Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY

jwillis7

Member
  • Posts

    303
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by jwillis7

  1. I remember when people asked Tolkien, who is Tom Bombadil, he said that there should always be something in a story which is a mystery to even the author, Maybe that is what Nakomi is too

    Tom Bombadil was at the begining of the story, Nakomi is part of the ending plot, who could play a huge role in what we did not see...  these are not the same.

     

    its just cheap writing, instead of being able to drop hints and leave clues BS put in things for us to wonder about (verin's letter, nakomi) that he knew were not going to be answerd.

  2.  

     

    Btw, its 600 miles between Caemlyn and Cairhein, and it looks about the same between Tarwin's Gap and TV (the next big population center after Shienar). Lets say the trollocs can march 50 miles a day (which is ridiculous but seems to be about what they were doing in TGH being driven hard by Fain, although a much smaller group). Thats still 12 days of brutal marching.

    dreadlord gates?

    shadowspawn cannot go through gateways.  they just come out dead

  3.  

     

     

     

     

    Personally, the battle plans and descriptions ruined the book for me early on. The whole strategy for the Caemlyn trollocs was absurd. Convince them to attack and then let them chase you 250 miles north to Braem Wood? Of course, there is no detail given whatsoever about how this chase was pulled off or why it was even necessary. In one POV the trollocs are charging Perrin's harrying force, in the next POV they are 250 miles north outside Braem Wood. This would take 1-2 weeks in traveling time for an army. How did Perrin's army prevent from being overrun during this time? It was so poorly written I had to put the book down for a bit at this point.

     

    Also, it's noted that the trollocs in Caemlyn number in the "tens of the thousands." In KoD's Rand and a few friends destroy 100,000 trollocs at the manor house, yet in aMoL they decide to kite the trollocs halfway across the continent (which would have taken a good month). Really? They fought the same group of "tens of thousands" of trollocs for a month and traveled over 500 miles despite having dragons and channelers? This whole tactic/battle was so sloppily written it was hard for me to engage myself in the book from that point on. What a massive disappointment. I'm glad we get an ending, but the execution of this book was awful. 

    it was 150 miles but still WAY to far.  for any force to travel 150 miles to get some archers.

     

    it is like an army attcking London for the people in london to chase them 30 miles north of Nottingham.  go look at google maps it is crazy

     

    No it's not. The French let the English march over 350 miles from Harfleur before forcing them to fight at Agincourt. 

    These are not the same at all. Yes there have been campaigns that have gone for over 150 miles but this is not what was happening here.

     

    Henry V (as i am sure you know) landed in France on 13 August 1415 and fought the battle of Agincourt on 25 October 1415 with lots of stops on the way. It took the trollocs and the forces of the light what...and hour to make that trip. The French did not attack London and drive them out of a fortified position on a 150 mile chase. Henry was the aggressor making these very different. I know you will say that the trollocs are the aggressor but i say they took and held Caemlyn as a staging ground to bring in troops.

     

    150 miles is way to far

    Per: http://www.amazon.com/Agincourt-Henry-Battle-That-England/dp/0316015040/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1358482481&sr=8-3&keywords=agincourt

  4. It seems this community is blessed with numerous battle-hardened desktop generals, all with a better understanding of how (imaginative) large scale battles are being fought than the author of the book.

    o and i am awesone at medieval total war 2 and Age of Empire so..............................................

  5. Personally, the battle plans and descriptions ruined the book for me early on. The whole strategy for the Caemlyn trollocs was absurd. Convince them to attack and then let them chase you 250 miles north to Braem Wood? Of course, there is no detail given whatsoever about how this chase was pulled off or why it was even necessary. In one POV the trollocs are charging Perrin's harrying force, in the next POV they are 250 miles north outside Braem Wood. This would take 1-2 weeks in traveling time for an army. How did Perrin's army prevent from being overrun during this time? It was so poorly written I had to put the book down for a bit at this point.

     

    Also, it's noted that the trollocs in Caemlyn number in the "tens of the thousands." In KoD's Rand and a few friends destroy 100,000 trollocs at the manor house, yet in aMoL they decide to kite the trollocs halfway across the continent (which would have taken a good month). Really? They fought the same group of "tens of thousands" of trollocs for a month and traveled over 500 miles despite having dragons and channelers? This whole tactic/battle was so sloppily written it was hard for me to engage myself in the book from that point on. What a massive disappointment. I'm glad we get an ending, but the execution of this book was awful. 

    it was 150 miles but still WAY to far.  for any force to travel 150 miles to get some archers.

