A) I'll grant Dale Barton, I did forget about him. Though he is a trader who is supplying the military, meaning he travels, benefits directly, and is specifically protected. Either way he would have less experience than JG and Ulysses. Cass has even less first hand experience than Raul. He actually said he's been there. Last time I checked Cass is giving second hand info as she understands it.
B) Could you be more esoteric? Or at least stop projecting your own shortcomings onto me? Please and thanks. Seriously an entire paragraph just to say I haven't 'sufficiently substantiated' my claim that the Legion is a cult of personality. Even though that's basically the foundational concept. Either way let's get technical, since apparently consulting a dictionary is too difficult.
Cult of Personality "A situation where a leader (often a
dictator) has been falsely idolized and made into a national or group icon and is revered as a result."
He is not a god. He is idolized as a god. He has made himself into a national icon, and is revered as a result. A fact, at least in the empirical sense, is an independently verifiable observation. Every time I reference a facet of the game, say Caesar declaring himself the Son of Mars, I am providing a fact.
C) Oh good grief, you're just skimming. That's part of 'national stability', though I'd have to say the economy is also a factor, the management of farm land, really it's a bit bigger than 'the likelihood of obeying leadership'. A nation can be unstable without revolution, particularly if their government fails to provide basic things.
"Having dogma dictate national policy is not good for stability", is what I said when I referenced Imperial Japan. Maybe you recall that it doesn't exist anymore? Or how Soviet Russia collapsed, and how both it and North Korea couldn't/can't maintain the basic necessities of life or avoid regularly going to war against their own people? If you want revolution specifically I could actually just rewind the clock on both of those examples, to when they were created.
"In all the examples you gave, plus in the case of the Legion, there is no voice of rebellion"
You seriously think there's no rebellion in North Korea? So all the people fleeing from it and getting locked up in concentration camps, they're just like 'yeah it was time to move on'?!? Also Silus, Ulysses, Joshua Graham, and that whole thing where we don't get to see Legion territory--well that's convenient for your argument. Though given what humans have always done historically in response to unstable, oppressive regimes that demand absolute obedience, are we really going to pretend like the null position is cautious optimism? Any historian would be laughing their asses off.
D)
XD
wow
just wow
I don't even think you believe that would work. That even in the most semantic, pedantic, nebulous sense--that raising children in an army, as a recruit, is the same as having an actual family raise a child in an actual communiity. Or at the very least I have to, because the level of naivete I would have to assume if you were being sincere would just be brutally insulting.
E) ...you're wondering why being as terrible as you can be, to literally half the population, would necessarily be a bad thing? How limiting half your labor pool and your talent pool to being slaves might hold a country back?
https://www.usaid.gov/what-we-do/gender-equality-and-womens-empowerment
F) Ah, very pretentious, and you followed it up by using wikipedia links to unwittingly demonstrate that you still don't understand either term.
The NCRs strategy at the first battle of hoover dam was to disorganize their foe, compel them into a hasty forward march, in order to lure them into a trap. There isn't a single tactic in that sentence. The tactics they used were: placing sniper on high ground, in a position capable of sighting the officers at the back of the Legion formation; ordering them to specifically target said officers, laying bombs inside Boulder, and a false retreat.
"So take your cunty attitude elsewhere and consult the dictionary yourself before telling others to do so."
Oh, muffin.
G) "1. I'm not going to discuss game mechanics with you."
So basically you want facts, but you will not discuss them. That actually explains everything.
H) "Because strategic mobility is something entirely different from tactical mobility."
True, each describes the capacity to move something. Tactical is movement under fire. Operational is movement of soldiers and/or gear to some part of the battlefield. Strategic is movement of an army to the theatre. Obviously both NCR and Legion maintain tactical mobility in most conflict situations, so it's not worth mentioning. Technically operational mobility is more salient to the point, since we're only talking about mobility in terms of skirmishing. Whether by the Legion against the NCR, or the reverse after the 2nd battle of Hoover dam. And strategic just means getting their asses there. As in literally what they did during the 2nd battle of Hoover Dam. Really all I'm talking about is continuing what is specifically the ending of the game. The NCR taking their army to Legion territory, wherein they will do battle.
"The NCR is overextended and it's territory is under pressure from many angles. It cannot afford to move troops away from it's own strategic resources. Furthermore, because of their overextension and the state of NCR logistics, they cannot hope to achieve the same level of mobility the Legion can, who are nomadic and require little to no supply lines."
I refer you to exhibits A through Z, where I explained in exquisite detail how that exact situation can be resolved...in the post you are replying to. Seriously, do I need to quote you telling me not to be obtuse so you can see that you really need a mirror?
"Lets for the sake of argument say that the NCR would expedition into Legion territory. What would they find? Civilians who are hardy enough to engage them in guerilla warfare. Nothing else. Their only strategic target would be civilians and villages.The Legion on the other hand can sever NCR supply lines and take strategic objectives like the Dam, which would severely impair the NCR army ability to function. They'd be bled dry."
Lets say for the sake of argument that I didn't just go through each possible scenario of defense, exposing the flaws which you have yet to address on an even cursory level. Oh wait, you just did. Still waiting to hear which one you're committing to.
