Gate opens up at Tulln 9/5/1683

[Batrix2070]

Let me give my three cents to the whole thing. Wiverns in my opinion have such a limitation that their range of fire is small, very small which in fact exposes them to the fire of archers and slingers which although it does not have to kill them is enough to drive them away. In my opinion a simple dispersed formation of riflemen is enough which will do the same as the Swedes do when fighting our hussars, i.e. it will wait until it gets close enough to attack and the whole dispersed column will open fire at the same time. If they are successful, they can even kill a rider who is unprotected and can only rely on his armour.
That is why I think that wiverns are only used as scouts, and attack only those columns of units that do not have the cover of firing units. I doubt they can get anything other than infantry or artillery, because I don't think it is safe to fire on the fly, which makes it impossible to get cavalry if it is moving.

Especially Hussars, which are light cavalry with the strike power of heavy cavalry. And at the same time it does not ride in masses like regular cavalry units in antiquity, but it knows and uses various tricks to break up into smaller formations on the move, and Polish horses were trained to quickly change pace and direction of movement. Especially that they know the manoeuvre used by Poles since the beginning of this century, i.e. a 180 turn while riding (the Battle of Kircholm for example). Therefore, I think that the first trick will be to use the cavalry to draw the wiverns away from the rest of the Saderian army.

I think this job will fall to the dragoons who, being infantry on horseback, can pretend to be regular infantry and then get on their horses and ride off somewhere else.
The worst would be the pikemen, mainly Austrians, as we Poles used them less, filling their anti-cavalry function with our own cavalry, the much less known but more numerous Pancerni, also sometimes called Cossacks.
In general Sadera may have big problems, most likely their hit will make them capture Tuln and surroundings but they may have problem to go further, Austria is after all mountainous terrain and if they don't get allies quickly they may even lose and be pushed back. Sadera will have to use a lot of manpower to even begin to lay siege to Vienna. Overall in the best case scenario they can occupy Lower Austria, Western Slovakia and Moravia. Austrians could retreat to the Alps, Turks could retreat to Hungary. The Poles could retreat to the Moravian Gate.
The question is what kind of turmoil will this cause and call for a new great crusade to Sadera led against the barbaric Pagans?
Or will the states, having regrouped, try another strike to capture the Gate and the riches beyond it?

At the same time the appearance of the Gate may cause a rift in the Holy League and Poland's withdrawal from it if the Turks offer Poland Silesia with a part of North Slovakia and give up Podole. Sobieski was not in favor of war with Turkey, and wars were fought to regain lost Podolia. Poland had little interest in war with Turkey until the loss of Podolia.

If the Turks think that they can get the lands behind the Gate they can try to bribe us quite successfully and we can afford it without regret.

 

[ATP]

Let me give my three cents to the whole thing. Wiverns in my opinion have such a limitation that their range of fire is small, very small which in fact exposes them to the fire of archers and slingers which although it does not have to kill them is enough to drive them away. In my opinion a simple dispersed formation of riflemen is enough which will do the same as the Swedes do when fighting our hussars, i.e. it will wait until it gets close enough to attack and the whole dispersed column will open fire at the same time. If they are successful, they can even kill a rider who is unprotected and can only rely on his armour.
That is why I think that wiverns are only used as scouts, and attack only those columns of units that do not have the cover of firing units. I doubt they can get anything other than infantry or artillery, because I don't think it is safe to fire on the fly, which makes it impossible to get cavalry if it is moving.

Especially Hussars, which are light cavalry with the strike power of heavy cavalry. And at the same time it does not ride in masses like regular cavalry units in antiquity, but it knows and uses various tricks to break up into smaller formations on the move, and Polish horses were trained to quickly change pace and direction of movement. Especially that they know the manoeuvre used by Poles since the beginning of this century, i.e. a 180 turn while riding (the Battle of Kircholm for example). Therefore, I think that the first trick will be to use the cavalry to draw the wiverns away from the rest of the Saderian army.

I think this job will fall to the dragoons who, being infantry on horseback, can pretend to be regular infantry and then get on their horses and ride off somewhere else.
The worst would be the pikemen, mainly Austrians, as we Poles used them less, filling their anti-cavalry function with our own cavalry, the much less known but more numerous Pancerni, also sometimes called Cossacks.
In general Sadera may have big problems, most likely their hit will make them capture Tuln and surroundings but they may have problem to go further, Austria is after all mountainous terrain and if they don't get allies quickly they may even lose and be pushed back. Sadera will have to use a lot of manpower to even begin to lay siege to Vienna. Overall in the best case scenario they can occupy Lower Austria, Western Slovakia and Moravia. Austrians could retreat to the Alps, Turks could retreat to Hungary. The Poles could retreat to the Moravian Gate.
The question is what kind of turmoil will this cause and call for a new great crusade to Sadera led against the barbaric Pagans?
Or will the states, having regrouped, try another strike to capture the Gate and the riches beyond it?

At the same time the appearance of the Gate may cause a rift in the Holy League and Poland's withdrawal from it if the Turks offer Poland Silesia with a part of North Slovakia and give up Podole. Sobieski was not in favor of war with Turkey, and wars were fought to regain lost Podolia. Poland had little interest in war with Turkey until the loss of Podolia.

If the Turks think that they can get the lands behind the Gate they can try to bribe us quite successfully and we can afford it without regret.

Turks could gather 300.000 army,but - only 12.000 was janissaries,with maybe 5000 houehold spahis calvary.Rest was levies of various quality.
Even worst,their infrantry used muskets,but have no pikes and armours.Saderans would schoot most with archers,and legions would kill rest.
So,no turkish conqest there.
But you are right,winged hussarls would be no easy target for wywerns.

 

[Chiron]

Produces fire, so decimates infantry utterly is a bit of a long stretch, IMHO.

Sorry, but you need to do better than that, like showing that that fire can do actual damage at actual decent range.

Which we clearly saw through the anime, and as they age and get bigger, their fire gets more destructive.

I am certain that metal armor and those silly metal helmets are a big asset against fire.
I certainly didn't see mythrial-like armor and shields on the Sedarans, so I'd think that they were about as well equipped as your average Roman.
But are you forgetting one important thing?

They would and in fact ancient fire fighters used them as it protected their skin and body when fighting fires till lighter weight and fire proofed fabrics became available. Wyverns would have accelerated a need to develop fire resistance material as a tactical necessity. Because commanders are going to know that there will be leakers and need to have some protection in the few seconds they will be exposed.

17th century armies used a lot of canons, muskets, mortars, and grenades.
I think that the shock and awe of a canon ball slamming through your formation and turning the people next to you into bloody pulp would kinda-sorta be the same as a dragon burning a few of the front rank.
We are talking about line infantry that was subject to pistol wielding cavalry charges, canon bombardment, early versions of grapeshot and occasionally chain shot and black powder grenades.
Line infantry warfare with canon was brutal, and I think the veterans of such battles were far less squeamish than you apparently believe them to be.

