Forum:Could Ostagar have been won?

Forums: Index > Lore DiscussionCould Ostagar have been won?

Note: This topic has been unedited for 4080 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not continue it unless it really needs a response.

The title says it all. Could it have been won? While I am sure this has been discussed before, I hope to approach it from a non-biased POV.

I think the answer is yes, it could have been won, even without Orlais or Redcliffe re-enforcements, had everyone actually tried to use tactics. Here is the list of problems they made;

1. The entire attack plan and any hope of victory revolved around flanking the enemy, a tactic a 5 year old could think of.

2. Cailan's army apparently decided it was a good idea to attack from outside the heavily fortified fortress.

3. They only fired one volley of flaming arrows......I just don't get this one...

4. The majority of archers and mages were on ground level instead of at a safe distance like the cat walk the Warden and Alistair travel over.

5. By the time Loghain's men arrive, Cailan's army would already be decimated.

6. And finally, the worst mistake, is even if everything did go right, they had no plan for taking down the Archdemon if it did indeed show up.

Now if only problem 2 and 5 could have been fixed (rather easily I might add), the entire chance of victory would have probably doubled, even more if all these problems were fixed.

Now, I am sure someone is already typing up a comment mentioning how the battle was un-winnable, but lets take a look at the only two people who claim that:

1. Loghain, who is obviously biased in the matter.

2. That guy from the Return to Ostagar DLC, however considering he abandoned the battle, it would make sense for him to believe this as a coping mechanism for whatever guilt he may have.

So with that being said, I am pretty sure the battle of Ostagar could have been won rather easily. Unfortunately, no-one who participated in the battle was smart enough to see these flaws it took me 1 minute of thinking to realize. Feel free to comment and share your thoughts, and keep in mind that this is my first forum post her, so apologies if it is a bad one.--Legionwrex (talk) 20:53, February 11, 2013 (UTC)

1. There have already been a multitude of these topics.

2. In short, yes. As Aveline (a survivor of the battle) says in DA2: "We lost not to the darkspawn, but to betrayal". -Algol- (talk) 21:13, February 11, 2013 (UTC)

But by the fact that this one was made by me instantly makes it better than all the other forums regarding this issue :P--Legionwrex (talk) 21:25, February 11, 2013 (UTC)

Not that I'm scolding you for repeating or something, it happens all the time. Just pointing out that you might consider using other forums, as there are already a lot of thoughts on the matter. -Algol- (talk) 21:42, February 11, 2013 (UTC)

Short answer: no. Even had everything gone perfecctly with Cailan Loghain's men were still needed for the army to have a chance. Loghain never intended to charge, so he would have still left and Ostagar would have still been a disaster. I really wish I could hunt down the BSN post where Gaider outright says Loghain didn't mean Cailan to survive the battle :s ----Isolationistmagi 21:55, February 11, 2013 (UTC)

I think he means if Loghain was serious about winning. The answer is clearly yes. The problem is that Loghain had planned to get rid of Cailin long before Ostagar. That's the whole reason Howe attacked Highever. He wouldn't have done so unless he knew he could get away with it, and Loghain was his pardoner. It was Loghain who restricted access to Ishal, which had tunnels leading up from the battlefield. It was Loghain's "few" men stationed in the tower. Loghain picked the tower as the signal for the charge because he knew the Darkspawn would overrun it and it would never be lit. When Cailin suggested the Wardens light it, Loghain tried to dissuade him from sending them. Uldred even tried to put the task on the Circle of Magi, which would have ensured the signal was never sent. And when the signal was sent, Loghain willingly chose to pull out. He had always intended to, but he had hoped that he could use the excuse that the signal was never sent. Ostagar was never meant to be won. It was always intended to be Loghain's way to get rid of the Grey Wardens and Cailin.

