Quote:
Originally Posted by ttdestroy
They all knew it was a trap, and when the enemy sets you up, you don't go right in his house. However, like Borcuse kept saying, Baldr's tactics are good but they're by-the-book to a fault, so maybe Baldr was trying to be unpredictable? Thats the only reason to send your second-in-command straight into a trap.
|
Well the one thing i cant fault Baldr on was whom he chose to lead the assault. Shes specializes in close quarters combat and is a sound leader, if the attack had any chance of being successful someone competent had to go. But her loss and humiliation and the hands of Nike was still too much for the troops to take.
I guess the question we could ask is. Was is it too much of gamble? In my opinion yes it was. No matter what era you live in if its a ground war position on the ground take precedent. A small unit can hold out against a much stronger force if they have good ground. Having the high ground is as good as it gets and in this situation i can point another advantage Baldr had.
If you go back and look at the heights Baldr occupied there were several natural advantages.
1.Natural sniping spot
2.The hill was steep when the 20 units drop down to attack they slid down because of how steep it was. Now imagine the Athens units trying to attack in force up such steep ground. From what i saw there were no Artimis units there (they could have cleared them easily with their mobility but not with out taking long rage fire)
3.The area where the Athens troops would have had to assault was not big enough for a large group to attack in force. They would have been on top of each other trying to get up. Therefore rending their number advantage squat. Think of where Girghe attacked in a narrow canyon where they could not fully deploy and he inflicted heavy damage on Borucse own personal guard.
4. This is the most important from the position i saw them take up it was impossible for Baldr's units to be flanked nor attacked from behind. Which means they have held for days depending on supplies. Also with no way for the enemy to get behind them their retreat route would have remained opened.
I say this is the most important because Baldr could have sent a messenger stating he needed reinforcements. Tired or damaged units could have been pulled off the line replaced with fresh units. Bolstering his forces while holding Athens at bay and the retreat option was still there, just encase the main Athens force arrived. Worst case scenario is there is stalemate. From what i can tell from how the Athens forces are trained getting into a war of attrition with them is a bad idea these guys excel at this kind overwhelming and psychological warfare. Weaken their forces while holding and force them to pull back. I bet if Baldr would have done this Athens would have pulled back why? Because Borcuse would have become bored and he did have a mission objective he did not have infinite time to waste on that battle. Plus when Rygart showed up it would have thrown him off and he would still retreated.
I know im over-thinking it but it was as clear as day to me.