wkernochan
Lieutenant (Junior Grade)
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon May 18, 2015 1:47 pm
|
Again, probably redundant speculation by a newbie.
It occurs to me that if I were the strategist here, I would not aim as my next move to attack Dohlar directly. Instead, I would keep Dohlar's and the Temple's attention fixed on the advance along the Sheridahn canal, and actually advance along the Dairnwyth canal, which would give me a clear path (ironclad?) to the seas above Dohlar. At the same time, instead of penetrating deeper into Dohlar waters with my Navy, I would control the seas above Dohlar so I could meet/transport my army at the Dairnwyth canal outlet. At that point, I would have Dohlar effectively cut off from both Harchong and the Temple Lands.
Next, I would (possibly using the army from the Dairnwyth canal) take Hayzor and use the army (ironclad?) to march north along Hayzor's river to cut off Harchong from everything east of it. This may or may not mean that part of the Harchongese army will be cut off from Temple lands and its vanguard. Remember, what's north of those mountains north of Hayzor, since we are getting towards winter, is effectively impassible. If we use the early winter to chop up the Harchongese vanguard, we now have a major army with a straight shot towards Lake Pei and from thence the Temple and with no countering army around to stop it. Not from Dohlar, not from the blocked major army in Harchong, and not from the far less mobile Temple Lands states.
Obviously, there may be geographic reasons that I don't know about that make this strategy impossible. Still, it does seem a good continuation of the "slice off the south" strategy that happened in this last book.
|