Most Hated Person

Join the Romance of the Three Kingdoms discussion with our resident Scholars. Topics relating to the novel and history are both welcome. Don't forget to check the Forum Rules before posting.
Kongming’s Archives: Romance of the Three Kingdoms
Three Kingdoms Officer Biographies
Three Kingdoms Officer Encyclopedia
Scholars of Shen Zhou Search Tool

Re: Most Hated Person

Unread postby Li_Shengsun » Thu Dec 27, 2018 2:19 am

Dong Zhou wrote:Using them as vanguard would have been a bad idea for 3kingdom warfare, particularly in the early stages. Vanguard loses and the army risks complete collapse even for experienced armies like Gongsun Zan's. You need your great fighters at the front in that era


well, in a sense yes. but im talking about fully utilizing their uses. Of course if they were 'just' leading the vanguard, it would be disastrous, but its still had a chance that they may prevail when used right. Some enemy especially on 3kingdom warfare tend to look down on people whose their prowess inferior to them, even Gongsun Zan do. Heck, even some famous general were also looked down at a time until they're shown their prowess in battlefield. And you know when someone looked down on their enemies? they'll lower their guards and become careless.
Of course i know, if the enemy doesnt look down on my general, that would be disastrous, but thats when a strategy comes in. If these general follow my instruction steps by steps, im sure they will prevail, even against Guan Yu himself and i will make sure my enemy never live to tell the tale, if they refuse to surrender that is.

when i said i use weaker soldiers or general in front line, you shouldve notice, i weren't meant for them to win, but to gauge my enemies strength, they're the Canary or put it in a more harsher words "meat shield". of course, the survivor would grow stronger and tougher, thats a bonus points. when weaker soldier retreated in chaos, the enemies lower their guard thinking they're winning, then the stronger soldier rush in and struck them from where their guards are low or just rain them with arrows from a far.

thats why i said i hate useless people, people who doesn't listen to my instruction and behaves rashly in 3kingdom warfare are 'useless'. In time, these people like Zhang Kai, Wang Zhong or Xiahou Mao would be able to come up with a strategy on their own after they seen so many battle and gain experience, and that time they become my most prized asset. As for my strong and loyal general, their prowess is unquestionable and i trust their judgement as well appreciate them for being active.
Everyone has flaws. It's a matter of finding the ones you can live with.
User avatar
Li_Shengsun
Initiate
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2018 11:35 am

Re: Most Hated Person

Unread postby Dong Zhou » Thu Dec 27, 2018 1:56 pm

. Some enemy especially on 3kingdom warfare tend to look down on people whose their prowess inferior to them, even Gongsun Zan do.


Are you referring to Jie bridge? He did look down on the small vanguard sent against him but the difference between your idea and Yuan Shao's is that Yuan Shao used his elite. Qu Yi was his one really experienced miliatry officer and would be his star general, the men were likely Qu Yi's personal command or hand-picked. It allowed them to hold their nerve and time their meeting the cavalry charge with perfection. The reaction to that, the cavalry charge breaking leading to the complete collapse of Gongsun Zan's army, with Gongsun Zan's considerable expirence and that this was a frontier army, shows how quickly things could collapse.

It is true people could look down on foes and pay for it but the looked down ones usually sent their best officers against them none the less rather then put in a lesser officer. Your own soldiers need to have faith in their leaders or everything falls apart quickly, your selected generals needs to have the ability to actually carry out the task assigned, your idea is asking a lot given the nature of 3kingdom armies. If your vanguard loses as part of the test/meatshield, your elite troops and generals are going to be fighting a rearguard action to cover your retreat becuase your mostly peasant army may leave the field of battle on seeing your losing. It is true pursuits in such circumstances (like Jie Bridge) can lead to an expirence general getting in a counter-attack but that didn't happen too often.