So, if Loghain had been serious about winning then they would have won easily. The tower would have been rigged with traps to kill the Darkspawn invading through the tunnels. Troops would have been waiting at the hole to kill any Darkspawn to emerge. The signal would have been sent to Loghain and Bryce who would have been on opposite sides with their own regiments, and it would have been sent via a signal directly from Cailin's regiment. The forces from Amaranthine would have been there as well. This would have won Ostagar, but the Archdemon wasn't at Ostagar so there still would have been other battles after this. Believe it! (talk) 00:45, February 13, 2013 (UTC)

Theoretically, Ostagar could have been won...if the enemy had been human. As it was, the darkspawn would have eventually overwhelmed the defenders by sheer force of numbers. It could have been won if Loghain had been serious about the battle, instead the battle is a means to kill Cailan. These theoretical victories all depend on a lot of ifs and buts. Ultimately though, the battle is destined to be a loss. A refusal to wait for reinforcements, both from Redcliffe and Orlais, a poor use the terrain and a poor use of what troops were available (seriously, the archers let loose a volley far too close to their own lines). --Madasamadthing (talk) 04:55, February 13, 2013 (UTC)

I'm pretty certain that Loghain purposely made a ineffective battle plan in order to eliminate Cailan and the Grey Wardens. He took advantage of Cailan's eagerness to fight in battle.--R0B45 (talk) 05:13, February 13, 2013 (UTC)

No, I don't think that Ostagar could ever be won.Simply put, the darkspawn horde has its huge numerical superiority and I would argue they're more qualified individually as well. The Cailan's army had about 8 Circle mages (Gregoir says that in Magi origin), whereas darkspawn horde likely had dozens of emissaries. Those emissaries have Lighting, Fireball and drain Life from the start and gain powerful support spells and AoE later, whereas average NPC mages have Lighting/stonefist combo at the beginning and things don't improve that much later on: The Roadside encounter allied mages were greatly inferior to emissaries of the same level. Individual genlocks/hurlocks have access to Berserk no-one beside Ash Warriors had on top of similar skills of others and they never panic. Genlock alphas ranged are the best NPC archers in the game, while DW alphas/hurlock alphas are no worse than human Lieutenant DWs/Two-handed of the same level. Then they have shrieks and ogres: former are superior to regular troops and there was no real counter to the latter besides ballistas which got taken out early and aren't that great anyway. Finally, there were likely blight wolves/bereskarn present to counter mabari.

Regarding Legionwrex's original points, archers only firing one volley is actually a realistic representation of their Aim skill, which they always have and which forces them to slow down so much that having it active makes you worse off. Given the darkspawn catapults/fireballs, the catwalk was probably far more dangerous than actually being on the ground level: everyone there besides Warden and Alistair got decimated, remember? 4Ferelden (talk) 10:29, February 13, 2013 (UTC)

That was probably the most nonsense I've ever heard in a forum in my entire life. What happened to the army was through a cutscene, not gameplay. If you want to get technical, most of the darkspawn hoard would likely just be grunts, which are one-hit kills. Secondly, not all of the mages/soldiers would be a low level as you like to think and even if they were, the enemies scale with the level of the Warden anyway. Thirdly, even if the darkspawn have more talents/spells, it doesn't mean that they would always win in a fight. For example, ser Jory is an unspecialised warrior, but could easily beat a darkspawn using berserk. Furthermore, Duncan (the Warden-Commander), Cauthrine (elite boss), Loghain (boss, with high level champion and weapon & shield talents), Wynne (a senior enchanter) and Uldred (a very powerful mage) would be far superior to even the alpha's and emissaries of the hoard, not to mention two dozen other Wardens that are especially skilled in fighting darkspawn. --R0B45 (talk) 12:02, February 13, 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. Believe it! (talk) 17:49, February 13, 2013 (UTC)

