off from what the Huns dealt with. It's about 3 of yours to 1 horse archer. Huns fought in even less favorable conditions sometimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagato the Great Posted November 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2009 OOC: This is not a discussion of what the Huns fought against and with, Drake. 100 men in thirty seconds is being very generous on my part. You have 2600 men circling 7,000. If 2 men go at each horseman, it's pretty hard for that horseman to 1. scoot out of the way, 2. scoot out of the way without being attacked by another soldier, and 3. he would break the circle. considering that your horsemen have to 'scoot' to doge, your circle gets broken up rather quickly. And for the last time my cavalry is attacking as well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loannes Posted November 30, 2009 Report Share Posted November 30, 2009 OOC: Idc what the timing was. You still have 2600 guys shooting at you. That is 2600-5200 arrows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarah Tintagyl Posted November 30, 2009 Report Share Posted November 30, 2009 OOC: Lots of arrows, men on horseback, multiple arrows fired per second > 100 casualties. I'm leaving this up for Nagato and Drake to work out, but the bickering is disgusting. You definitely lose more than 100 men, I would say 500 men would be a good ball-park estimate. After than continue the battle and mind you this was in 30 seconds after that you can move your forces around. But you should lose more than 100 men, he did encircle you... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagato the Great Posted November 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2009 OOC: Okay, 500. But i better get just as good kills when I counter. IC: By the time the cavalry reached the circle almost 500 infantry had died in it. They had been hacking and slashing at the horses legs when they could, and when the warriors fell off their horses they stabbed them on the ground. The cavalry used the horsemens own attack on them, encircling them, so that the enemy was effectively trapped between the cavalry and the infantry. The cavalry fired arrows at the brigands, while others hacked at them and their horses. Meanwhile, the infantry were also doing their part, hacking at the legs and at the riders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mergerberger II Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 OOC: Seriously? Like seriously? Is that a serious post? Good lord, I may quit now if this is what I'm going to have to deal with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagato the Great Posted December 1, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 OOC: Enough bleedin OOC, merger. I assume you thought it was a serious post when Drake thought he only lost one guy in six skirmishes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 OOC: With all due respect, Nagato, I don't think you really understand Medieval tactics. First, firing blindly into the woods is not going to kill many people, period. Perhaps losing only one was pushing it for Drake, but at most he would have lost half a dozen. Cavalry is more mobile than infantry. And didn't you hactually have LESS cavalry than him? Although, Drake, remember few other than the Mongols were able to effectively use such tactics. A horseback archer takes much, MUCH more training than either a standard cavalryman or a foot archer (even a longbowman takes less training). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagato the Great Posted December 1, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 OOC: What part of "I did not shoot arrows blindly" do people simply not get? My men closed in on his, that's what happened. We have about the same amount of cavalry I would think. And anyway I left MRP. I can't keep track of what's going on in three different things on RP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freakwars Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 (edited) EDIT: wrong place Edited December 1, 2009 by freakwars Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loannes Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 OOC: With all due respect, Nagato, I don't think you really understand Medieval tactics. First, firing blindly into the woods is not going to kill many people, period. Perhaps losing only one was pushing it for Drake, but at most he would have lost half a dozen.Cavalry is more mobile than infantry. And didn't you hactually have LESS cavalry than him? Although, Drake, remember few other than the Mongols were able to effectively use such tactics. A horseback archer takes much, MUCH more training than either a standard cavalryman or a foot archer (even a longbowman takes less training). OOC: I mentioned they were Mongol-influenced. Even then, barbarians have used similar tactics in the past, such as the Scythian tribes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.