Training up your officers is a great idea but they need the talent in first place for miliatry matters and the method for doing so doesn't fit the era armies.
User avatar
Dong Zhou
A-Dou
A-Dou
 
Posts: 16694
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 12:32 pm
Location: "Now we must die. May Your Majesty maintain yourself"

Re: Most Hated Person

Unread postby zirroxas » Thu Dec 27, 2018 6:46 pm

Li_Shengsun wrote:Of course i know, if the enemy doesnt look down on my general, that would be disastrous, but thats when a strategy comes in. If these general follow my instruction steps by steps, im sure they will prevail, even against Guan Yu himself and i will make sure my enemy never live to tell the tale, if they refuse to surrender that is.


And there in lies the problem. A subordinate following a plan step by step gets enormously less likely the more steps you add and the more complicated the steps get. Situations evolve, the enemy doesn't react as anticipated, fog of war prevents them from properly judging the situation, people forget things under the stress of combat, people misunderstand directions. Even in today's military, with all the modern communication and analysis technology available to a professional army, the mindset that officers are taught is still to keep directions simple and easy to follow.

when i said i use weaker soldiers or general in front line, you shouldve notice, i weren't meant for them to win, but to gauge my enemies strength, they're the Canary or put it in a more harsher words "meat shield". of course, the survivor would grow stronger and tougher, thats a bonus points. when weaker soldier retreated in chaos, the enemies lower their guard thinking they're winning, then the stronger soldier rush in and struck them from where their guards are low or just rain them with arrows from a far.


To add on to what Dong Zhou said, the issue you run into here is with the idea of momentum of battle and its effect on both your army and the opponent's. Battles are usually tests of morale more than anything, and if you're rocking an army mostly made up of peasant conscripts with only a few retainers and elite units scattered about, tending to morale has got to be top priority.

If your vanguard is made up of poor quality men who are defeated and rout, you run the very real risk of your low quality troops thinking that the battle is going against them and routing themselves or at least having a lower morale than the enemy (emboldened by their victory) upon the actual clash of the lines. This is especially true if your vanguard routs into your own men and begins causing chaos as it tries to get away. Morale is infectious, and if one part of the main army begins to run, you're likely going to see a lot more start to run very soon. The reason why vanguards are usually made of some of the best soldiers is because the vanguard engagement often sets the pace of the entire battle.

A baited trap isn't a terrible idea. It still pops up because it can work, but it requires a lot of ancillary conditions to be effective: commanders that can judge the situation, troops that will hold their nerve, an enemy that is willing to be baited. It's typically a strategy that you'd need time to prepare and carries a decent amount of risk itself, so it usually something you'd use when the odds in a standard engagement are already stacked against you and you need a way to offset that. If you already have an advantage in a standard engagement, it's safer and usually more cost effective to just press that advantage if practicable.

thats why i said i hate useless people, people who doesn't listen to my instruction and behaves rashly in 3kingdom warfare are 'useless'. In time, these people like Zhang Kai, Wang Zhong or Xiahou Mao would be able to come up with a strategy on their own after they seen so many battle and gain experience, and that time they become my most prized asset. As for my strong and loyal general, their prowess is unquestionable and i trust their judgement as well appreciate them for being active.


A soldier who can't follow order is indeed useless, but the idea that you can just keep sending poor quality men into battle and they'll eventually turn into elites if they survive is something of a very video gamey way of looking at things. Personal development isn't a straight line, and a commander may not learn from battles they fight in, or they take the wrong lesson entirely. History is full of examples of poor generals who fought battle after battle but never improved. Some even got worse.

As for the troops, experience is one thing, but training is usually a less risky and more cost effective way of ensuring troop quality, and training requires them surviving. Throwing them into the meat grinder might toughen up the survivors, but a well trained army can usually accomplish the same thing, just with a lot less loss of life. It'll likely take several battles to make the survivors into quality troops, but every man who died on the way is one less soldier you could've had trained and ready as well if you had kept them out of harms way or only in light danger.

