Steam installieren
Anmelden
|
Sprache
简体中文 (Vereinfachtes Chinesisch)
繁體中文 (Traditionelles Chinesisch)
日本語 (Japanisch)
한국어 (Koreanisch)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarisch)
Čeština (Tschechisch)
Dansk (Dänisch)
English (Englisch)
Español – España (Spanisch – Spanien)
Español – Latinoamérica (Lateinamerikanisches Spanisch)
Ελληνικά (Griechisch)
Français (Französisch)
Italiano (Italienisch)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesisch)
Magyar (Ungarisch)
Nederlands (Niederländisch)
Norsk (Norwegisch)
Polski (Polnisch)
Português – Portugal (Portugiesisch – Portugal)
Português – Brasil (Portugiesisch – Brasilien)
Română (Rumänisch)
Русский (Russisch)
Suomi (Finnisch)
Svenska (Schwedisch)
Türkçe (Türkisch)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamesisch)
Українська (Ukrainisch)
Ein Übersetzungsproblem melden
Diskussionsregeln
Diesen Beitrag melden
What are you on about? I don't care about the current size of the us army, we're talking about warhammer and skaven lore. Those 2 has nothing to do with eachother. The lore is the lore, simple as that. It wasn't just 2 clans, it was all of Skaven united under the Council. But it was thanks to those 2 that the Council decided to attack the Empire.
"All of Skaven united under the council" is what I am pointing out it is not. That is WHY Pestilenz owned three of the thirteen (Or really, twelve) seats at the time. They were the bulk of the force and they were the ones who invested the absolute most into the action. The other clans involved were, explictily, Warlord clans, or in English 'minor' clans. As with all Skaven actions, some Mercenaries were recruited from Moulder, Skryre, Eshin, etc, but those were not the bulk. Now, I am being unfair here, however. Pestilenz is, in point of fact, the most numerous great clan, but percentage of army it still would have added up to having been less then 50% of the might of the Skaven from what I'm reading of the lore, which...is not a war. It's a skirmish. If you're going to pick certain things out as Skirmishes (the little warlike bans of orcs that aren't actually a threat and aren't sincerely a major force but are still razing two or three towns before a dedicated force deals with them) then it's very hard to place anything Skaven do as a full assault until the End Times lore.
You think devoting anything less than 100% of your armed forces in an offensive push is nothing more than a skirmish?
My friend you need to read up on wars. Literally no war ever was fought with 100% of their man power because then youd lack logistics. Let's not forget you can be at war on different fronts and with different people and thus allocate different amounts of forces where its needed.
The fact that Pestilens and a good number of Warlord clans declared war on Empire does mean the Skaven empire was at war. Even if only 25% of their armed forces were on empire soil it was war. It just means the other 75% were fighting off goblins in bad lands, or probing Kislev from Hellpit, maybe mucking about in Cathay as Clan Eshin is ought to do.
Interesting ramble. I suspect that there's a good few screw-ups that the Emperor made that would still come back to haunt him, but a major issue, IMO, with the Imperium is that it has NO top tier or two of executive power.
The Emperor is... unavailable.
All the Primarchs are dead/missing/chaotic.
Malcador the Sigillite is MIA.
The Chapters don't really own allegiance to anyone. They fight for humanity, but who is there who can order them about? The first of the Soul Drinkers books was an interesting look at this (before it went south quickly).
The Inquisition does what it thinks is right.
Ditto the Ecclisiarchy.
And the Ad-Mechs are.... independant.
The Lords of Terra are a bit of a stop-gap solution.
That's one of the more interesting bits if the latest revamp of the 40k setting, having a loyal Primarch back means the Imperium actually has someone to set policy and make decisions...
There's also some crazy ideas in the HH book Legion about what would have happened either way with/without the HH. I'm ignoring them due to an unreliable source.
Alright. Therefore every Waagh counts as a war, and that changes the nature of the original discussion. As such, the Empire is constantly at 'war' with the Greenskin, in unending defensive war, that every cultist insurrection is an act of war, and etc etc. These are dealt with in means other then armed forces. Which in turn messes up the complexity of the question dramatically.
