Quote:
Originally Posted by rantaid
Why do after the Battle of Bastards passed, there seems to be so many people who become self proclaimed strategist and tactician in warfare ?
before thinking too much, do anyone notice that sometimes (more so or often) The author quoted a phrase/sentence/saying of any past Military treatise/history before confusing them with others in paraphrasing or even explaining them to the readers wor whether it is just me? i feel like the author often unsure which lesson he should use to lecture us or the character .... which made him sometimes mix one with the others.
|
Actually, Battle of Bastards require a heavy amount of suspension of belief: It is impossible to surround an army like it has been done by the Bolton dude. People who usually surround their enemy either entice them into advancing too far into the center or use cavalry or light infantry like Bai Qi in his battle of Changping (the Zhao advanced too far into his center), Hannibal in cannae (Roman too far into his center + better cavalry) or Khalid ibn al-Walid and the last phase of the battle of Yarmouk (Light cavalry + sending cavalry to cut the main path for retreat before the last battle).
BTW, IDK about other people but I'm curious about history, antiquity's and medieval cultures since quite a bit ago.
As for the author, he's only using two books as references: The Prince and the Art Of War and he more or less do understand them but he leave to a side whatever seems too immoral in The Prince to keep the MC likeable for the biggest part of the audience (I don't really like that thought...)