VanillaG, on 16 May 2014 - 07:03 AM, said:
This was Trial of Possession, not a Trial of Annihilation. Like you said, the cities were the objectives and would determine that the victor after one side conceded but if the first 4 clans would have taken and held their objectived Focht would have most likely conceded the field by that time. That would have meant that 2/3 of his forces were engaged and not making any progress and there was still 3 more clans to drop with fresh troops. Just like how the battle actually ended, both commanders agreed that additional fighting was a pointless waste of resources since the outcome was already determined.
I don't know that the canon identifies exactly what sort of trial it was? Whats your source for this?
In any case, as I have said twice (and you quoted) the battle in canon was not for the cities. The battle would not end until one commander or the other decided their troops could no longer fight. The 12 cities were the framework to assit with the determination of the victor, but the battle was one of attrition. Focht's records are quite clear, that the battle would end only when one commander conceded they could fight no longer.
To take an extreme example, had the Clans (or Comstar) held all 12 cities but were wiped out outside the cities and their CiC said,'we cannot fight anymore, we concede", it didn't matter that they held all 12 cities. They had lost regardless. The cities were the framework, not the goal post. That's what Focht says anyway.
If you have some canon that suggests otherwise, I'd be happy to hear. It would certainly change my view of some aspects.
VanillaG, on 16 May 2014 - 07:03 AM, said:
While the ilKhan/Khan may put some parameters what is allowed or not allowed, the tactics on how to accomplish the mission are left up the individual battle commanders. This is way of the Clans. Each commander bids what they think is appropriate to accomplish the mission, period. It is then up to them to ensure that they use the appropriate tactics based on what is bid to accomplish the objectives. This was a short battle on one specific planet over 12 cities. Each Khan knew what was defending each target and made bids that they thought be appropriate to take the targets they bid for. To blame the ilKhan for not reigning them is would go against how the Clans have fought trials.
But Il Khan (read Grand Council) was the combatant. Not the individual Khans / Clans. It was the Il Khan who negotiated the trial, the Il Khan who secured the Grand Councils consent. Some Khans (at least one of GB in canon) spoke out against the Trial at Tukayyid, but it was the Il Khans show. The Khans did not bid for the battle against Comstar nor did they have individual Trials. The Il Khan was the sole representaive and accordingly, the battle was on his shoulders.
In at least one case, the Diamond Sharks faced an Army (the 2nd) from another theater. They did not have set opponents, they were not individual trials.
The Khans can not be held accountable for the Il Khans mis management of his own Trial, just like if a Khan bid a Cluster against 16 Clusters to fight a trial of Refusal, it's not the Cluster commanders error the Khan misjudged. The bidder is accountable for the outcomes of their trial, not the soldiers. The bidder claims the glory, the bidder suffers the consequences. That is the Clan way.
VanillaG, on 16 May 2014 - 07:03 AM, said:
While Leo was checking up on the Clans, it was more at a strategic level not a tactical level. Even in the Rasalhague bidding, he made the two clans bid against each other but he did not dictate tactics. The Wolves and Ghost Bears we free to take the objective how ever the wanted. You seem to be advocating foe the ilKhan to act in a way that no other ilKhan has acted in regards to tactical actions. Simply put the Crusading clans underbid because of hubris and by failing to take their objectives proved that their viewpoint was wrong by losing on the field of battle. Had they taken the enemy more seriously they most likely would have won.
Again, I don't want to get into a comparison of Il Khans as it's not relevant to the thread content. But the main gist is had Ulric exercised his command perogitives instead of leaving his sub commanders to their own devices, it is likely the outcome of the battle would have been different. The Khan did have certain powers and authorities over the Clans in execution of his duties as Il Khan. Leo Showers is an example of an Il Khan who exercised some of those authorities, Ulric did not show the same apptitude.
Ulric showed very little (if any?) strategic influence on the Tukayyid battle in canon.
Compare Focht's influence on the battle. Who moved troops from one zone to the other, who prepared his troops for a long logistical battle, who gave them prep speeches before the Invasion? Who counselled his troops on the tactics that will bring success? If your point is to compare one CiC to another, Focht is head and shoulders above Ulric as demonstrated in the outcome of the battle.
What I am pointing out (in part) is what the canon reflects, that the Il Khan made minimal strategic influence (if any?) on the battle he negotiated and commanded. Ulric can blame his subordinates all he likes, but the canon is quite clear this was the the Clans Battle, and Ulric's negotiation. It was not the individual Clans, not the the individual Khans.
People can draw their own conclusions and deductions about what might have happened had the Clans been commanded differently, but they do so undertanding where the Clans failed and the command decisions that led to those failures. The most obvious point to examine is the 2 orders Ulric did issue, for the SJ's and GB's to retreat. The armies "freed up" by these two decisions would have an impact on the battles of 3 other Clans, so 5 Clans in total were impacted. 5 of 7 Clans hampered or impacted adversly by the Il Khans orders.
That's what is in canon anyway.