Nilfgaardian & Bludgeon
Nilfgaardian Nilfgaardian
Bludgeon Bludgeon
Nilfgaardian Nilfgaardian
So, Bludgeon, how do you feel about using a well‑planned siege versus a direct, relentless assault when you’re trying to crush an enemy?
Bludgeon Bludgeon
A siege can cut off supplies and wear them down, but it wastes time and gives the enemy a chance to regroup. If you want victory fast, you crush them with a relentless, straight‑ahead assault. I’d do a siege only if the target is too strong for a single charge.
Nilfgaardian Nilfgaardian
I agree that a swift charge wins when the enemy is not over‑prepared, but a siege is not a waste—it buys time, forces the enemy to overextend, and can be executed with minimal loss if planned correctly. If the target can hold out, the siege will sap their resources and morale before you strike. If the enemy is weak, a direct assault is the efficient choice. So choose the method that keeps your own forces at peak strength while you break theirs.
Bludgeon Bludgeon
Sounds right—keep your troops fresh and strike when they’re weakest. A well‑planned siege can be smart, but if you’ve got the firepower to finish it quick, I’d say charge and smash. Keep the enemy on the run, not the other way around.
Nilfgaardian Nilfgaardian
Exactly. Keep the pressure relentless, let their morale break before their supply lines do. A swift, decisive strike shows discipline and sends a clear message—order, control, victory.
Bludgeon Bludgeon
That’s the way. Keep the hammer swinging until they crumble. No mercy, no pause. Victory belongs to those who strike first.
Nilfgaardian Nilfgaardian
Exactly—strike before they even know we’re coming, keep the hammer down, and let the enemy crumble under the weight of our resolve.