The pike is still the main weapon of attack, armor is still widely worn, cannons have a firing rate of one round every 6 minutes at best, its all solid cannon balls, explosive rounds won't show up for another 20 years, grenades are not widespread yet, rocketry wasn't tactically significant, and caracoles with pistols were not tactically effective as armor was widespread and the rounds too low velocity and too inaccurate.

Also the Saderans would be in strong defensive positions and have their own artillery set up plus the arsenal of Tulln and some newly 'hired' artillerists to man them.

The rest of this post is again you not grasping the actual tactical reality.

Princess beach cocktail and her forces rode horses, they did not ride wiverns.

So what? She was kept as an honor guard formation that the Emperor indulged till he decided to send her to reinforce Italica. She was never meant to go on campaign till the Emperor found himself a little light on troops till the training camps popped out more troops. Also it may even have been preference as well.

That being said it proves nothing. Also does it not occur to you a general in command of troops needs to be on the ground in a central spot to see the action and receive report and send orders back out? Sure being flying, would give a better view, but then, how does the general gives orders or receives reports when in the air? Horn and light signals can only convey so much. Generals don't have god mode real time intel you know.

Also, this is in essence a medieval army, I doubt that they can coordinate all that well, you need radios for a proper, effective combined arms IMHO, so I think you are over-exaggerating the efficiency of the cooperation between Wiverns and the rest of the army.
I mean, a large army from the roman times up to modernity was usually broken up into several, pretty autonomous detachments, so the level of coordination you envision is IMHO extremely hard to achieve.
Frankly, communicating with the wivern riders sounds nigh impossible and they would have to be 100% autonomous.

Horns, light signals, pre-battle briefings and trusting initiative of on the spot commanders. Medieval Armies were quite capable of executing complex maneuvers and getting orders out. Especially the ones with professional standing armies that train constantly which the Saderans had which enabled them to recruit 3 full armies in a rapid time frame plus throw together and organize their vassals to serve as fodder. That isn't possible without a high degree of organization and central planning to coordinate resources quickly.

When they had terrain advantage and when facing cataracts only, maybe they got a few victories.
The trick is to soften them up with light mounted archers, then mop up with heavy cavalry.

And from what I have read on the subject the Persians had an overwhelming advantage on flat terrain, with the legions being able to win only when they had a hilly area to contest.

Rome on multiple occasions marched down through Iraq and destroyed the Persian Armies and sacked the capital. Persians never went to Rome or Constantinople. The Romans certain could and did beat the Persians because they had combined arms troops who worked in concert.

 

[Agent23]

Which we clearly saw through the anime, and as they age and get bigger, their fire gets more destructive.

You sure you aren't mixing up that dragon Itami killed with one of them?


Those beasties, their capabilities and their lifecycle weren't really covered and you are making assumptions on the basis of a few shots.

They would and in fact ancient fire fighters used them as it protected their skin and body when fighting fires till lighter weight and fire proofed fabrics became available. Wyverns would have accelerated a need to develop fire resistance material as a tactical necessity. Because commanders are going to know that there will be leakers and need to have some protection in the few seconds they will be exposed.

Well the outfits they wore didn't look in any way different from those worn by normal roman soldiers, so that is another assumption on your part.

The pike is still the main weapon of attack, armor is still widely worn, cannons have a firing rate of one round every 6 minutes at best, its all solid cannon balls, explosive rounds won't show up for another 20 years, grenades are not widespread yet, rocketry wasn't tactically significant, and caracoles with pistols were not tactically effective as armor was widespread and the rounds too low velocity and too inaccurate.

Also the Saderans would be in strong defensive positions and have their own artillery set up plus the arsenal of Tulln and some newly 'hired' artillerists to man them.

Citation needed.

The rest of this post is again you not grasping the actual tactical reality.

The tactical reality is that wiverns, if they were as effective as you are claiming, would have led to much more spread out units of infantry.

So what? She was kept as an honor guard formation that the Emperor indulged till he decided to send her to reinforce Italica. She was never meant to go on campaign till the Emperor found himself a little light on troops till the training camps popped out more troops. Also it may even have been preference as well.

That being said it proves nothing. Also does it not occur to you a general in command of troops needs to be on the ground in a central spot to see the action and receive report and send orders back out? Sure being flying, would give a better view, but then, how does the general gives orders or receives reports when in the air? Horn and light signals can only convey so much. Generals don't have god mode real time intel you know.

The wiverns are the most mobile and deadliest weapon,and the only adequate defensive mecahnism for the army, ergo the wiverns are the thing the general needs the tightest control over.
In your fannon.

Horns, light signals, pre-battle briefings and trusting initiative of on the spot commanders. Medieval Armies were quite capable of executing complex maneuvers and getting orders out. Especially the ones with professional standing armies that train constantly which the Saderans had which enabled them to recruit 3 full armies in a rapid time frame plus throw together and organize their vassals to serve as fodder. That isn't possible without a high degree of organization and central planning to coordinate resources quickly.

The mongols could get messages from one end of their empire to the other extremely rapidly, semaphores and smoke signals were also a thing from early antiquity.

"Armies" of what size?

You are fanboying, you are not answering the actual questions.

Rome on multiple occasions marched down through Iraq and destroyed the Persian Armies and sacked the capital. Persians never went to Rome or Constantinople. The Romans certain could and did beat the Persians because they had combined arms troops who worked in concert.

What I have read on the subject suggests that the Persians, when competently led, were quite successful.
Persia had its ups and downs, and when the two clashed Rome was far larger and richer, they had the deck stacked against them and they still managed to give the Romans a bloody nose more than once.

Persians were far from the only equestrian-heavy raiders to damage Rome's footsoldiers, though.
A mix of mounter archers and heavy cavalry can easily take out a larger force made up of infantry.
Genghis Khan and Attila were a thing, as were dozens of Mongolo-Tatar tribes flooding in from the steppe.
As were a bunch of other

 

[Chiron]

You sure you aren't mixing up that dragon Itami killed with one of them?


Those beasties, their capabilities and their lifecycle weren't really covered and you are making assumptions on the basis of a few shots.

Context: Wyvern rider was flying low, likely disoriented by the nature of the Tokyo cityscape and likely scouting a route for the main force while disrupting any enemy formations as he sees them. A cop takes an opportunistic shot that knocks him off, but doesn't kill him and the riderless Wyvern flies off disoriented. If the Saderans had by some miracle won, another rider would have flown up and called it to a temporary perch where it would have either reunited with its rider or a new one.

As it is we see very little, but what we do see validates my thoughts on how they were employed tactically, operationally, and strategically.

Well the outfits they wore didn't look in any way different from those worn by normal roman soldiers, so that is another assumption on your part.

