The Dragoon Saga (Sabres of Infinity, Guns of Infinity, Lords of Infinity) - General Discussion

low-fantasy
gender-locked-male

#2740

I was boot that been oversea. I getting deployed at the end year. My old unit is being deployed right now.

@Cossack_Highlander 11 bravo i’m in a unmounted cav troop.


#2741

About the only place where the doctrine was almost used correctly, if that’s the right phrasing, was in the defense of Bastogne. Even there though, the tank destroyers had been deployed in penny-packets to help units like the 101st Airborne that didn’t have their own organic tank destroying capability, whereas doctrine called for entire tank destroyer battalions to be used to halt enemy breakthroughs or form defensive positions that the enemy was supposed to smash itself against.

Well, at least you’re not a POG :laughing:


#2742

What’s even more obnoxious is I can where the Stetson and earn my spurs because I’m in a cav squadron. Even though I am dirty 11B. Along with getting EIB and wear the blue cord.


#2743

@Cataphrak This is off topic, but I saw that today is your birthday, so… Happy Birthday!

This reminds me of the Russians in WWI (WW2?). Waves of soldiers would run forward, the 2nd line would pick up the rifles the 1st line dropped upon death.


#2744

That would be ww2 in many of the movie adaptions. Some surviving old veterans that once served in the Soviet forces even said that only 1 out of 3 would be issued a rifle. While the rest had to grab whatever they can use for close-quarters combat.


#2745

I won’t hold it against you, even if you aren’t a real cavalryman. I think we can all agree that we hate MPs. If you told me you were an MP, I wouldn’t even talk to you. (This coming from a guy who had five members of his family serve as MPs, including my mother.)


#2746

So it’s a traditional thing for you! And thank you brother.


#2747

Historically, it was mostly a WW1 problem (and even then, it was the issue of distributing weapons, not necessarily manufacturing them).

The big bottleneck in WW2 was ammunition, especially since Soviet urban fighting doctrines (read: entire divisions armed with submachine guns) needed so much of it.


#2748

Right, sorry. My bad.


#2749

“The world is a cruel place, so why not adapt and enjoy it?” is definitely an attempt to justify one’s actions even if only to one’s self. If it’s “a good reason for something to be done”, it counts as far as my statement goes.

Someone like your PC might be comparing this in terms of benefits instead of moral standards, and may be comfortable with societal disapproval, but…

Basically, this:

justify
show or prove to be right or reasonable.

synonyms: give grounds for, give reasons for, give a justification for, explain, give an explanation for, account for;defend, answer for, vindicate

He might not be trying to justify his actions as righteous, but that wasn’t exactly the point I was aiming for.


#2750

Seeing all this Cav talk but we gotta remember the most superior MOS:

11 bang bang. But then again I love my MOS so I’m biased lmao.


#2751

I see what you’re saying. Let me rephrase.

My MC does not think that what he does is wrong in anyway.

He does realize, however, that other people have something called “morality”, and according to the morality that is widely accepted, his actions and thoughts would be branded as dispicable.

Even Cazarosta has a morality to a degree because of his faith. His faith may allow him to do some truly horrific things (things we on this side of the screen may find awful), but he still does them because he is idealistic and has strong thoughts about what is right and wrong when it comes to serving the Saints. Thoughts that he will act and has acted upon. (But Caz is a different subject. I’m just using him to compare to because I believe we can all see him as something of a monster based off our own beliefs and morals.)

It’s not so much that my MC believes what he does is wrong, but that he realizes that it is wrong in the eyes of other people. So, in an effort to blend in as a Baneblooded gentleman, he fakes it when in public and when he is with the appropriate company. He does not have to fake it around Caius. That’s why they are so close.

The part about dillusions that I was talking about, that applies more to other people. People who have set a morality for themselves, then go outside that morality, proceed to feel guilty, but “justify” their actions as ok - even though they directly contradict their previously set principles - only to alleviate their guilt. I would not say Renard nor Cunaris are dillusional. They have there set beliefs, and they follow them. Now whether or not those set beliefs are consistent or make sense is a different matter altogether.

My canon MC never kills the Antari prisoners in Sabres because he is with Elson and under the command of Cunaris, very honorable men. My canon MC never looks at Mhillanovil as he has a strategic objective that must be completed, but also because he has the eyes of the King on him. He always goes on the Strellyck Mission and pulls the trigger because he is with Caius. He always shoots the girl because no one who knows about it will hold it against him other than Renard, but in this instance he finds the sacrifice of that friendship worth it in order to ruin House Khorobirit throughly.

Once my MC holds appropriate power, wealth, prestige, and allies, then he will proceed fourth to act as he wishes, but for now - as he realizes where he comes from (ie not having any of the pre-mentioned items) - he will have to play to the tune of the more powerful, working his way up as he does so.


#2752

“This is an acceptable price to pay for the outcome I desire, as opposed to that which would cost too much or gain too little.” is what I am reading here. It might not be quite how he’d phrase it, but it is how it looks.


#2753

I think this a logic trap that many wealthy and powerful people fall into. You never really make it. There is always someone nipping at your heels and someone who’s heels your nipping at.


#2754

If you want an example of this sort of desperation, check out Enemy at the Gates (2001) and the opening scene during the Battle of Stalingrad.

Stalin, acting as the People’s Commissar of Defence issued Order No. 227 on 28 July 1942. With it’s famous slogan “Not a step back!”, Order No. 227 aimed to re-establish discipline in the Red Army. The Soviets had suffered heavy losses against the German invaders, leading to incidents of mass retreat and desertion. Order No. 227 was also intended to reinforce patriotism and raise morale.

Order No. 227 stipulated among other things:

  • the removal of corps and army commanders and commissars who accepted unauthorized troop withdrawals from occupied positions, and who accepted the unwarranted withdrawal of troops in other circumstances,
  • the formation of penal battalions to be comprised of those found guilty of a breach of discipline due to cowardice or bewilderment, and
  • the formation of defensive squads to shoot in place panic-mongers and cowards attempting to avoid their duty to the Motherland.

Needless to say Order No. 227 wasn’t particularly popular with commanders and soldiers and was not consistently applied.


#2755

I think that’s exactly how he would phrase it.

True enough. Although I would not say it is entirely without merit.


#2756

Enemy at the Gates is… debatably accurate, especially since the sniper duel that makes up its central plot probably never happened.


#2757

He I am 11 Bang Bang but I got to be extra homoerotic by being in the cavalry and getting spurs.


#2758

Vasily Zaytsev was very real, although he worked with a partner, Nikolai Kulikov.

Major Erwin Konig is likely fiction, although Zaytsev’s account of a three day “snipers’-duel” is still open to debate.

Regardless, Zaytsev’s record is impressive. Between November and December 1942 alone he killed 225 enemy soldiers, including 11 snipers during the Battle of Stalingrad.


#2759

I’m referring more to its portrayal of Soviet infantry doctrine. By late '42, the mass assaults which characterised the “slow down the Germans, I don’t care how” attitude of the early war had given way to more sophisticated methods*. We should be seeing platoon/company-level assault teams with support weapons, vehicle support, and truly absurd numbers of portable automatic weapons grappling over buildings room-by-room, not hordes of poorly-armed conscripts barrelling down open streets.

*Not that these methods were any less bloody. “Western” troops had the same sort of experience on a much smaller scale when the 1st Canadian Infantry Division went up against veteran German troops in Ortona, and they had a bad time.