You do realise that grunts were one-hit kills BECAUSE they were stuck in level 5 when you were in level 20? I liked that idea, as it would have been implausible for all darkspawn to level up with you, but it was never meant to be abused like that. I don't get your second point, as I specifically said above that from my experience the darkspawn are better at any level (with the possible exception of non-alpha archers). Finally, ser Jory is NOT representative of the average soldier, both lore-wise (Grey Warden recruit & all) and gameplay-wise (he could be controlled by the player and had different skill progression than the rest of soldiers). This ultimately comes down to whether these few Bosses you listed above and some Wardens would be enough against the darkspawn numerical and qualiative advantage over the rest of the troops, and whether or not the darkspawn had any of their own bosses on the field as well. All in all, I believe that darkspawn would have always won in this set-piece battle here. 4Ferelden (talk) 23:44, February 16, 2013 (UTC)

P.S. "it was a cutscene" argument is meaningless, because Dragon Age cutscenes are completely divorced from gameplay by their very nature and so anything and everything could happen in them. Could the Cailan's army have won the Ostagar by cutscene rules? Yes. Could darkspawn have slaughtered everyone in a cutscene while only suffering 7% casualties? Once again, yes. 4Ferelden (talk) 23:44, February 16, 2013 (UTC)

A couple of points to adress:

1) The cinematics. I've always believed these to be merely an impressive artistic presentation of the battle, not a reflection of any tactics/strategy, because, as Legionwrex correctly points out, as a depiction of a real battle, it sucks (similarly as the attack of the Sword fleet in a tight formation, so that Reaper beams could do as much damage as possible, apparently). With Loghain's supposed battle genius, I suppose the battle plan would be a bit more sophisticated, or else everyone would think that he didn't have his wits about him when he was devising it.

2) Loghain. I would very much like if someone could fish those Gaider comments, because the ones I remember (and can't fish out now because the links were lost when my PC died about two years ago), he claimed that Loghain wasn't really decided until the last moment and that there was no long-term plan to get rid of Cailan. IMHO, this is inconsistent with the rest of the information we have - namely the attack at Highever is something that Howe could never get away with as long as Cailan lived and which would have been absolutely no use to him as long as Fergus lived, and only Loghain was in the position to get rid of both. (On the other hand, greater lapses of logic and consistency have happened since)

3) Numbers. It is stated that the darkspawn horde was bigger than it had been expected. If Cailan's forces wre truly vastly outnumbered, the battle may have been lost even if Loghain had a good plan and didn't betray Cailan. However, it still needn't have been the disaster it was if a half of the army wasn't abandoned to their fate, not to mention the following civil war that tore the country apart.

All in all, I believe that with a correct strategy, Ostagar was winnable, and even a defeat without Loghain's betrayal would have been less disastrous than what followed. --Ygrain (talk) 12:05, February 13, 2013 (UTC)

Is this the link[1] you may be looking for?
Mr. Gaider's comment is near the bottom but for those who don't wish to visit, he says - In my mind, Loghain did not go to Ostagar expecting to walk away from the battle. It was clear, however, that he and Cailan were already having profound disagreements -- mainly centering on Cailan's overtures to Orlais. Loghain was obviously moving to confront Cailan in some way, undercutting his access to allies and so forth. But did Loghain plan on killing Cailan? No, I don't think that. I think he was doing what Loghain does, and trying to ensure that when that moment of confrontation with Cailan came the battle was already won. That said, he had been fighting the darkspawn for some time in the south with Cailan there, and had already seen what Cailan was capable of. I think he made preparations prior to that last battle for the possibility that he would have to walk away. He once made a promise to Maric that he would never allow one man to be more important than the Kingdom -- and in his eyes Cailan was recklessly endangering both himself and his kingdom. Whether that error in judgement condemns him right there is up to you.
Anyway, that's the comment that came to my mind on seeing this thread. My interpretation was that the battle cutscenes were simply snippets of what was going on in a larger tapestry. The area cleared for the battleground was likely *much* larger, the archers - as the longest ranged - would have continued to fire after the first volley, the hounds (dozens more of those) would have been the next line of attack, and then the main army were just behind them with the overhead ballistas firing beyond the reach of the archers. The point was not to focus on the battle but to give the player enough information to know the battle was engaged.
What always kind of baffled me was why Loghain didn't even try to send a small force to extract and save the king. Obviously it's explained if he ultimately decided to wash his hands of Cailan but it looked like he should have at least made the effort. Ultimately it seems to me that the Archdemon/darkspawn planned better than Loghain gave them credit for, the Fereldan forces were vastly outnumbered, and in the end Ostagar was lost due to complacency.
(Tried a few new formatting tricks with this post and previewed frequently so I hope I haven't completely glitched this entry.) Shenachie (talk) 18:53, February 13, 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that's the quote, thank you. --Ygrain (talk) 07:01, February 14, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Shenachie. That's the quote that worked best with my interpretation of Loghain.