Depends largely on unit types and whether you are looking at LN/MG/AN depictions. We also know full plate armor exists and the Saderan Vassals and Pina's knights are fully plated. Man/LN Wyvern Riders look like Polish Hussars in their plate complete with wings. Also there is some logic, a momentary burst of fire is not going to catch wood on fire, it takes sustained heat or a sticky gel like napalm to do so. Most deaths from the tetsudo formation getting hit from sustained Wyvern fire won't die from the heat so much as the oxygen deprivation. But then the Saderans already know that and guard against that on the battlefield as much as possible.

Citation needed.

Artillery in the 17th-Century English Civil Wars

The limit of the effective range of most cannons was around 730 metres (800 yards), although half that was a more realistic expectation. Cannons, depending on size, could fire an impressive 10 to 15 times per hour, which, multiplied by the number of cannons in a battery, allowed for a continuous and harrowing bombardment of the enemy. Not for nothing were cannons given nicknames like ‘Roaring Meg’ or ironic monikers like ‘Queen Elizabeth’s Pocket Pistol’ and ‘Sweet Lips’.

15 shots an hour is pushing it due to heat build up especially if using an iron piece. 10 shots is sustainable if tiring.

Hmm, seems the English did have explosive shot for mortars, but there is no account of the Habsburgs or Poles bring mortars to the battle or for that matter artillery deploying in time. I will grant grapeshot to you but tactical realities means it is a defensive shot for when the battery itself is threatened and won't matter anyway.

For each new shot (at least for larger cannons), the crew had to first cool down the barrel using a blanket of thin leather or sheepskin soaked in water. This was to ensure the new charge of powder did not prematurely explode. Another precaution between shots was to clear the barrel and touchhole of any blockages, residue spent powder or burning embers. When ready, the required measure of gunpowder was pushed down the barrel, blocked in place with wadding such as hay or oakum, and the cannonball gently pushed in. Another quantity of wadding was then added. A rod was next used to ram everything tightly to the bottom of the barrel. If the charge was not firmly packed then the explosive energy was lost, which reduced the range of the shot. A poorly packed charge could even blow up the cannon itself. The gunpowder was then lit through the touchhole in the top of the cannon using a slow match attached to the end of a long pole (linstock) for safety. The match lit fine-grained priming powder, which in turn set off the main powder charge.

With cannonballs that fitted a cannon well, the accuracy was high, but there were, unfortunately, many factors that could reduce this. A poorly cast cannon, imperfectly shaped balls, variations in the strength of powder, damp weather, and variations in wind strength could all conspire to make a shot ineffective. For this reason, cannons were fired in batteries so that several shots covered the same specific area of the target.

Additional Caveats here which the Saderan who have access to mages and creatures who can manipulate weather in a local space can use to render volleys ineffective while aiding their own. Which would enable them to mask their troop movements to close the distance. Wouldn't work against a military with thermals or ample MG ammo and indirect fire support aided by aerial observation. But against an army with neither of those or mages to counter, enables them to largely take the Habsburgs' theoretical advantages away entirely.

The tactical reality is that wiverns, if they were as effective as you are claiming, would have led to much more spread out units of infantry.

Not necessarily and not backed by historical reality. Armies simply adjusted their support elements to negate the theoretical weaknesses. In the Saderan's case they recruited a substantial Wyvern Arm, increased the number of skirmishers, conscripted irregular humanoids as cannon fodder, and utilized magic to enable their infantry to close in and take ground.

Also the appearance of cannons did not stop mass infantry formations clashing with pikes as the enemy also had artillery and supporting cavalry with which to shape the battlefield and negate your cannons and cavalry.

Thus you are wrong again. The mere introduction of a weapon of war doesn't mean it alters the nature of war fundamentally if your opponent also has the same weapon and can integrate it to negate your introduction.



See how close these US troops are packed together. They are able to do this because supporting arms means the Taliban is unable to bring arty and mortars strikes on them or deploy a heavy weapon effectively. So they are able to mass firepower and beat them down without risking their lives. If that were not the case, this formation is suicidal till the enemies supporting arms are dealt with.

What I have read on the subject suggests that the Persians, when competently led, were quite successful.
Persia had its ups and downs, and when the two clashed Rome was far larger and richer, they had the deck stacked against them and they still managed to give the Romans a bloody nose more than once.

Its not enough to be competent, you opponent also has to be incompetent. Equally competent foes equal stalemate till one side loses too many folks to continue.

 

[Agent23]

Context: Wyvern rider was flying low, likely disoriented by the nature of the Tokyo cityscape and likely scouting a route for the main force while disrupting any enemy formations as he sees them. A cop takes an opportunistic shot that knocks him off, but doesn't kill him and the riderless Wyvern flies off disoriented. If the Saderans had by some miracle won, another rider would have flown up and called it to a temporary perch where it would have either reunited with its rider or a new one.

As it is we see very little, but what we do see validates my thoughts on how they were employed tactically, operationally, and strategically.

Depends largely on unit types and whether you are looking at LN/MG/AN depictions. We also know full plate armor exists and the Saderan Vassals and Pina's knights are fully plated. Man/LN Wyvern Riders look like Polish Hussars in their plate complete with wings. Also there is some logic, a momentary burst of fire is not going to catch wood on fire, it takes sustained heat or a sticky gel like napalm to do so. Most deaths from the tetsudo formation getting hit from sustained Wyvern fire won't die from the heat so much as the oxygen deprivation. But then the Saderans already know that and guard against that on the battlefield as much as possible.

You are not providing proof of fireproofing, just more theorizing.

Artillery in the 17th-Century English Civil Wars

I am asking about the ratios between pikemen and and Musketeers, not about canon fire rates.

Some form of shrapnel shot was known 100 years prior to the 30 years war:
Canister shot - Wikipedia
Chain shot - Wikipedia

Chain shot was sometimes used on land as an anti-personnel load. It was used by the defenders of Magdeburg in May 1631 as an anti-personnel load, which, according to counselor Otto von Guericke, was one reason for the extreme violence of the victorious attackers.[3]

15 shots an hour is pushing it due to heat build up especially if using an iron piece. 10 shots is sustainable if tiring.

Hmm, seems the English did have explosive shot for mortars, but there is no account of the Habsburgs or Poles bring mortars to the battle or for that matter artillery deploying in time. I will grant grapeshot to you but tactical realities means it is a defensive shot for when the battery itself is threatened and won't matter anyway.

Yeah, but you will have multiple guns as well as musketeers and mortars.
Also maybe, just maybe they will be willing to risk shooting more often during a battle rather than say a siege, where the besieging army can afford to put less strain on its weapons.
Averages can hide some interesting disparities.