The reason I state 'Skaven are not at war', is because it makes every fractional assault on the Empire by everybody into a war. Hell, when an ogre tribe goes on a rampage through human lands, that is no longer a skirmish, that is a war, as that's roughly a fifth of the total number of ogres remaining with how few in number they are. Wild Hunts are wars, which in turn means the Empire has done nothing but 'lose' wars against the Wood Elves for time immemorial. A concerted, focused effort by the race as a whole to wipe out is required for it.
Furthermore, as I was trying to bring up...army. They're not bringing in the navy, or the airforce, as it were. Moulder and Skryre are both doing other things for most of this fight, which means this is an even more insignificant portion of the force then you otherwise would have.
While I appreciate your concept....it just doesn't work with the numbers the Skaven present. Frankly, nothing the Skaven do, until the End Times, is a proper warlike action with the Skaven Civilization as a whole. You can claim that Pestilenz was at war with the Empire, which would not be inaccurate, or that the Warlord tribes were at war, but I have to use a corruption for War already.
If you wish to speak strictly, the Empire is more often at war with itself then it is with any other faction in the existence of Warhammer. Although it does not escalate to armed conflict consistently (Although that's hardly a rarity), its' soldier movements often cause armed conflict that were not intended, and divisions amongst their own ranks. Men at arms often fight other men at arms. However, these conflicts are not worth noting, compared to the greater 'extermination' wars that occur. While three in four Imperial Citizens did die in the plague of 1111, and it took the concerted effort of two separate factions to finally defeat the Skaven, the fact is, the only thing they were at war with was, truthfully, Clan Pestilenz. Otherwise, Clan Pestilenz would not have gained the political acumen it did.
You can claim being at war with Clan Pestilenz is the same as being at war with Skavendom, although anyone who knows Skaven culture is going to cough a bit and look at you funny. Or you can claim the mercenaries the Pestilenz brought in, the Warlord clans and etc, means that the Empire was at war with those warlord clans, although that means Rome was in an interesting position of being at war with, and then being saved by, tribesmen that had been mercenaries of Carthage....
War is a difficult phrase to master at the best of times. It's one of the reasons why the president is allowed to get away with as much as he is in terms of manipulation of the position of the army so long as he does not officially declare war. It's scummy, but most human concepts tend to be.
You're not wrong in many areas, I just like being the devils' advocate when someone proclaims something would be 'so much better' in a specific circumstance every now and again. And I do like pointing out that the Emp's actions do really parse as him trying to force the Horus Heresy to occur.
Waaagh literally means War in Orc slang. And yes the Empire is constantly at "war" with Greenskins (Not any single Greenskin empire and/or large/small tribe per say but a single tribe usually doesn't Waaagh by itself as other tribes will unite with it, but I digress) as a whole. And yes even in unending defensive wars since the Empire couldn't effeciently strike back into Greenskin territory without suffering attrician and depriving the manpower from back home that would need to defend against Beastmen and Skaven and Chaos and other humans, etc It's also very hard to root out Greenskins when they can just run back into tunnels in the mountains. Lets not forget the logistical problems of a supply line through not only mountain passes that could still be crawling with Greenskin filth but also maybe not friendly factions such as Border Princes.
It depends on the Ogre Tribe's size. Plus I doubt 20% of the entire living Ogre population is able to make its way into Empire lands all too easy. And if they do it's probably atleast a couple tens of thousands. Unless you want to claim Ogre population is as small <50k.
Again a faction doesn't have to commit 100% to any single war. The Vampire Wars were called just that, but it's not like the entirety of the Empire fought the Vampires at any given time. Daddy Vlad went around leading decisive battles or coming back from a defeat with a fresh army and beat up all the seperate Elector Count's armies. But the Empire didn't use every bit of manpower at it's disposal.
I'll also bring up that the Skaven don't just invade the Empire, they also invade Cathay, Tilea, Estalia, Araby, I'm assuming Ind + the rest of the Southlands AND Lustria all at once, who all happen to be different factions and races. So according to your logic they DON'T declare war on any one of them but are in fact skirmishing each of those nations into oblivion. Really?
