Lol, MSJ, I assume Ferdinand is autocorrect for Kellhus
?
I will preface this post by suggesting that this conversation ultimately is a question of how much of what we're debating Kellhus had mapped out or whether, as Walter suggested, that Kellhus ultimately would have lost to the Nansur/Fanim at Shimeh without Achamian's presence at the hilltop shrine.
Walter, rather than break down your post (I have a couple contentions with how you describe (OT) and (A)) I'll write out where I think we disagreed in our conversation in Quorum.
Firstly,
if Achamian is not there, he doesn't stall the Nansur. We talked about how I figure Conphas would have established command on that hilltop and then sent his columns forward - merchant had some great quotes regarding figures and deployment in Quorum, it'd be nice if he (or someone) could quote them in thread as I lack my books. Poor recall on my part but I believe that means he's got at least some cavalry in the column with him and then three other columns coming up behind him. Without Achamian there, as far as I see it, Conphas deploys immediately.
Secondly,
if Conphas isn't stalled by Achamian, when does Saubon hit Conphas? You and I disagreed on the timeline here, though, I don't especially think it matters. I argued in (A) that Conphas is killed in the same way he is in (OT) when Achamian is present, except that Conphas is just sitting there with his guard, trumpeters or flag-bearers, and Cememketri, as he'll have sent his own column forward as well. In the extreme version of my case, I argued that the columns would already be engaged with the Holy War and leaderless when Saubon and his portion of the Galeoth contingent strike them in the back, splitting the Nansur engagement to two fronts.
However, in the case above or in your suggestion (B) that Saubon ends up engaging Conphas' whole four columns before they move against the Holy War, I still think you give the Saik and the Nansur too much credit to their ability - though, you'd still have to account for me why you think Conphas would have just stood around waiting to get hit by Saubon in (B). merchant also brought up in his quotes in Quorum that one column straight up breaks and runs as soon as Conphas is taken out by Saubon so the Nansur discipline isn't as strong as you make it either.
There's also the issue of split fronts, cavalry, and Chorae. Now again, I'll have to rely on merchant (or others) for quotes but if there are four Saik and Cememketri with Conphas in one column, we can probably assume that he's got in the range of 12-20 sorcerers-of-rank split among his columns. We don't have a good indication of Saubon's forces or Chorae, unfortunately, but we can guess that the between the Holy War and Saubon's forces there are that many Chorae kicking around - the Holy War was already proving a boon to the Scarlet Spires against the Cishaurim and I made the argument that clearly the Inrithi had figured out some tradition of warring against Schools because they did so successfully during the Scholastic Wars. I assume that the Saik, like the Nansur, will be sufficiently engaged with the Holy War and Saubon is going to make a good dent into the Nansur's flank before anyone even realizes what's going on (especially, in (A) if Conphas dies by Saubon's hand before the Galeoth engage the Nansur).
Lol, kk, I think that's it. Sorry it took time to come back around to the conversation, Walter
.
Hopefully, Wilshire will be drawn back in soon.