Additional Caveats here which the Saderan who have access to mages and creatures who can manipulate weather in a local space can use to render volleys ineffective while aiding their own. Which would enable them to mask their troop movements to close the distance. Wouldn't work against a military with thermals or ample MG ammo and indirect fire support aided by aerial observation. But against an army with neither of those or mages to counter, enables them to largely take the Habsburgs' theoretical advantages away entirely.

A fat lot of good those mages did them during their little civil war as well as the Japanese incursion.
Once again, you are extrapolating abilities they never demonstrated having.

Not necessarily and not backed by historical reality. Armies simply adjusted their support elements to negate the theoretical weaknesses. In the Saderan's case they recruited a substantial Wyvern Arm, increased the number of skirmishers, conscripted irregular humanoids as cannon fodder, and utilized magic to enable their infantry to close in and take ground.

Also the appearance of cannons did not stop mass infantry formations clashing with pikes as the enemy also had artillery and supporting cavalry with which to shape the battlefield and negate your cannons and cavalry.

Thus you are wrong again. The mere introduction of a weapon of war doesn't mean it alters the nature of war fundamentally if your opponent also has the same weapon and can integrate it to negate your introduction.



See how close these US troops are packed together. They are able to do this because supporting arms means the Taliban is unable to bring arty and mortars strikes on them or deploy a heavy weapon effectively. So they are able to mass firepower and beat them down without risking their lives. If that were not the case, this formation is suicidal till the enemies supporting arms are dealt with.

Yeah, no, sorry, you are comparing the USA's unconventional war against insurgents in Afghanistan with conventional 16 century line warfare.
Apples and oranges.

Its not enough to be competent, you opponent also has to be incompetent. Equally competent foes equal stalemate till one side loses too many folks to continue.

I am sure all of Genghis and Attila's enemies, from the Xia dinasty to the Russian principalities and everything in between were complete and utter fools.

Proper mounted forces are a massive change in warfare, of the same power level that tanks and aircraft were.

That does not make all other formations and unit types instantly obsolete, but it shifts doctrine massively and makes them adapt and reorganize around the new paradigm.

Like motorized rifle units supporting armor and mopping up urban areas afterwards and like anti-material rifles, small special anti-tank squads forming to ambush armor with specialized anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons.

I do not see any sign of such adaptation to the alleged power of wiverns, ergo they are not nearly as capable as you claim they are.

 

[ATP]

You are not providing proof of fireproofing, just more theorizing.




I am asking about the ratios between pikemen and and Musketeers, not about canon fire rates.

Some form of shrapnel shot was known 100 years prior to the 30 years war:
Canister shot - Wikipedia
Chain shot - Wikipedia






Yeah, but you will have multiple guns as well as musketeers and mortars.
Also maybe, just maybe they will be willing to risk shooting more often during a battle rather than say a siege, where the besieging army can afford to put less strain on its weapons.
Averages can hide some interesting disparities.




A fat lot of good those mages did them during their little civil war as well as the Japanese incursion.
Once again, you are extrapolating abilities they never demonstrated having.


Yeah, no, sorry, you are comparing the USA's unconventional war against insurgents in Afghanistan with conventional 16 century line warfare.
Apples and oranges.


I am sure all of Genghis and Attila's enemies, from the Xia dinasty to the Russian principalities and everything in between were complete and utter fools.

Proper mounted forces are a massive change in warfare, of the same power level that tanks and aircraft were.

That does not make all other formations and unit types instantly obsolete, but it shifts doctrine massively and makes them adapt and reorganize around the new paradigm.

Like motorized rifle units supporting armor and mopping up urban areas afterwards and like anti-material rifles, small special anti-tank squads forming to ambush armor with specialized anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons.

I do not see any sign of such adaptation to the alleged power of wiverns, ergo they are not nearly as capable as you claim they are.

You are right about wywern being used mostly as scouts,and mages do not helping much on battlefield - but,Saderans would still win battles.
Thanks to archers - romans used bows with better range and rof then muskets,so they would massacre turkish infrantry and western musketers.
Legions after that would mop up what remain,althought western pikeman would hold for a time.Not that it help them.
Till european get effective fieldartillery,they would keep loosing battles.Or till they train their own archers.Or both.

Considering,that turkish armies would be most fragile to saderans,i see most of Balkans taken by them.Part of Austria and HRE,too.Maybe even Poland.

But,they would be stopped about 1700AD,and,till inventing better weapons,hold by exotic alliance of all countries in Europe.
I think,that about 1750 real fieldartillery would be available,with european countries having their own mages and demihumans,maybe wywerns,too - and knowing,how counter them.

After that,they would be pushed back.

If Gate hold.Imagine,that Gate disapeared with saderans forces still there.In that case,we have saderan country relatively quickly owerwhelmed by everybody.

 

[Chiron]

You are not providing proof of fireproofing, just more theorizing.

No it is proof based on how fires work and the tactical realities that magical creatures bring to the fray and how the Saderan State would have adapted over the centuries.

I am asking about the ratios between pikemen and and Musketeers, not about canon fire rates.

"Digs through Osprey-Campaign-191-Vienna-1683"

Okay at this time, Imperial troops were on paper to be organized into regiments of 2,040 men organized into 10 companies. Ideally on paper 48 pikes supporting 88 muskets (mostly matchlocks, some had flintlocks, others wheellocks), bayonets were widespread but mostly plug types. 8 shield men rounded out the company. Rate of fire for a musket will be roughly 1 shot a minute, due to fatigue, powder buildup, and heat issues. Effective range is roughly 73 meters and accuracy will be shit. They would also be fighting the cannon fodder first before the trained skirmishers even begin screening the main Saderan line.

Absent the Wyverns and Magic support, it could go either way depending on who won the cavalry fight.

A fat lot of good those mages did them during their little civil war as well as the Japanese incursion.
Once again, you are extrapolating abilities they never demonstrated having.

Because we have the technology to negate their advantages which you don't fucking get as you aren't thinking things through.

Yeah, no, sorry, you are comparing the USA's unconventional war against insurgents in Afghanistan with conventional 16 century line warfare.
Apples and oranges.

Again fucking missing the damn point. Which is introduction of a new weapon doesn't make the old tactics obsolete out the door, as often the enemy can negate it. Our troops are able to use line formations in battle against the Taliban because we have the air, we have the arty in interlocking and overlapping FSBs, and the communication structure to enable US troops to mass up in safety from artillery and use mass to induce a Taliban retreat with few to no causalities.

If the Taliban had been given effective MANPADs and SHORADs, and had ample ATGMs with thermobaric warheads, combined with better mortars, and the training to use them, the entire light infantry shitck we used in Afghanistan would have been unviable, and we would have had to deploy Bradleys in large numbers and swallow our pride and beg South Korea to loan us their BMP-3s and build our own analogue.