I do agree that Empire is often at war with itself but so are most other factions. Even the Skaven since the only reason the Skaven war failed was because the same plagues that had helped Skaven also backfired and started killing off (probably non-pestilens) Skaven which lead to bickering and in-fighting. A few Pestilen assinated leaders later and the Skaven are back to status quo (Which is constant backstabbing fellow tribes) as opposed to semi-uniting to take down a common foe.
Yeah but anyone who knows Skaven Culture knows that there's no way Pestilens would have been able to mount any meaniful offensive against an enemy because they'd be too paranoid that enemy tribes would usurp their position while they were commiting to Empire. Skaven don't conquer the Old World (before End Times) simply because they're so split and paranoid of each other.
I agree but lets try not to get political haha.
There's plenty of skirmishes happen in fantasy don't get me wrong. But even if a Skaven only has to commit 1% of their armed forces, it would be considered a battle. Maybe they're not declaring war but if they have to come up with the logistics and supply lines to feed 1% (Which for skaven is probably a couple thousand at least) it's no longer a skirmish.
Skirmish by definition is an episode of irregular or unpremeditated fighting, especially between small or outlying parts of armies or fleets. Which means the troops aren't typically being commanded to or if they are, they're acting as partisans. A couple units of Gutter Runners for example harassing an Empire supply line, or some clanrats looting the local granery of a small village for food: A skirmish.
A battalian of Stormvermin with Skaven Slave auxilliaries laying siege to a city while Gutter runners come up from the sewers to release poison/plague into a city to weaken the defenders: a Battle and thus a war.
For the record, I did read your post. I will state that I dispute it for reasons I've already brought up, but you hold a different standpoint then me. Which is both fine and respectable, but I felt that I shoudl bring up that while you do provide an argument, that argument presents other issues. Any cultist action becomes a chaos 'war', and thus it would require me to describe how every single chaos cultist action was resolved succinctly.
Every minor Greenskin Tribe stirring ♥♥♥♥ becomes a war. Which would have required me to describe how the Empire doesn't fall to that.
Every Beastmen supply line attack becomes a 'war', which would have me have to describe why those broken supply lines aren't actually crippling the Empire.
Every mutant incursion that the Empire itself has propagated changes from banditry to war.
Every bandit incursion that the Empire itself has propagated changes from banditry to war.
Every grudge followed through by the dwarfs changes from a skirmish or single mobilization to a 'war' that i have to define as only taken one or two cities, tops.
Every single time a captain gets a big idea in his head.
Every single time a city tries to secede.
Every single time a hiccup occurs in the mechanisms of state.
....So no. For the sake of my earlier posts and explanations, I do not expand my war description, as frankly, most of those instances are not threatening the Empire as a whole civilization, and are not intended or designed to do as such.
Frankly, it presents the issue that the war on drugs becomes a bit more literal, as those actions are planned conflicts. It also doesn't prevent a lower 'limit' on what is a war.
That being said, if a cultist uprising managed to take over an entire city and it made the Elector Count of the province have to mobilize troops to take care of it. Yes it would be considered a war.
They're literally rebelling, they're succeeding from the province based on their religious beliefs and have either formed their own state or pronounced vassalage to a higher power. It's a civil war.
Hell even if they didn't manage to take any reasonable ground and fighting only took part in streets or guerilla tactics in the country side it would still be a civil war.
A single tribe of Orks isn't leading a waaagh. They're just going "Lets krump dem 'umies, boyz! Our pile of shiny things and teef is running low" and off they go. When a giant horde of Orcs assemble, then it's a Waaagh.
I agree most Beastmen attacks aren't wars. They're skirmishes but Morghur and his tribe of beastment and Khazrak and his tribe are at war with Athel Loren and Middenland respectively. They attack in such large enough numbers that armies have to be mobilized especially in Athel Loren's case.
The other examples you bring up is actually declaration of war. OR if the guilty nation of aggression doesn't apologize somehow then it leads to war: A captain pillaging bordering towns is either jailed or the enemy nation starts to invade and a war happens. A Dwarf grudge starts as just that and eventually ends in a war with multiple more grudges attached that had been made during said war. A city trying to secede militarily is grounds for a civil war, it's the definition. And that depends on the hiccup in question. If troops had to be actively mobilized then yeah a war probably happened.