Also you basically just admitted that the Legion doesn't farm (ranch) for jack, has no supply lines (so what's with the caravans?), lives not just a subsistence lifestyle but a hunter gatherer one. Which begs the question of how they have towns in your mind. As well as how that works in game when they clearly have brahmin, and caravans. Or how that would ever be a stable society. Really just all of the points Ive raised without getting a real rebuttal for.
"4. Expeditioning with their army does not solve the NCR's overextension. Obviously. It's not even a real option. Expeditioning with an army would leave too much weaknesses for the Legion to exploit."
Except for the part where I already solved overextension vis a vis literally things you can do in game. As in canon events. Facts, remember? Also, on the one hand according to you skirmishing is a perfect unassailable move, but on the other hand it's terrible? You can't define the nature and mechanics of a move based on who's making it. If plainsmen come riding into colorado on horseback using Gengis Khans hit and run tactics, and the Legion then copied them--it wouldn't arbitrarily have different strengths and weaknesses. It's the same thing. The Legion literally trains their soldiers not to think, until they become officers (and even then...), disavows science (the method of discovery), education and academia in general, and kills people for talking back. The NCR promotes education, allows questioning, and science. If anyone can learn the moves of their enemy of the two, it is not the Legion. They already learned how to fight the Enclave, the BoS, any number of raiders, tribals, and factions in between. The Legion has only ever steamrolled over uneducated disorganized tribals, until--despite throwing their entire society into the pursuit of war they lost, and with the NCR ending, twice.
"The moment the NCR leaves Hoover Dam, the Legion takes it. Let's say they trade: NCR takes Fortification Hill, the Legion takes the Dam. The NCR gets a useless hill, the Legion gets the NCR's primary strategic asset in the region. It's not even close who would be the winner in this scenario."
The moment the Legion is defeated at the second battle of hoover dam, they will need years to rebuilt their army. The same exact way they did last time. Only this time they overextended themselves into the east (paraphrasing Lanius). So with what exactly are they going to take it with? And what convenient replacement will arrive to replace Lanius that can hold it all together despite the fact that we've already seen what happens when they suddenly lose much of their leadership (1st battle of hoover dam).
I) "5. This is a false assumption. Look at Vietnam for proof of the contrary.
6. How is this relevant to your argument?
7. Again, how is this relevant, and how would this problem only plague the Legion, as the NCR is guilty of it's fair share of oppression? Discontent is rife within the NCR. Yet when speaking with characters in the Legion they all are grateful for the civilization the Legion brought to their tribes."
5) Incorrect, they still had law enforcement, and beyond the line ordinary settlements. And again, that was a proxy war where the Vietcong were supplied by another country. 6) B/c it necessitates a minimum of static forces to maintain law and order. Cops offer a target that would further destabilize settlements if attacked. If there are additional forces in towns, then those are also static forces. 7) The reason you don't hear ungrateful Legion people (except Silus, Ulysses, Joshua Graham) is because they tend to kill them. Seriously, you can barely if at all criticize Caesar without him trying to murder you. It's not strictly a Legion problem, but putting half your population in rape slavery, and threatening the other half with torture and murder if they don't become efficient killing machines is infinitely more oppressive than anything the NCR has done let alone continues to do at any appreciable scale. Unless you're insane, it's better living in a country where you have rights. Countries where people have no rights tend to have revolutions. In fact that's basically the universal impetus.
"8. The Legion doesn't need to hold their own territories. You're envisioning a conflict where the NCR is taking Legion towns and the Legion is just standing at a distance twiddling their thumbs. It's much more likely that as soon as the NCR'd make a thrust forward into Legion territories, the first thing the Legion would do is sever their supply lines, which would render them helpless. It all ties into overextension and not being able to protect their vulnerabilities.
You're proposing the NCR sit on a worthless Legion town while giving the Legion the opportunity to ransack and destroy all the NCR's strategic resources. The NCR just has much, much more to lose for such a concept to be worth considering."
I actually never mentioned setting up supply lines in Legion territory. At minimum I spoke of hit and run tactics for the sake of attrition. As in guerilla warfare. What I'm envisioning is a post defeat Legion who isn't magical, and again I refer you to your own words 'where are the facts?' You can't just say 'they'd instantaneously cut supply lines and take the dam' without a b/c attached to those statements. Whereas I actually worked through each scenario, and the logical conclusions thereof. I'm seriously starting to think the Legion is a superhero to you, in the same way a father is to their preschool child.
"9. Yes, using an army of malnourished women, old and weak to fight instead of the overextended and undersupplied, demoralized NCR army sounds like a great idea. They'd probably do a better job at it too."
Ah, so this is about me bashing your Legion fan club. Good to know, thinking I've just about wasted all the time I should on this 'discussion'.
J) Tech. Yes we agree that as it concerns technology the NCR has the advantage.
I would further add that this extends to non-military technology. Namely medicine which improves mortality rates (supply of new soldiers), lifespan (lifelong productivity), and quality of life (broad impacts). As well as manufacturing and farming, which means they can out produce the Legion on an equivalent strip of land, bearing in mind that they already have more arable land and people. Which is to say that the NCR can get stronger within its existing borders. While the Legion is capped. They can only ever get back to their previous strength. Or use conquest to expand the total size of their army and, since apparently they live entirely off the land without working it, to expand any of their total resources. The Legion has to get much bigger which means expending men they just lost to the 2nd battle of Hoover Dam and their eastern campaign, in order to gain more. On both counts they're destined to lose the race.