Applying this logic here, Wyverns and the mass infantry formations you see make sense, because the Empire structured their doctrine to ensure at least air parity and has been the Hegemon for so long that most foes aside from one sea power far from their shores, can't challenge them in the air to the point they can attack the massed infantry long enough to effect a tactical shift in the outcome.

Which brings me to the next part. Gunpowder is not unknown in Sadera, they have had skirmishes with the Avion Sea Forces and absent the Gate incident, would have had in time adopted gunpowder themselves as a result of those skirmishes and their own researches.

See Gate: Weigh Anchor.

Your arguments are thus premised on false assumptions and rejected in their entirety as you still have not grasped why the Saderan Military fights as it does.

 

[Agent23]

No it is proof based on how fires work and the tactical realities that magical creatures bring to the fray and how the Saderan State would have adapted over the centuries.

Star Trek ships warp reality and Star Trek uses antimatter, while Star Wars uses fusion, ergo Trek always wins.

Except that it is not the case, you are using conjecture, not hard, observable facts from the anime.

"Digs through Osprey-Campaign-191-Vienna-1683
Okay at this time, Imperial troops were on paper to be organized into regiments of 2,040 men organized into 10 companies. Ideally on paper 48 pikes supporting 88 muskets (mostly matchlocks, some had flintlocks, others wheellocks), bayonets were widespread but mostly plug types. 8 shield men rounded out the company. Rate of fire for a musket will be roughly 1 shot a minute, due to fatigue, powder buildup, and heat issues. Effective range is roughly 73 meters and accuracy will be shit. They would also be fighting the cannon fodder first before the trained skirmishers even begin screening the main Saderan line.

Very well, what is the Saderan troop strength and what effect of volley fire will cause to the their rawest recruits and horses?
Remember, war horses had to be trained so as to not get spooked by gunfire.

Absent the Wyverns and Magic support, it could go either way depending on who won the cavalry fight.

The Hussars have multiple pistols and other improved equipment.Hell, the Romans didn't even have stirrups.

Because we have the technology to negate their advantages which you don't fucking get as you aren't thinking things through.
Again fucking missing the damn point. Which is introduction of a new weapon doesn't make the old tactics obsolete out the door, as often the enemy can negate it. Our troops are able to use line formations in battle against the Taliban because we have the air, we have the arty in interlocking and overlapping FSBs, and the communication structure to enable US troops to mass up in safety from artillery and use mass to induce a Taliban retreat with few to no causalities.

If the Taliban had been given effective MANPADs and SHORADs, and had ample ATGMs with thermobaric warheads, combined with better mortars, and the training to use them, the entire light infantry shitck we used in Afghanistan would have been unviable, and we would have had to deploy Bradleys in large numbers and swallow our pride and beg South Korea to loan us their BMP-3s and build our own analogue.

1)Again, very specific circumstances.
2) That didn't look much like a line formation, more like individual small units of troops shooting at other individual, small units of troops, with lots of cover and shitty terrain.
Most high density populated areas do not have Afghanistan's shitty geography, Tanks and self-propelled artillery do not work there, and I doubt that an army made up purely of infantry with some advanced weapons like manpads and anti-tank missiles can stand against a mix of tanks, aircraft, artillery and motorized rifles units for support for long.
It is not impossible but you'd be going into Zerg Rush territory and most places with anything like civilization are in much more advantageous terrain.
In short, infantry supporting the artillery and tanks and mopping up a few dangerous hotspots like forested and urban areas.

Meanwhile, those legions were formed up for a nice, pitched battle in a field or on a hill, not for the type of guerilla warfare or anti-insurgency campaigns you'd see.
TL;DR, you are saying that Tanks revolutionizing trench warfare didn't make barbed wire, trenches and the massive amounts of machine gun nests used to keep the belligerants during WWI obsolete?
Let us ISOT Rommel's Afrika Corps to Verdun and find out!

Applying this logic here, Wyverns and the mass infantry formations you see make sense, because the Empire structured their doctrine to ensure at least air parity and has been the Hegemon for so long that most foes aside from one sea power far from their shores, can't challenge them in the air to the point they can attack the massed infantry long enough to effect a tactical shift in the outcome.

Which brings me to the next part. Gunpowder is not unknown in Sadera, they have had skirmishes with the Avion Sea Forces and absent the Gate incident, would have had in time adopted gunpowder themselves as a result of those skirmishes and their own researches.

See Gate: Weigh Anchor.

So, it is not the first time a large, advanced civilization disregards what can potentially be a massive technical leap like that for some stupid reason.
Romans had a steam engine prototype, Greeks had exceedingly complex time pieces, the Chinese had gunpowder, and Japan banned the wheel and firearms.
The per-Columbian south Americans had wheels, but only as parts for toys for their children.

Again, you prove nothing!

Your arguments are thus premised on false assumptions and rejected in their entirety as you still have not grasped why the Saderan Military fights as it does.

Lol, bruh, who died and made you arbiter of truth and justice?

I do not yied, come and face me in the field of nerd verbal war!

 

[ATP]

Star Trek ships warp reality and Star Trek uses antimatter, while Star Wars uses fusion, ergo Trek always wins.

Except that it is not the case, you are using conjecture, not hard, observable facts from the anime.



Very well, what is the Saderan troop strength and what effect of volley fire will cause to the their rawest recruits and horses?
Remember, war horses had to be trained so as to not get spooked by gunfire.



The Hussars have multiple pistols and other improved equipment.Hell, the Romans didn't even have stirrups.




1)Again, very specific circumstances.
2) That didn't look much like a line formation, more like individual small units of troops shooting at other individual, small units of troops, with lots of cover and shitty terrain.
Most high density populated areas do not have Afghanistan's shitty geography, Tanks and self-propelled artillery do not work there, and I doubt that an army made up purely of infantry with some advanced weapons like manpads and anti-tank missiles can stand against a mix of tanks, aircraft, artillery and motorized rifles units for support for long.
It is not impossible but you'd be going into Zerg Rush territory and most places with anything like civilization are in much more advantageous terrain.
In short, infantry supporting the artillery and tanks and mopping up a few dangerous hotspots like forested and urban areas.

Meanwhile, those legions were formed up for a nice, pitched battle in a field or on a hill, not for the type of guerilla warfare or anti-insurgency campaigns you'd see.
TL;DR, you are saying that Tanks revolutionizing trench warfare didn't make barbed wire, trenches and the massive amounts of machine gun nests used to keep the belligerants during WWI obsolete?
Let us ISOT Rommel's Afrika Corps to Verdun and find out!


So, it is not the first time a large, advanced civilization disregards what can potentially be a massive technical leap like that for some stupid reason.
Romans had a steam engine prototype, Greeks had exceedingly complex time pieces, the Chinese had gunpowder, and Japan banned the wheel and firearms.
The per-Columbian south Americans had wheels, but only as parts for toys for their children.

Again, you prove nothing!