A war doesn't need to threaten the entire state. Marienburg for instance broke away from the Empire and had to fight off 3 different armies. The Empire declared war on Marienburg but did NOT send 100% of it's forces to retake it and I'm certain Marienburg did not conscript 100% of it's adult male population to help defend instead relying on retinues of Merchant houses and mercenaries/merchant marines. In the end Marienburg gained it's independence due to the Empire being surrounded by enemies.
Not all skirmishes are wars, but a lot of skirmishes happen during a war.
I'll also bring up the Skaven war, that no matter which way you want to spin it, it was a full invasion. They not only attacked seperate cities at the same time, but also systematically scoured the country side for slaves and food. Not to mention they did besiege Middenheim by attacking the walls and sewers (Not sure how that can be considered a skirmish but okay) You can see the entire war as just thousands of little skirmishes over period of roughly 13 years but the fact is the Skaven declared war on the Empire.
Especially given the fact it was a council, as in the council of 13 decided it was time to attack the humans. This was a planned out war with all major and minor clans on board and only fell apart when the plague turned on them.
One, no it was not with all major. Or minor. Warlord clans were heavily featured, Eshin was utilized in assassin services, and Pestilenz was heavily featured, but Skryre, Moulder, Grey Seers, and Eshin's more heavyweight forces, were not featured at all beyond mercenary inclusions which would be minimalistic at best, and at worst, they were actively attempting to sabotage or avoid forwarding this plan. Furthermore, saying "Warlord clans were heavily featured" is equivalent to saying "Tribesmen were included". You end up in an awkward situation where the terminology is vague, as Warlord Clans are the 'minor clans', but it's hard to say precisely what percentage ended up going to the surface.
Two, planned....Can you call anything Skaven do really planned? They advance their own particular schemes, but once you hit a large enough number, everything just sorta ends up being a rolling ball, which no singular Skaven truly has control over with the sheer number of internal treacheries. This is one of the areas where it becomes the hardest to describe this as a war, as ultimately they went up because Pestilenz used the rep gain from the plague to take over a fourth of the seats of the council, and that put them in a position of significant enough power to actually continue the offensive, which they did.
Three, siegeskirmishes. Yes, in point of fact, I will qualify a siege as a 'skirmish', even if it takes three years, if one side does not provide any support to prevent the siege. In that scenario while it is a battle, while the besieged are fighting for their lives (As they would in a skirmish), while the besieged are protecting themselves...there is no plans for it to evolve into a war.
Four, declarations of war. Is it a declaration of war if the other side is never informed that you have declared war on them, or is it merely an amping up of aggression? This is an area where you're using weasel words to attempt to corrupt the meaning of a definition I have already provided with factual inaccuracies. We both know that even if the Skaven said they were at war with someone, the first the other person would know would be the exact same as if they weren't.
Come now. I provided metaphorically a textbook of why the Empire wasn't dead on the first page. This is a single incident over 1400 years before current day. And you're attempting to use this to invalidate the rest of my response when in point of fact I was avoiding including it because while it was a major incident, it wasn't even a noticable blip to the Skaven as a whole beyond the prestige bump and following prestige falloff of the Pestilenz clan, and even THEN, it was unnoticable. The fact is, humanity survives the Skaven because of the exact reasons that I put, that Skaven are, as a whole, too disunified to actually maintain a wartime economy / support in the long term towards the surface world. If you want a textbook on why the Skaven haven't eliminated them, I can provide that, but I would prefer for it to be its' own topic. Even then, I wouldn't say that most Skaven would likely have thought they were at war with the Empire, in truth, or any more so then they would have normally thought they were at war with the surface dwellers. To most Skaven it would've been 'just another day.'
Edit: Correction of incorrect terminology.
It's literally the opposite of it's definition. The defender can lead small sorties and the attacker can probe defenses and those can be considered skirmishes but the seige is anything BUT skirmish.
Again: a Skirmish is an episode of irregular or unpremeditated fighting, especially between small or outlying parts of armies or fleets.
A seige consists of an entire army surrounding an entire army/garrison for months on end and with irregular fighting being the examples (Sorties and probes) I explained above. There's just no way.
