Quote:
Originally Posted by Loke
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
That is making some big assumptions I think, mainly that races will all attack humans and/or their nearest enemy, which I don't think are fair assumptions. Even if they abide by those assumptions, you'd have RV up against HHK. I think HHK is a much more defensible position. You'd have Neriak vs. FP, with the potential of dwarves coming from the sea, assuming humans didn't take the dwarvish port in BB, which I think strategically would be one of the first things they should do. Even if they don't, you've got OOT in between the two, which could play out like a WW2 pacific island campaign, which I think would favor humans over dwarves. Then you've got Halas and Erudin attacking Qeynos.
Even if all that were to happen, unless it were ridiculously coordinated, which would imply some sort of alliance between those races, I think the human control of logistical factors and potential for reinforcements from the other human cities (a la Rohan showing up to save Gondor, because humans are bosses like that) is still the driving force in a WW-norrath.
"Logistics win wars" -Every General Ever.
|
I am inclined to agree with you. I point out proximity attacks, because it is likely that humans will be seen as a huge threat near borders. Thus everyone striking humans is just a way to defend themselves. Except for the Barbarians. They are just attacking the closest thing race out of bloodlust.
The only race I think is iffy in this situation is halflings. They may just turn around and attack Neriak. However, if halflings attack highkeep, then the halflings will win in this situation. Sure, highkeep is more defensible. However, highkeep has a low population, has to deal with the gnoll/orc problem, AND has no guild masters to help them.
I am working on a draft as to how humans would win, even in this scenario, but I won't get to submit it for a while.