Lol, bruh, who died and made you arbiter of truth and justice?

I do not yied, come and face me in the field of nerd verbal war!

saderans horses - you are right,they would be spooked by musket fire.But - their knights have stirrups,so other calvart have it,too.
Winged Hussarls and reiters have 2 pistols each,but since they could not reload it on horses,they could fire it only once during battle.
Calvary battle - winged hussarls would wipe out any opponent,reiters would hold,pancerni and turkish medium calvary/spahis/ ,too - but,turkish and polish light calvary and tatars would probably could be used only for recon and attacking skirmishers.

But,if numbers were the same,i would say,that allies would eventually win calvary battle,and turks hold.

And you are right,that saderan infrantry tactic mean that their wywerns was good only for scouting and harassing.

But,you forget about saderan infrantry archers - they would have eastern bows with about 300m range,and outschoot musketers and turkish infrantry before they have chance to fire.
After that,legions would wipe out remnants.

So,till allies&turks get their own archers,start making plates for musketeers,or both,they would keep loosing.

 

[Agent23]

saderans horses - you are right,they would be spooked by musket fire.But - their knights have stirrups,so other calvart have it,too.
Winged Hussarls and reiters have 2 pistols each,but since they could not reload it on horses,they could fire it only once during battle.
Calvary battle - winged hussarls would wipe out any opponent,reiters would hold,pancerni and turkish medium calvary/spahis/ ,too - but,turkish and polish light calvary and tatars would probably could be used only for recon and attacking skirmishers.

But,if numbers were the same,i would say,that allies would eventually win calvary battle,and turks hold.

And you are right,that saderan infrantry tactic mean that their wywerns was good only for scouting and harassing.

But,you forget about saderan infrantry archers - they would have eastern bows with about 300m range,and outschoot musketers and turkish infrantry before they have chance to fire.
After that,legions would wipe out remnants.

So,till allies&turks get their own archers,start making plates for musketeers,or both,they would keep loosing.

Archers might cause some damage, but quantity has a quality of its own.
Let us not forget that the crossbow and the bow went out of favor for a reason.
So IMHO there will be far less archers in the Saderan lines, since using that weapon requires a lot of practice, skill and strength.
They will likely take out a few pikemen and musketeers, but when the European forces close in there will be hell to pay IMHO.
Do not forget, we are talking about humans here, not automatic weapons.
Your average archer will not be able to sustain shooting arrows indefinitely.
Also, the enemy cavalry being able to shoot projectile weapons en mass will be an ugly surprise, IMO, since competent horse archery was very hard to learn.

 

[ATP]

Archers might cause some damage, but quantity has a quality of its own.
Let us not forget that the crossbow and the bow went out of favor for a reason.
So IMHO there will be far less archers in the Saderan lines, since using that weapon requires a lot of practice, skill and strength.
They will likely take out a few pikemen and musketeers, but when the European forces close in there will be hell to pay IMHO.
Do not forget, we are talking about humans here, not automatic weapons.
Your average archer will not be able to sustain shooting arrows indefinitely.
Also, the enemy cavalry being able to shoot projectile weapons en mass will be an ugly surprise, IMO, since competent horse archery was very hard to learn.

Archers were part of any legion.And,since musketers need get at 70m to hit anybody,they would need to go at least 150m under enemy arrows.Let say,1-2 minutes.
Archers would fire 15-30 arrows in that time,et assume that you need 3 arrows to kill unarmored opponent - one archer would kill 5-10 musketeers/turkish troops before they could retaliate.

Enough to kill most of them.Survivors would have chance for one salvo ,and then fight legions with their sabers/shortswords.
It would be almost one-sided massacre.

Calvary firing pistols would shock enemy - but wywerns and monsters would shock horses,so allied calvary could not be as effective as they could be.

Besides,remember about ogres - you need fieldgun to kill one.

 

[Agent23]

Archers were part of any legion.And,since musketers need get at 70m to hit anybody,they would need to go at least 150m under enemy arrows.Let say,1-2 minutes.
Archers would fire 15-30 arrows in that time,et assume that you need 3 arrows to kill unarmored opponent - one archer would kill 5-10 musketeers/turkish troops before they could retaliate.

Enough to kill most of them.Survivors would have chance for one salvo ,and then fight legions with their sabers/shortswords.
It would be almost one-sided massacre.

Calvary firing pistols would shock enemy - but wywerns and monsters would shock horses,so allied calvary could not be as effective as they could be.

Besides,remember about ogres - you need fieldgun to kill one.

You need a lot of physical strength and stamina to fire a bow, so I think that number of shots is overly-optimistic.

Also, we haven't really covered the numbers for the Saderans, and the ratios between regular footsoldiers and archers.

As I said, by this point in history, archers were obsolete.

 

[ATP]

You need a lot of physical strength and stamina to fire a bow, so I think that number of shots is overly-optimistic.

Also, we haven't really covered the numbers for the Saderans, and the ratios between regular footsoldiers and archers.

As I said, by this point in history, archers were obsolete.

Max 30 arrows - it is under the norm,archrs in England could fire at least 100 arrows one after another.
Saderans numbers are known from Gate - both armies anihilated by Japan have more then 100k soldiers.Ratio heavy infrantry:missile troops was about 2:1/which included slingers and peltast/.

Archers was not obsolate till at least 1850 - but,becouse you need 5 years to train one average archer,and they must be healthty and well fed,armies choosed musket.Need one month training,and could eat shit if need.

But here,they would face enemies who have many trained archers,so both allies and turks would keep loosing battles till they either get their own archers,or gave every muskeeter plate armour.

Becouse only regard in which bow was worst then musket was,becouse arrow could not penetrate plate,when musket ball have no such problems.

 

[Agent23]

Max 30 arrows - it is under the norm,archrs in England could fire at least 100 arrows one after another.
Saderans numbers are known from Gate - both armies anihilated by Japan have more then 100k soldiers.Ratio heavy infrantry:missile troops was about 2:1/which included slingers and peltast/.

Archers was not obsolate till at least 1850 - but,becouse you need 5 years to train one average archer,and they must be healthty and well fed,armies choosed musket.Need one month training,and could eat shit if need.

But here,they would face enemies who have many trained archers,so both allies and turks would keep loosing battles till they either get their own archers,or gave every muskeeter plate armour.

Becouse only regard in which bow was worst then musket was,becouse arrow could not penetrate plate,when musket ball have no such problems.

Those are British longbowmen, though.They weren't exactly indestructible, and the English longbow was IMO a different beast compared to what the Romans had.

 

[ATP]

Those are British longbowmen, though.They weren't exactly indestructible, and the English longbow was IMO a different beast compared to what the Romans had.