That's why, ultimately, many of these feudal style armies would have their battles decided by elites, whether or not the main army was even engaged. It's safer, more cost-effective, and more controllable than relying on a mass of levied troops to operate exactly as you expect them to.
I don't underrate the value of military knowledge, but if men make war in slavish obedience to rules, they will fail. - Ulysses S. Grant
User avatar
zirroxas
Initiate
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 5:05 am
Location: The Lands of Always Drizzle

Re: Most Hated Person

Unread postby Qin Feng » Fri Dec 28, 2018 2:33 pm

I hate Zhou Yu. Not because he's incapable, nothing like that. But he's just such a dick all the time, compromising the recently forged alliance between Wu and Shu just to win a dick measuring contest with Zhuge Liang despite Cao Cao being at the gates thirsty for revenge over his loss at the red cliffs. He's so whiny and easily angered that I couldn't help but think his death was more than deserved.

I don't hate Ma Chao, but I also think he's kind of a shitty guy too.
User avatar
Qin Feng
Assistant
 
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:18 pm

Re: Most Hated Person

Unread postby Dong Zhou » Sat Dec 29, 2018 11:34 am

Qin Feng, the contest bit was slightly over the line, best not to refer to people using their equipment unless necessary :wink:

I actually disliked the novel Zhuge Liang for moments like that, not so much Zhou Yu. Arguably Zhou Yu's portrayal is the least liked novel portrayal I have seen, he is the one LGZ gets backlash over.

Why with Ma Chao?
User avatar
Dong Zhou
A-Dou
A-Dou
 
Posts: 16694
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 12:32 pm
Location: "Now we must die. May Your Majesty maintain yourself"

Re: Most Hated Person

Unread postby Qin Feng » Sat Dec 29, 2018 1:12 pm

No wonder he would get backlash, he portrays him in such a way that even though he does great in battles in the novel he still comes across someone very easily carried away by his emotions and constantly being on Zhuge Liang's tail because he's just so obsessed with him.

Ma Chao is in a similar situation for me. He may be a great warrior and all, but he keeps slashing in all directions and getting his followers against him because of his angry (and murderous, I might add) tantrums. Funny how Koei portrays him as some kind of fighter for justice or something :lol:
User avatar
Qin Feng
Assistant
 
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:18 pm

Re: Most Hated Person

Unread postby Han » Sun Dec 30, 2018 11:54 am

Historically, Ma Chao was compelled by circumstances to oppose Cao Cao. His hands were tied behind his back and his cards were god awful. He played it as well as anyone could have in his position.
Liu Bei did nothing wrong.
User avatar
Han
Changshi
 
Posts: 417
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 1:46 pm

Re: Most Hated Person

Unread postby Qin Feng » Sun Dec 30, 2018 2:23 pm

I was talking strictly about the novel, I'm not knowledgeable enough to make statements on history yet :lol:
User avatar
Qin Feng
Assistant
 
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:18 pm

Re: Most Hated Person

Unread postby LiuBeiwasGreat » Sun Dec 30, 2018 2:45 pm

Qin Feng wrote:I was talking strictly about the novel, I'm not knowledgeable enough to make statements on history yet :lol:


In the novel it is different but at the same time he had little choice but to invade. He is a bit more impressive in the novel though with the duels and such.

In both history and the novel Ma Chao had little choice but to invade, sadly for him he really stood little chance of victory. The best he could have hoped for was a treaty keeping Cao Cao out of Liang.
"If you can't drink a lobbyist's whiskey, take his money, sleep with his women and still vote against him in the morning, you don't belong in politics."
LiuBeiwasGreat
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 2658
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:13 pm
Location: Raleigh, NC

Re: Most Hated Person

Unread postby Li_Shengsun » Wed Jan 02, 2019 6:10 am

Dong Zhou wrote:Are you referring to Jie bridge? He did look down on the small vanguard sent against him but the difference between your idea and Yuan Shao's is that Yuan Shao used his elite. Qu Yi was his one really experienced miliatry officer and would be his star general, the men were likely Qu Yi's personal command or hand-picked. It allowed them to hold their nerve and time their meeting the cavalry charge with perfection. The reaction to that, the cavalry charge breaking leading to the complete collapse of Gongsun Zan's army, with Gongsun Zan's considerable expirence and that this was a frontier army, shows how quickly things could collapse.

