Comrade Angles utilise witches.town. Vous pouvez læ suivre et interagir si vous possédez un compte quelque part dans le "fediverse".
History, War, Violence Afficher plus
It depends on the scale of the entities at war and the lethality of weapons used. Soldiers take an awful lot of time to be born, bred and trained, and for each soldier you need an awful lot of civilians to spin the wheel of the economy. You can easily imagine regular low-scale skirmishes around a contested border for example, whereas a full-scale offensive would be too costly for either side(s) to mount, especially if there are more than 2 warring entities. Alliances allow more bloodshed, with supporting allies with no threat to their land providing material support for entities directly at war with each other.
@hypolite Hmm, gotcha. How does this apply to ancient societies, like the greeks? How often would an average greek citizen have seen their society go to war? :0
I would say all their life, even though large-scale open engagements would probably be rare. Take the Punic Wars that lasted around 120 years! The big obstacles to hasten the wars would have been moving troops by foot only, supply for them during a campaign and actually taking objectives as defense structures were mightier than offensive weapons.
History, War, Violence Afficher plus
If you increase the power of weapons, the open wars are getting shorter, more soldiers die, objective are easier to capture and one side has to capitulate at some point. But look at Israel that's been in a constant state of conflict since its inception. They have a massive military advantage and yet neighboring countries keep taking pot shots at it. A constant state of conflict with more powerful weapons seems to imply asymmetric warfare, see South America or even Africa. In this case you have a powerful but monolithic entity versus scrappy but elusive rebel groups that can keep the larger entity on its toes but not capture meaningful objectives and can secretly be supplied by other entities not officially at war.
History, War, Violence Afficher plus
This is a little far-fetched, but I suppose it would give a temporary advantage until the other side realize how critical this particular person is and spend meaningful resources to take them out.
History, War, Violence, Fantasy Afficher plus
If a war is protracted enough, you can imagine multiple infiltrated agents, or threatening family/friends/pets if a direct assassination isn't available, or blocking weapon materials supply. Heck, if the wonder weaponsmith is too heavily guarded, they may rebel themselves for lacking freedom. I'm not sure where you're going with these single point of failure. Like you said, magic is just another tool, and it certainly doesn't invalidate general strategy concepts.
History, War, Violence, Fantasy Afficher plus