Yes,they have eastern bows.With even better range then longbows,but worst penetration - which do not mattered as long as their opponents do not use armours.
And both musketers and turkish troops do not use armours.
Which mean,that turks and allies could relatively cheaply help themselves by giving infrantry helmets and mails,against eastern bows that should be enough./plates was expensive,and turks do not made them anyway/

But - it would be in next battles,in 1683 they would be massacred.

 

[Chiron]

Star Trek ships warp reality and Star Trek uses antimatter, while Star Wars uses fusion, ergo Trek always wins.

Except that it is not the case, you are using conjecture, not hard, observable facts from the anime.

Uh, Star Wars ships use Hypermatter Reactors and have vastly greater energy generation capabilities that strip stars of their mass. Also shields and intense EM interference stop teleports.

Very well, what is the Saderan troop strength and what effect of volley fire will cause to the their rawest recruits and horses?
Remember, war horses had to be trained so as to not get spooked by gunfire.

Judging by the source material, the Saderan Force in Ginza was 120,000 soldiers with thousands of orcs and other trash mobs included, and penetrated as far as the Government District. Another 100,000 or so were at Alnus awaiting deployment and after the repulse, simply stood put till the JSDF annihilated them in the first Battle of Alnus.

They easily would have overran Tulln and its bridges and gained a decisive lodgement on the Tulln Plain and be dug in as the lead elements of the Imperial and Polish Forces arrive. Both sides are going to size each other up for a few days and neither the Poles or Habsburgs are going to leave the Saderans on Tulln.

So its a siege at first. Due to the terrain the Poles are easily blocked off and destroyed first thanks to the Saderan control of the air. The Saderans then take their time, assess, let their horses get acclimated to the cannon. Habsburgs need to get to Vienna, but can't leave the Saderans in their rear and are loathe to seek decisive battles. They will also have seen their Polish Ally destroyed. Saderan Commanders for their part having the river bridges patrol and raid afar. Once they are ready, they simply outflank the Habsburgs out of their entrenchments using their superior numbers and then hit them on the march. Given Mages can cause people to fall asleep unless countered, and Lelei used this ability at Italica, the Saderans likewise can launch a night attack if the Commander utilizes this route as well.

Meanwhile Vienna falls to the Ottomans who winter to digest the gains and consolidate.

The Hussars have multiple pistols and other improved equipment.Hell, the Romans didn't even have stirrups.

Saderans have stirrups. And the Europeans don't have Wyverns and Magic or the technological overmatch to negate them.

1)Again, very specific circumstances.
2) That didn't look much like a line formation, more like individual small units of troops shooting at other individual, small units of troops, with lots of cover and shitty terrain.
Most high density populated areas do not have Afghanistan's shitty geography, Tanks and self-propelled artillery do not work there, and I doubt that an army made up purely of infantry with some advanced weapons like manpads and anti-tank missiles can stand against a mix of tanks, aircraft, artillery and motorized rifles units for support for long.
It is not impossible but you'd be going into Zerg Rush territory and most places with anything like civilization are in much more advantageous terrain.
In short, infantry supporting the artillery and tanks and mopping up a few dangerous hotspots like forested and urban areas.

Again missing the point completely. Also armored units work fine in Afghanistan. And again you missed the point of why those weapons systems would necessitate the deployment of armored units to gain fire superiority.

The point you keep fucking missing is the Wyverns and Magic give the Saderans a decisive military edge that negates the Gunpowder Armies of this era which do not have a sufficient development of firearms to kill Wyverns in a reliable way that will affect the operational outcome of battles.

TL;DR, you are saying that Tanks revolutionizing trench warfare didn't make barbed wire, trenches and the massive amounts of machine gun nests used to keep the belligerants during WWI obsolete?
Let us ISOT Rommel's Afrika Corps to Verdun and find out!

No, because they were countered by artillery in direct fire support, specialized AT rifles and rounds, and new tactics. WW2 combined arms warfare did not eliminate the need for trenches and fortifications. Even today trenches are still part and parcel of warfare alongside fortifications, requiring an opponent to devote massive amounts of firepower to break them. If five guys in a bunker can hold up a column for a half hour, that is a victory even if they do nothing but spray and pray.

So, it is not the first time a large, advanced civilization disregards what can potentially be a massive technical leap like that for some stupid reason.
Romans had a steam engine prototype, Greeks had exceedingly complex time pieces, the Chinese had gunpowder, and Japan banned the wheel and firearms.
The per-Columbian south Americans had wheels, but only as parts for toys for their children.

Romans had a steam wheel, not a steam engine, they simply did not realize the next step and constant warfare and disinvestment meant the opportunity got lost. China kept their guns and were the first to invent breechloading rifles. Japan never banned the wheel or firearms either.

Pre-Columbian Indians had no problem building massive cities and structures without wheels or the draft animals and roads Eurasia had. Because if you don't have good roads or draft animals strong enough, carts are not possible and you have to use log sleds to move stones with massive manpower instead.

 

[Agent23]

Uh, Star Wars ships use Hypermatter Reactors and have vastly greater energy generation capabilities that strip stars of their mass. Also shields and EM interference stop teleports.

I am pretty sure the "hypermatter" bit came in later to justify the ICS whank though, IIRC it is still hypermatter fusion.

Judging by the source material, the Saderan Force in Ginza was 120,000 soldiers with thousands of orcs and other trash mobs included, and penetrated as far as the Government District. Another 100,000 or so were at Alnus awaiting deployment and after the repulse, simply stood put till the JSDF annihilated them in the first Battle of Alnus.

They easily would have overran Tulln and its bridges and gained a decisive lodgement on the Tulln Plain and be dug in as the lead elements of the Imperial and Polish Forces arrive. Both sides are going to size each other up for a few days and neither the Poles or Habsburgs are going to leave the Saderans on Tulln.

So its a siege at first. Due to the terrain the Poles are easily blocked off and destroyed first thanks to the Saderan control of the air. The Saderans then take their time, assess, let their horses get acclimated to the cannon. Habsburgs need to get to Vienna, but can't leave the Saderans in their rear and are loathe to seek decisive battles. They will also have seen their Polish Ally destroyed. Saderan Commanders for their part having the river bridges patrol and raid afar. Once they are ready, they simply outflank the Habsburgs out of their entrenchments using their superior numbers and then hit them on the march. Given Mages can cause people to fall asleep unless countered, and Lelei used this ability at Italica, the Saderans likewise can launch a night attack if the Commander utilizes this route as well.

We saw very, very little mage craft assisting the Sedaran troops.
The effectiveness of those mages is just as dubious as that of the Wyverns.
IIRC there was just that one guy that shot a rock at the enemy.
Also this reminds me, the Saderans are totally incompetent in that they decided to just waltz into a completely unknown world and try to conquer it without any intelligence.

Also, for a roman/medieval army organized for a single campaign, that figure is excessive.
The entirety of Rome's legions amounted to 160 thousand, tops.Total military strength was IIRC 350 thousand.
And I don't think that the Romans ever deployed all their legions in a single army.

