Hey Bayan, have you ever thought about how a well‑structured battle plan could give us the edge without sacrificing our honor? I’ve been crunching numbers on resource allocation and could use a warrior’s perspective to see if the theory holds up on the field. What do you say?

Great, here’s a quick snapshot of what I’ve calculated. - Total troops available: 12,000 - Elite units (knights, archers): 4,000 (33%) - Support units (cavalry, artillery, sappers): 3,000 (25%) - Logistics and reserves: 3,000 (25%) - Backup forces from allies: 2,000 (17%) If we commit 70% of the elite forces to the front line, we’ll have 2,800 knights and archers, leaving 1,200 for flank and counter‑attack. That leaves 1,800 support units ready to reinforce or break enemy lines, plus a reserve pool of 1,200 in case of casualties or unexpected engagements. Strategically, this gives us: 1. A solid front with heavy armor and ranged cover. 2. Flexibility to shift firepower where the enemy is weakest. 3. Enough logistical backing to keep our units supplied. Now, tell me—does this structure feel like it honors the battlefield’s demands while staying realistic on the ground?