     

    it is like an army attcking London for the people in london to chase them 30 miles north of Nottingham.  go look at google maps it is crazy

  6.  

     

     

    i have a problem with how long the batle lasted.  I mean really, how long did open field battles last?  Not counting the facts that there are people doing magic everywhere.

     

    Not long. Culloden (1745), lasted an hour or two. Agincourt (1415), lasted something like four hours before it was all over. Crecy (1346) also lasted just a few hours. The Battle of Barnet (1471), lasted around 3-4 hours and was fought almost entirely in a thick fog. 

     

    Medieval battles didn't last long. The armies weren't that big, fighting in armor is tiring, and generally speaking one army or another would break after a few hours and start running, and that's when the real killing would begin. 

     

    A long battle like those described in the books just wouldn't happen. The battle in FoH at least made partial sense because Mat moved around, and presumably had time to rest. In AMoL there's a scene describing rest periods for the men at Tarwin's Gap, only they don't happen nearly as much.

    is a good clip from the series Rome, which shows how a Roman Legion fought so as to not tire out the men. Other Medieval armies would have had something similar. Either men fighting in pairs and switching off, or ranks fighting for a bit and then moving back. 

    yea the rest scence kinda threw me off, i understand in a war sending people to the front lines and pulling squads out for rest.  But this is kinda like everywhere was the front lines right?

    You have to rest them. Otherwise they'll drop from exhaustion inside an hour and then where are you? You do it by having them work in shifts, which works when you've got a battle like Tarwin's Gap where you can block the bulk of the enemy forces with a portion of your own.

    haha no i get it why you need to rest.  But i just cannot picture this battle where there is time to rest.  I picture it like a giant Braveheart battle with all these forces crashing into each other at different parts of the field.  And with Gateways why would you not just go to where people are eating/sleeping and attack.

     

    If this was like a campaign in germania where all of your forces are not engaged in battle. but these are.  I just got the feeling everyone was fighting.

     

    and we have not seen any of the nations using the shild formation like in that rome clip which is key to the rotation.

  7.  

    i have a problem with how long the batle lasted.  I mean really, how long did open field battles last?  Not counting the facts that there are people doing magic everywhere.

     

    Not long. Culloden (1745), lasted an hour or two. Agincourt (1415), lasted something like four hours before it was all over. Crecy (1346) also lasted just a few hours. The Battle of Barnet (1471), lasted around 3-4 hours and was fought almost entirely in a thick fog. 

     

    Medieval battles didn't last long. The armies weren't that big, fighting in armor is tiring, and generally speaking one army or another would break after a few hours and start running, and that's when the real killing would begin. 

     

    A long battle like those described in the books just wouldn't happen. The battle in FoH at least made partial sense because Mat moved around, and presumably had time to rest. In AMoL there's a scene describing rest periods for the men at Tarwin's Gap, only they don't happen nearly as much.

    is a good clip from the series Rome, which shows how a Roman Legion fought so as to not tire out the men. Other Medieval armies would have had something similar. Either men fighting in pairs and switching off, or ranks fighting for a bit and then moving back. 

    yea the rest scence kinda threw me off, i understand in a war sending people to the front lines and pulling squads out for rest.  But this is kinda like everywhere was the front lines right?

  8.  

     

    ...hate it when writers leave the ending unwritten. I want to know what happened I don't want to imagine it. Pisses me off when this happens in books and movies. Seriously absolutely hate it. I'm big time disappointed :/I'd rather have less drawn out fights and more explanation of what happens at the end. I dont want to have to imagine and dwell on what happened to the characters after the fact, I have better things to do. Give me a conclusion and be done with it.

    "The purpose of a storyteller is not to tell you how to think, but to give you questions to think upon."  - Hoid, The Way of Kings

    Questions to think about life, the world...everything.  Not plot holes in the story they were telling.

  9. I think nobody can be happy with end ...why? Because everyone dreamed how it will end,  charakter is going to die and so on and everyone made  they own opinion.

     

    For me I personaly think  there is missing something like timeline in the Lord of Rings where will be show what happen after + I think if RJ write this ending now, this ending will be diferent

    I do not agree. I think most people have problems with tthe giant plot holes.  After reading 13 books where everything is explained to the most minute detail, we are rushed through the ending giving no explaination for what is happening or how it happened.  Another problem is when cliff hangers are set up in a previous book and then told to RAFO, that implies that if i read it i will find out.... this did not happen.

×
×
  • Create New...