As for Warlords not being a major part of Skaven-empire is silly. It's the council of 13. 1 Seat was held for each Major clan, (Skyre, Moulder, Pestilins and Eshin), 2 seats for the Grey Seer Prophet and Grey Seers in general, and 1 Seat is left empty for the Horned Rat, that leaves another 5 seats solely for Warlords. Pestilens did not get their 2 extra seats until after the initial victories and enslavement of the villages increased their prestige. 1/13 a vote does not make a victory, which means that, probably Eshin, voted with Pestilins, and all Warlords voted as well. Wiki doesn't say it's unanimous decision but regardless, there has to be a majority vote and they need 7/13 votes to succeed.
It's also said the major Skaven clans became scared when Pestilens took 2 more seats after the initial victories in the war. So at no point did Pestilens own 1/4th of the council as you put it. 3/13 max, and they soon lost that power when everyone turned on them.
Regardless, just because the Skaven can not go to war for as long as other nation doesn't mean they can't at all. The first Skaven War is infact a war.
Horned rat does not in fact get a vote in most practical instances. IN point of fact, the only time I recall him actually joining the council of 13 to put in a vote, was when he showed up in the end times and everyone became unanimous. Which does put 1/4th as Pestilens, 12/3=4. Therefore, 3*4=12, or 1/4th. It's a misgnomer, so I can hardly blame you for that mistake.
And...yes...Skaven do do unmeditated, unplanned, and poorly thought out things to the point of 'unpremeditated' sieges. A bunch of Skaven stand around trying to devour anyone dumb enough to come out. Yes. That IS a skirmish siege. Or would you care to define the first crusade as primarily being Crusaders attacking their own holdings in acts of war that were ignored and then eventually ending up in the right land largely through chance and acts of fate? Because I'm pretty sure there were no retaliations or peace treaty demanded for those actions beyond quick smacks to the back of the head of the looting/pillaging crusaders on their travel outward. And then there was the infamous '60%' siege which had them mostly sitting around blockading about half of the wall of a city thinking that might eventually bring the city to its' knees...
I'm not saying Warlord clans aren't a major part, I'm saying they're minor clans, not major clans. In the current day, Mors and Rictus are the two closest 'warlord' clans to rivaling a major clan in power. When they say 'minor clans' joined in, it doesn't indicate a percentage, merely that there were minor clans involved as well. Which is a hard thing to define.
As for who voted yes. Probably the 5 warlord clans, the pestilenz representative, and a bought out seventh. It's not a hard guess. That would give the exact majority you would be looking for. It would also line up with what I've been suggesting, that, yes, the majority of skavendom did not actually support this, inasfar as we consider the majority of skavendom. The Warlord CLans on the COuncil of 13 maintain their power by getting to go to war constantly, and getting new honors/mythos attached to them, but in point of fact, they're not the majority powerholders, or the largest clans, in existence. They're there because they are there.
And it depends on how you define a war, and what the participants are. I am claiming that Skavendom, as a whole, did not go to war, you are claiming it did. You are claiming that every Skaven warrior was on the surface ravaging it, I am claiming that it was a fractional display of the might of the SKaven because that's how Skaven tend to end up having to hold back. You are claiming that it was in point of fact a true 'war', because it was how the Skaven would array in a war, I'm claiming that it's the Skaven trying to let Pestilenz shoot themselves in the foot, and in turn being shocked when Pestilenz doesn't mess up immediately. I am claiming that the Skaven 'war machine' did not get any real support from the underground once it was topside, that its' supply lines were fought constantly, that its' officers were corrupt and as such messages did not get sent, and etc etc, which isn't an inaccurate assessment of the situation, and I hold that that means the nation was not in a true state of war, as they were not supporting the war as a whole. If the US Military rebels against the US and suddenly decides to take Peru, is the US at war with Peru, or is the US Military at war with Peru? By my definition, you could, at best, claim that the US Military alone was at war with Peru unless the US continued to support the US Military by providing supplies, ammo, armor, guns, vehicles, etc.
And if you would like to correct me, at least go so far as to provide a different definition then me as to why Skaven haven't wiped out the Empire yet. If you're going to nitpick a dispute out of a disagreement of definitions, then you're going to do that, but if you're going to put in this much effort to continue the disagreement time after hour after time again, then at least put out your own answer to the topic at hand, rather then ignoring the actual discussion and derailing it to focus on skaven politicking.