It is true people could look down on foes and pay for it but the looked down ones usually sent their best officers against them none the less rather then put in a lesser officer. Your own soldiers need to have faith in their leaders or everything falls apart quickly, your selected generals needs to have the ability to actually carry out the task assigned, your idea is asking a lot given the nature of 3kingdom armies. If your vanguard loses as part of the test/meatshield, your elite troops and generals are going to be fighting a rearguard action to cover your retreat becuase your mostly peasant army may leave the field of battle on seeing your losing. It is true pursuits in such circumstances (like Jie Bridge) can lead to an expirence general getting in a counter-attack but that didn't happen too often.

Training up your officers is a great idea but they need the talent in first place for miliatry matters and the method for doing so doesn't fit the era armies.


Yea, im referring to that.

Its fair, but you mistaken about what the real battle looked like. It wasn't like games, you send men like Guan Yu to attack, they responded by sending more and more men to defend their base as they turned into mince meat with Guan Yu's attack. If you sending Elites and experienced general with some renown, people would think more carefully how to deal with it, even setting trap to capture the said general. You don't want your elite general to be captured and left you with only good for nothing general don't you?

Using meatshield or Human Shield is tried and true strategy, used by the mongols (Genghis Khan) and some of countries in modern war. You used surrendered soldier or peasant as shield in frontline while your elite unit stayed behind them to make sure they dont retreat, run or surrender to the enemies. While sending another Elites to circle the area far from enemy sight and strike them from behind while they busy fending off the vanguard. If they rode out to fight, they'll fall into pincer attack, if they dont, their retreat/supply route is cut off and that would only give just two option, surrender or dead.

zirroxas wrote:And there in lies the problem. A subordinate following a plan step by step gets enormously less likely the more steps you add and the more complicated the steps get. Situations evolve, the enemy doesn't react as anticipated, fog of war prevents them from properly judging the situation, people forget things under the stress of combat, people misunderstand directions. Even in today's military, with all the modern communication and analysis technology available to a professional army, the mindset that officers are taught is still to keep directions simple and easy to follow.


the direction is indeed simple and easy to follow. how complicated can it be for peasant troop? retreat and split into two direction, they were to wait until the enemies DID follow them and were to retreat again if the enemies chasing them. then they were to join up when the elite troop DO charged up onto the enemy lines.
If the enemies DID NOT follow them, then they gain merit without doing anything and retreat in orderly fashion, then wait for further instruction.

To add on to what Dong Zhou said, the issue you run into here is with the idea of momentum of battle and its effect on both your army and the opponent's. Battles are usually tests of morale more than anything, and if you're rocking an army mostly made up of peasant conscripts with only a few retainers and elite units scattered about, tending to morale has got to be top priority.

If your vanguard is made up of poor quality men who are defeated and rout, you run the very real risk of your low quality troops thinking that the battle is going against them and routing themselves or at least having a lower morale than the enemy (emboldened by their victory) upon the actual clash of the lines. This is especially true if your vanguard routs into your own men and begins causing chaos as it tries to get away. Morale is infectious, and if one part of the main army begins to run, you're likely going to see a lot more start to run very soon. The reason why vanguards are usually made of some of the best soldiers is because the vanguard engagement often sets the pace of the entire battle.


i only said the peasant troop is my vanguard, because they were just carrying vanguard banner, to make an illusion my vanguard were weak, untrained, low morale, and also to deceive my opponents that i am a bad leader. Battlefield is full of deception. Everything is the right move, as long as you are the victor. History were told by the victor after all, no matter how many lives were lost or how evil the plan is, you just need to spin the story that's all.

im sorry, but since when i said i sent men so they get defeated and routed? i only said i sent weak troop to gauge my enemy strength. that weren't meant i sent them to die. just like i explained above. My own peasant troop or untrained troop, they were to retreat to bait the enemy and were to join with my Elite troop when attacking.
i don't care to surrendered troop, general or a peasant who support my enemy. As i said on one of the thread, im like Cao Cao, i dont easily trust a newcomer, but i'll use them as long as they have use, and cast them away if theyre useless. I'll use them as a human shield to protect my elite men in battle if i have to.