Meanwhile Vienna falls to the Ottomans who winter to digest the gains and consolidate.

Then, since it is the biggest and richest city in the area it probably gets attacked by the Saderans.

Saderans have stirrups. And the Europeans don't have Wyverns and Magic or the technological overmatch to negate them.




Again missing the point completely.

No, my thesis is that formations, equipment and footsoldier army size would inevitably be changed by the use of mages and wyverns, if mages and wyverns were as numerous and effective as you claim they are.

No, because they were countered by artillery in direct fire support, specialized AT rifles and rounds, and new tactics. WW2 combined arms warfare did not eliminate the need for trenches and fortifications. Even today trenches are still part and parcel of warfare alongside fortifications, requiring an opponent to devote massive amounts of firepower to break them. If five guys in a bunker can hold up a column for a half hour, that is a victory even if they do nothing but spray and pray.

Non-motorized cavalry got slaughtered and died out.
Stormtroopers and assault rifles were introduced.
Trenches and kilometers-long defensive lines became far less useful and the WWI position war forced upon people by artillery and macheneguns became sort of obsolete.
Infantry reformed to support tanks and suppress them in advantageous situations with special equipment, but the WWI and pre-WWI formations and tactics became obsolete for the most part.

There is no visible equivalent to such cahnges where wiverns and mages are concerned, ergo they are less numerous/effective than what you assume they are.

Romans had a steam wheel, not a steam engine, they simply did not realize the next step and constant warfare and disinvestment meant the opportunity got lost. China kept their guns and were the first to invent breechloading rifles. Japan never banned the wheel or firearms either.

Pre-Columbian Indians had no problem building massive cities and structures without wheels or the draft animals and roads Eurasia had. Because if you don't have good roads or draft animals strong enough, carts are not possible and you have to use log sleds to move stones with massive manpower instead.

Sorry, but Japan did ban the wheel and from a massive exporter of guns they most went back to using their silly swords.
China did next to nothing with its massive tech advantage.

Also, you do realize that hand-carts are a thing?

 

[ATP]

Uh, Star Wars ships use Hypermatter Reactors and have vastly greater energy generation capabilities that strip stars of their mass. Also shields and intense EM interference stop teleports.



Judging by the source material, the Saderan Force in Ginza was 120,000 soldiers with thousands of orcs and other trash mobs included, and penetrated as far as the Government District. Another 100,000 or so were at Alnus awaiting deployment and after the repulse, simply stood put till the JSDF annihilated them in the first Battle of Alnus.

They easily would have overran Tulln and its bridges and gained a decisive lodgement on the Tulln Plain and be dug in as the lead elements of the Imperial and Polish Forces arrive. Both sides are going to size each other up for a few days and neither the Poles or Habsburgs are going to leave the Saderans on Tulln.

So its a siege at first. Due to the terrain the Poles are easily blocked off and destroyed first thanks to the Saderan control of the air. The Saderans then take their time, assess, let their horses get acclimated to the cannon. Habsburgs need to get to Vienna, but can't leave the Saderans in their rear and are loathe to seek decisive battles. They will also have seen their Polish Ally destroyed. Saderan Commanders for their part having the river bridges patrol and raid afar. Once they are ready, they simply outflank the Habsburgs out of their entrenchments using their superior numbers and then hit them on the march. Given Mages can cause people to fall asleep unless countered, and Lelei used this ability at Italica, the Saderans likewise can launch a night attack if the Commander utilizes this route as well.

Meanwhile Vienna falls to the Ottomans who winter to digest the gains and consolidate.




Saderans have stirrups. And the Europeans don't have Wyverns and Magic or the technological overmatch to negate them.




Again missing the point completely. Also armored units work fine in Afghanistan. And again you missed the point of why those weapons systems would necessitate the deployment of armored units to gain fire superiority.

The point you keep fucking missing is the Wyverns and Magic give the Saderans a decisive military edge that negates the Gunpowder Armies of this era which do not have a sufficient development of firearms to kill Wyverns in a reliable way that will affect the operational outcome of battles.



No, because they were countered by artillery in direct fire support, specialized AT rifles and rounds, and new tactics. WW2 combined arms warfare did not eliminate the need for trenches and fortifications. Even today trenches are still part and parcel of warfare alongside fortifications, requiring an opponent to devote massive amounts of firepower to break them. If five guys in a bunker can hold up a column for a half hour, that is a victory even if they do nothing but spray and pray.




Romans had a steam wheel, not a steam engine, they simply did not realize the next step and constant warfare and disinvestment meant the opportunity got lost. China kept their guns and were the first to invent breechloading rifles. Japan never banned the wheel or firearms either.

Pre-Columbian Indians had no problem building massive cities and structures without wheels or the draft animals and roads Eurasia had. Because if you don't have good roads or draft animals strong enough, carts are not possible and you have to use log sleds to move stones with massive manpower instead.

Polish army have 3000 winged hussarls capable of going through anything which Saderans have except ogres,and each have 2 pistols.Enough to deter wywerns attack - horses would be spooked by wywerns,but but wywerns would be spooked by firing at them,too.
Moreover,polish King created kind of united calvary army with dragoons following calvary and fighting on foot delivering need fire,which mean,that wywerns would be repulsed by musket fired by them.

So,no destroyed polish army.
Austrian,on other hand - they would fight using infrantry mostlt,and you forget about advantage archers have over muskeeter.They would schoot most of infrantry,and legions would mop up rest.

Later Saderans could beat turks/infrantry with muskets and no armour against archers/ and take Vienna.
Becouse all relatively intact force would be polish calvary,they would take all they wont near Vienna,too.

Later - allies and turks would gave mail and helmets to infrantry,and start teaching archers - but,since you need at least 5 years for that,till 1688 Saderans would take what they wonted.

 

[Batrix2070]

Okay you know what? Who's in favor of trying to start writing this, because it sounds like a pretty good script and action launch. It would be so much easier to discuss what should happen and how.
Another thing is that I think Wiverns are much weaker than Chiron thinks, their biggest advantage is that no one from Europe will know how to fight them effectively.

Wivers in my opinion are used as scouts and eyes for the commander to know where his units are. And thanks to the fact that they fly they can be very effective as couriers, better than those on horseback, which makes it easier to command the huge formations that Sadera puts out, which may also explain how they are able to direct the forces they put out. And at the same time they are able to control such a large territory without wasting most of their energy on keeping them together with their level of technology.

And this, in my opinion, gives Sadera a real advantage over Europe, because they can react faster than them to attacks as well as conduct counter-attacks. And at the same time it explains why, despite everything, their armies did not change their command tactics and formation! Because there is no reason to do so, since the Wivers do not serve in any other role than that of reconnaissance and communication. And this is a very serious change and advantage for Sadera.