Guns of Infinity(Continuation)



Thanks i did all of that except the observe/partisan hunt in GoI. I totally forgot about that. Not even the killing of all the antari prisoners in SoI ist apparently enough to convince this guy.

Anyway thanks a Lot.


Begs the question… If he fails, will he have to frag himself?


Only Cazarosta can defeat Cazarosta himself.


Debatable if cazarosta can defeat himself.


Just the same thing as they say about Napoleon Bonaparte: Only Napoleon can destroy Napoleon. A person’s own fatal flaw can be his or her doom.


it would probably end in a draw where Cazarosta dies.


Only if he feels like he has to frag himself.

If he attempts to do something, but fails, then all that means is that the Saints wanted wanted him to attempt to do something, but fail.

Thus creating the Infinite Sea equivalent of the “Hitler killed Hitler” meme.

“Cazarosta did some good things. He killed Cazarosta.”

“Yeah, but he also killed the guy who killed Cazarosta.”

“Yeah, but that guy was a murderous fanatic.”


Laughs in Russian

Too bad there wasn’t an “I win” button in Moscow.


Bonaparte’s fatal flaw was pride and being too impulsive.


A potential result of being too good at your job.


His thoughts and minds are always settled on having an Austerlitz in every of his campaign, and clever for the Russians for not giving him the opportunity to have one.


He did though, the Battle of Borindino was the perfect place to destroy the Russian army before his advance into Moscow as an effective body. Once he failed to do so, the Russians were able to destroy his supplies and force him to march back the way he marched into Russia.

In Borindino he proceeded to use his troops as battering rams to attack fixed Russian positions that caused massive casualties and it was only through the courage of his soldiery and the mortal wounding of Prince Bagration that he managed to secure the field.


But instead Borodino gave him a wound so severe that he can never fully recover.

I’d rather say is that the Russian winter combining Bonaparte’s unwillingness to withdraw is what had defeated him.

He loss nearly 50,000 men in the entire fight, Murat’s cavalry was the one taken the hardest punishment of all: The entire cavalry corps suffered over 60% casualties, on top of that Murat was nearly captured by Russians as well.


Too much store is placed on “General Winter.”

What killed Napoleon was the harsh winter and the fact his troops were forced to march down the road they already picked clean a la his norm. So they could get no food and they already confiscated all the food the Russian serfs had.

The second fact was the fact the Russian Cossacks ran rampant and destroyed his supply chains.


And Bonaparte considers them as the real pain in his arse. But one thing for sure is that the Cossacks? They’ll be brilliant troops if their leaders could read maps. Some were even responsible for the destruction of Bonaparte’s 2e Regiment de Chevau-Légers Lanciers de la Garde Impériale.
I must say is that Kutuzov made the right move of using them to harass the retreating French.


I thought the Russians had plenty of more serfs to throw. My bf mentions the Tsar in Petersburg had a sizeable force with him.

So were the Russians had lost the war if the army at Borindino was destroyed?


Settling a dispute through a “sparring match” isn’t uncommon, but only among friends: without the societal weight of a “proper” duel, there’s much less impetus against cheating (especially since one of those safeguards is the fact that the seconds have the right to kill any cheater without reprieve).


@Cataphrak, I have a question: What is Caz’s own fatal flaw? As every person who has their own fatal flaws.


A. No, everyone doesn’t have one “fatal flaw”. Everyone is flawed, but you can’t boil it down to one negative trait and pin all their failings on that alone.

B. We’ve already seen many of Caz’s flaws, from his fatalism to his fanatical religiosity and sociopathic disregard for life.


Not to mention that it’s hard to tell something will be a fatal flaw until it’s well, fatal.

We wouldn’t be talking about Napoleon’s arrogance being his undoing if he hadn’t been undone.

That’s not to say he wasn’t arrogant, but asking when we don’t even know where Cazarosta is heading seems especially hard to give any answer past “You’ve seen his flaws and failings, what do you think will undermine him?”