A baited trap isn't a terrible idea. It still pops up because it can work, but it requires a lot of ancillary conditions to be effective: commanders that can judge the situation, troops that will hold their nerve, an enemy that is willing to be baited. It's typically a strategy that you'd need time to prepare and carries a decent amount of risk itself, so it usually something you'd use when the odds in a standard engagement are already stacked against you and you need a way to offset that. If you already have an advantage in a standard engagement, it's safer and usually more cost effective to just press that advantage if practicable.


as i said, if they were to follow my direction, they'll survive. if they don't they dead. I am the commander, they're just a pawn. If the enemy are not baited by the ruse, then i just order them to retreat or sending my peasant troop and/or elite to harass the enemies. Like sending them to shot fire arrow at night or sounding the drum to make them stay awake 24/7.
The battle of attrition is really scary, in time my enemies would get exhausted by this constant harassment, their morale will plummet and eventually they'll forced to make choice either to take the bait, surrender of retreat. either choice they make, they'll die in the end.

A soldier who can't follow order is indeed useless, but the idea that you can just keep sending poor quality men into battle and they'll eventually turn into elites if they survive is something of a very video gamey way of looking at things. Personal development isn't a straight line, and a commander may not learn from battles they fight in, or they take the wrong lesson entirely. History is full of examples of poor generals who fought battle after battle but never improved. Some even got worse.


And here where you're wrong. your mindset is reversed. In video game, everything is fixed by the coding. Xiahou Mao will always stay as Xiahou Mao, the same as Guan Yu etc. You'll decimated in game even if you send Xiahou Mao with 50k troop against Guan Yu with only 5k troop, even worse, your Xiahou Mao could get killed by him (via duel).

you mention about those who fought battle after battle and never improved even gets worse. firstly, you need to understand why they lose, what choice do they make so they lose, and to whom they lose against.
You clearly underestimate human ability to learn and to survive.
- An untrained soldier just armed with spear/sword with nothing to lose, can win against a full armed trained soldier.
- Xiang Yi cut off the bridge, a retreat route, in order to unleash his men's potential.
- Starving Yellow Turbans on a castle fought to the death and dealt a massive casualty to imperial army.
and many other.

Humans do improve, they just need a lot of practice in order to make their mind and muscle remember it. Those three men i mention doesnt have any real experience in battlefield.
- Zhang Kai is a bandit, he only know how to plunder and kill.
- Xiahou Mao only sit his butt on the office for long time, he gets jumpy in real battlefield.
- Wang Zhong do indeed survivor of a famine, but he never seen any battle or mostly send just to lose.


As for the troops, experience is one thing, but training is usually a less risky and more cost effective way of ensuring troop quality, and training requires them surviving. Throwing them into the meat grinder might toughen up the survivors, but a well trained army can usually accomplish the same thing, just with a lot less loss of life. It'll likely take several battles to make the survivors into quality troops, but every man who died on the way is one less soldier you could've had trained and ready as well if you had kept them out of harms way or only in light danger.

That's why, ultimately, many of these feudal style armies would have their battles decided by elites, whether or not the main army was even engaged. It's safer, more cost-effective, and more controllable than relying on a mass of levied troops to operate exactly as you expect them to.


training and experience is clearly something that can't be separated. A trained soldier but without any real experience on battle, would die the same way as untrained soldier are. an experienced men are usually have higher chance to survive than just a trained soldier.

im totally agreed with you about the well trained soldier, but you have forgotten where Cao's Qingzhou Elite troop coming from. They were untrained men, yellow turban rebels with just strong and healthy body. however, after facing many battle, they eventually become experienced and strong troop who would braving any danger.

im totally agreed with battle decided by elites, but you've forgotten why they're called elite. is it just training on barrack would suffice? no. You need to take them in battle to face the real thing, and when they survived thats how they can be called 'elite'.
Last edited by Li_Shengsun on Wed Jan 02, 2019 2:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Everyone has flaws. It's a matter of finding the ones you can live with.
User avatar
Li_Shengsun
Initiate
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2018 11:35 am

PreviousNext

Return to Sanguo Yanyi Symposium

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

Copyright © 2002–2008 Kongming’s Archives. All Rights Reserved