As for Howe, it's always possible he intended to present "evidence" (forging documents and citing Bryce's business trips to Orlais wouldn't be hard) of the Couslands being traitors collaborating with Orlais (and as we know from Awakening, treason is a capital offense), an argument that would probably resonate with Loghain assuming there were no other witnesses to tell otherwise (remember that only Duncan and the HN warden escaped, and if Duncan wasn't there, it seems no one survived - therefore Howe would be able to tell whatever story he wished). Or at least, that may have been how Howe saw it. If it'd have actually worked is dubious - but then, I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility of Howe being so blinded by greed and jealousy that he just took the first chance he could to kill Bryce and his family and take his castle, damn the consequences. Just my two cents. Matt-256 (talk) 15:42, February 14, 2013 (UTC)

A little correction - as I said above, the scheme wouldn't work with Fergus alive - Fergus who knew that one arl Howe was paying a visit and was supposed to stay for the night. Howe and his men alive while none of the Couslands and their servants survived would definitely raise suspicion, and Fergus would certainly mightily object to any forged "proofs".

Furthermore, there is the problem of that private note from Celene - by which channels did it go, and how did she and Cailan get on such close terms? There must have been quite some corresponding going on, and I believe that to avoid suspicion, some of it may have been mediated by Bryce. --Ygrain (talk) 16:18, February 14, 2013 (UTC)

Fergus alive would indeed be a problem - unless Howe could convince Loghain to legitimately believe the Couslands were guilt, at which point Loghain would probably doubt Fergus' word, if not call for his execution too. I'm not entirely sure Howe could have done that, but it's a possibility. And if he did, that would probably be enough - Loghain was clearly pulling Cailan's leash, for the most part (Howe convincing Cailan, on the other hand - hoo boy, that'd have been impossible, I think), so repercussions from the crown wouldn't be quite as certain.

Alternately (though this one's a long shot), he could have shifted the blame for the massacre onto some of his men by claiming they raided the castle once inside against his orders, after which he could say he "avenged" the Couslands by killing said men with the rest of his forces and sending their heads to Denerim to prove it. As I said, a long shot, and most likely, no one would buy it. It's probably just a plot hole - but whatever, these rationalizations help me sleep at night ;P

Ah yes, "the secret correspondence". The series of letters implying Cailan was going to replace Anora with empress Celene. The writers dismissed that plot thread. Internet jokes aside, we actually discussed this in a past thread. Not that I mind bringing it up again :) Speaking of which, I believe one of Gaider's Tumblr entries actually brought up the removal of most the elements of the original prologue for DAO (in which Empress Celene arrived in Denerim and it was revealed Cailan planned to put aside Anora - whether to just Loghain or both him and the player character is unclear from the description) is one of his great regrets. And in this particular case, I somewhat agree - it'd have made Loghain's motivation clearer and his actions more justified (in the final game, I get the impression he didn't know about this). I'll see if I can find the link.

Edit: Ah, here it is. It also gives some interesting insight into DA2's production. Matt-256 (talk) 21:00, February 14, 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't matter. Speculations on "what if" are pointeless, past can't be changed.78.8.135.82 (talk) 18:37, February 16, 2013 (UTC)