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



Probably nothing about “the PC” specifically yet, but “The Dragoons” have several, and the PC may be one of the more interesting characters in the regiment by the events in Guns.



Cataphak has said that the Deathride has been made to plays and even musical. I imagine the MC is mentioned briefly in something like Lt Okay “You and death born hold the castle, The rest of have a rendezvous with destiny.” Conversely if MC goes on the death ride, there should be denouement scene where the MC and Lanzerel address a reconstituted 6th squadron, where the MC must fill Maras’ boots.


Thanks, I missed that the boost comes from trying to capture Princess Khorobirit. It seems a bit odd that there’s no boost for success, though. Is that for balancing (since capturing the princess is arguably the best outcome), or would it make more sense to add a boost to relationship with Katarina here?

I also noticed a few places where the number of Hussars in Lady Aleksandra’s bodyguard is given as forty, though in most places it’s said to be fifty:

…and riding out through the parted slabs of oak and iron are forty mounted Church Hussars.
Forty dead Hussars, and in their midst, the slim, broken body of a single girl
Sending your men to face forty of them formed up and in killing fury is nothing short of the highest foolishness.


to capture half a hundred of the League’s dreaded Church Hussars with only a squadron of dismounted dragoons?
the combined ransoms of fifty, even split among an entire squadron, would be quite the fortune indeed.
All you would have to do is stop a force of fifty Church Hussars with your weary band of dragoons.


The MC doesn’t have time to count them, so it would make sense that he’s guessing.


I certainly wonder which MC would get more respect in society, all other things equal: a MC who charged with Elson, or an MC who guarded the tower and singlehandedly killed a Church Hussar?

On the one hand, everybody loves a Charge of the Light Brigade/ Rohirrim charge, but literally holding against dozens of Church Hussars is pretty impressive too.


Well they both give an equal reputation boost.

On one hand, the castle has you singlehandedly kill a hussar, and also lets you prove your worth as an independent commander.

On the other hand, the castle (according to Welles) is an “often overlooked sideshow”, the Death Ride had far more lives at stake, and the fighting was much thicker.


Both are pretty strong “Lieutenant X of the Dragoons valiantly fought against overwhelming odds.” moments, as far as something measured outside reputation.


True. But how the public sees it will have huge consequences in the future.


Probably charging out with Elson and Cunaris.

Far more people of high rank who have some sort of incentive to make that incident famous.

But I don’t expect there to be much of a practical difference. Both were hard fighting at Blogia.


I almost always fight at Castle Blogia with Caz. I like to think that after Blogia, and a good defense on the extreme Tierran flank again at 2K, an MC has begun to earn somewhat of a reputation of a stubborn defender.


I wonder if in Toerran society, offense actions are looked upon more honourably than defensive actions, given the religion of death cult worship and martyrdom and the emphasis on cavalry and grenadiers instead of artillery and snipers.


It probably depends on the context. A valiant last stand is a good way to win martyrdom, ask Hunter.


I’d wager a defensive action is looked on favourably only after you first were doing a frontal charge with the enemy and enter a situation where you know is now fertile but for the sake of ensuring the rest of your forces do not get annihilated, you hold the line. This is seen in Hunter and in Saint Talbot.


Not sure. I can definitely imagine that situations like that are especially favorable, but I’m not sure “ATTACK ALWAYS ATTACK!” is quite that entrenched as to mean a defensive action can’t be legitimate on its own.


I mean, were that the case, Tierra would be handing out sainthoods to people who took part in offences that bear little or no significance to a war, whilst ignoring when someone who, let’s say, was in a siege for 5 years and in the end, managed to force the enemy to retreat after depleting their resources.


Im curious what the fandom makes of the cavalry school vs infantry school debate. Personally while I think the infantry school position is the harder of the two to get right and more essential to a expeditionary military, I’m guessing the kind of war Tierra will be fighting will be a home game next time. If that’s so then the cavalry school position will be more valuable in implementation. The infantry school might actually be counter productive because it will cause shock in the force once the finely tuned logistics machine breaks down.



We would need to know the nature of Tierra’s next war in order to make a decent decision.

Artillery is expensive and difficult to transport. “Sniping” is only really viable with rifles, and those have issues of their own (longer and more difficult to reload, harder to maintain…)

Cavalry is seen as more prestigious because it requires more skill, and financially a cavalry soldier also costs more than an infantry soldier.

There is only one Grenadier Regiment in Tierra. I would not call that an emphasis.

Soldiers who have better training and endure greater risks are placed above those who do not. Otherwise there would be no incentive to join the Grenadiers if a Line Infantry regiment earned you the same amount of respect and pay with less risk.


I’m pretty firmly in the Infantry school’s camp, though the Cavalry school does have some very good ideas I’d like to implement, like permanent specialized formations such as the Experimentals. I think someone best summed up the divide as something along the lines of, “The Infantry school is best for a conventional war, the Cavalry school is best for an unconventional war”.

In my opinion, even though there may be chaos if the logistics branch breaks down, Tierra’s future security relies heavily upon the ability to improvise and make heavy use of technological advantages. That usually means a wide adaptation of Garing’s bolt-action rifle is the best chance Tierra has to make the RTA a significant hurdle for Kian or Takara to overcome. The ammunition this will require will dramatically increase supply demands though, probably past what is currently workable in the RTA’s current state. Thus a dedicated logistics branch, and a more streamlined supply situation are instrumental in such a fighting force not shooting themselves dry in a few minutes.

A system of more permanent regiments and a standardized officer training program are universally good reforms compared to the current system so I don’t have too much to say on them. The training program could really help the engineers and other branches like them out though.


Personally, I’m actually leaning towards Infrantry. Don’t get me wrong, the Calvary school has things I personally like (creation of special units, more independent command) but when I see you’ll probably ensure your army is well supplied and at least train their officiers properly, I rather ensure my army for the coming war at least have the essentials. I mean, I could be wrong, we might have a lot of battlehardened veterans still with us for the next war such that Calvary school is the one feasible, but in this case, call me old fashioned and one for centralisation.


I don’t see why the “standardized training” the infantry school desires can’t be used to “train independent units with more flexible tactics commanded by officers with more freedom to respond quickly” as the cavalry school desires. I don’t have much faith in the existing houseguards, or in the existing training regimen for officers. I’d love to see a war college developed that is capable of both updating the manual of arms, drill, and tactics from the battalion level down, and also teaching and encouraging more initiative at lower levels. So my preference would be to give the infantry school much of what they want, but in a way that satisfies the cavalry school’s objectives.

The only cavalry school objective that I find problematic is the desire for more special purpose units. First because they’re easily and by far the most expensive element of their school’s agenda, and secondly because it’s not clear to me that they would be integrated organically into existing units, but would most likely be organized and housed all together, separate from the existing regiments, and thus easily targeted by an invading force for special attention.