anwi wrote:Hi, as we're on withdrawal let's spend the time ... productively.
n7axw wrote:I am having trouble visualizing any fortifications that the COGA might set up as being resistant to the heavier shells of DE's angle guns for any serious length of time.
Also, you can only get so many men under effective cover once the bombardment starts.
I'm no military engineer, either, so I have to speculate, but I envisage a lot of dirt. My point of reference would be WWI trenches. If you dig in deep enough, you'd need todays' bunker busters or those Tallboy types munitions of WW2. Both are out of scope for the ICA, moreover they could not actually deploy these munitions lacking arial capabilities.
Barring that, the CoGA could dig in around e.g. a city. The ICA could certainly keep up an annoying level of bombardment, but the "kill ratio" would likely be too low to cut down CoGA units to a level where their defensive capabilities collapse. Moreover, the CoGA should be able to dig proper gun pits/fortified firing positions for its artillery, so that all close range engagements (e.g. mortars) would be a risky endeavour. And with deep trenches and hefty provisions in storage rooms in cellars or in specifically excavated rooms in bedrock (if available), depriving the CoGA units of the supply they need to continue the fight would be hard.
I would not assume that the CoGA capabilities would be sufficient to hold such a defensive position if the ICA really wants to take it at any cost (in lives), but it would take likely months of siege. And it would be costly just in terms of spent ammunition, of which there is a limited supply.n7axw wrote:Thinking about the supply situation, I would think that the alliance would be better able to protect its supply convoys with calvary and dragoons than the people forted up would have busting through to raise the siege.
The Harchonese represent a huge force, but of marginally competent, for the most part indifferently armed soldiers, at best limited in mobility which will prove their undoing when the furbar starts.
On the supply situation: If the CoGA dug rather extensive trenches and fortifications (for > 100000 men) in a place with good lines of communication (at the Langhorne canal with access to high roads, etc.) keeping up a tight siege will be hard even for the ICA, I guess. Without motorized transport, they'd have to resupply (and provision) their forward units the hard way. And those forward units and their lines of communications would be vulnerable to CoGA counterattacks from the CoGA reserves (as they could raise and deploy another army of let's say 200000 for that purpose while the siege lasts). And if you don't block the CoGA lines of communication continuously, they'll be able to resupply and hold their position even longer.
On your points on the offensive "capabilities" of the "mighty" host, I agree, as I've indicated before. Again, their limitations define the catch 22 Magwair is in. He's not allowed to deploy them defensively (which would be the best he could do) or he loses them by defeat in detail on the offensive. It'll be interesting to see, when he and Rhobair realize these points and what they'll do then.
I think we are getting a bit of 'tunnel vision' when we start considering trenches and trench warfare. In our history, trench-warfare (not siege trenches) did not come into use until the mid-1800s (Crimea and US-CW) and then became really big in Europe for WW1. The thing to remember is that deep, effective trenching does require engineering as well as massive man-hours, in short it is EXPENSIVE and must be traded off against need. While Charis angle-guns are now infamous to the CoGA, they are still working on effective countermeasures. It is illogical to go to the most expensive countermeasure before the need becomes apparent, especially if you (CoGA) are becoming financially strapped. Another fact to face is that not all terrain is suited to trenching and that desire then shifts to above-ground bunkering that tends to draw the eye and artillery!
The next critique that I have for trenching in this case is that it comes into its own in times of static war. The battle lines around Sevastopol in Crimea, Petersburg in VA and WW1 in Europe were all effective because defense had become dominant. I do not see that happening on Safehold because Charis knows that it cannot do well in a 'sitzkrieg' and need aggressive tactics like those of Green Valley and his compatriots. If you keep the lines in motion, the enemy has no time to dig-in.
and, Mangy Fur the Smart Alick Spacecat.