Siege of Giza: Difference between revisions

From EarthPol
Jump to navigation Jump to search
MrTytanic (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
MrTytanic (talk | contribs)
Line 66: Line 66:


== '''Tactics''' ==
== '''Tactics''' ==
'''Greece:''' The Greek strategy revolved around brute force and overwhelming numbers. Their goal was simple: flood the battlefield with as many fighters as possible to secure the siege banner quickly and decisively. This tactic relied heavily on mass coordination and assumed that sheer manpower would be enough to dominate the defenders. Greek troops rushed forward in waves, attempting to overwhelm Giza’s defenses with raw aggression rather than precision.
'''Ottomans:''' In stark contrast, the Ottomans employed a much more refined and adaptive approach. Rather than meeting the Greeks head-on with equal numbers (which they lacked), they deployed small, agile groups of elite fighters who relied on coordination and mobility. These Ottoman strike teams focused on isolating individual Greek fighters who had splintered off from the main group. Once isolated, these targets were picked off one by one — often with the very gear the Greeks had lost in previous engagements.
This “divide and conquer” approach proved devastating. The Ottomans were not just killing enemies; they were looting them and turning their gear against the rest of the Greek army. As the battle wore on, the Ottoman fighters became increasingly better equipped — with many now using Greek diamond armor, weapons, and potions.
These small but highly skilled Ottoman squads — often numbering just 2-4 fighters — exploited the disorganized and bloated Greek ranks. They struck at flanks, intercepted reinforcements, and sowed chaos behind enemy lines. What the Greeks thought would be a straightforward siege devolved into a tactical nightmare as their ranks were steadily dismantled.


== '''Logistics''' ==
== '''Logistics''' ==

Revision as of 01:57, 21 April 2025

The Siege of Giza
Greco-Ottoman War
Greek Attackers cap banner at Giza
Date 8/02/2022-8/05/2022 (3 Days)
Location Giza, Egypt
Result Egyptian Victory
Status
Territorial
changes
Beginning of the Decline of Greece
Belligerents
The Kingdom of Greece Islamic Egypt

The Ottoman Empire

Commanders and leaders
arescartier Appqle
Strength
Casualties and losses

Background

The Greek-Ottoman Rivalry, one of the most defining conflicts in EarthPol history, first ignited during the Great War of Version 4. Tensions between the two powers only escalated after defeat of Deutschland at the Siege of Linz, where SQPR forces secured a decisive victory. As Version 5 (V5) began, the wounds of V4 had not healed — and the Greek people, especially their leadership, were determined to seek revenge and restore their honor.

Over the course of several weeks, Greece focused heavily on military buildup, recruiting fighters, constructing infrastructure, and preparing for future conflicts. However, this preparation soon led to boredom and unrest within Greece’s powerful PvP clan, Vespa, whose members grew impatient and began demanding action. Many Vespa fighters pushed for an immediate offensive, regardless of strategy or diplomacy.

Despite early efforts to delay aggression, King arescartier eventually gave in to the pressure and moved forward with war planning. The target was chosen carefully: Islamic Egypt, a nation directly south of Greece and a loyal ally of the Ottomans, presented both a strategic and symbolic opportunity. Striking Islamic Egypt would send a clear message to the Ottomans and fulfill Vespa’s desire for battle. Thus began the preparations for what would become the Siege of Giza, the first major battle of the Greco-Ottoman War in V5.

Conflict

Day 1

Siege Assembly: The Siege of Giza began on August 2nd, 2022 at 8:23 PM EST, marking the opening battle of the Greco-Ottoman War on EarthPol. The conflict was initiated when the Kingdom of Greece, alongside their military outpost New_Sparta, launched a surprise siege against the city of Giza, held by the nation of Islamic Egypt. Greece deployed an overwhelming force of 42 online players, while Islamic Egypt had only 3 players online at the time. The siege began with the placement of the Greek banner, officially triggering the siege assembly phase. During this phase, Greek forces rapidly constructed fortifications using netherrack and other easily accessible blocks. These makeshift defenses allowed the attackers to secure territory and prepare for the siege itself. The sheer difference in manpower and the surprise of the banner drop gave Greece a significant early advantage. Despite being outnumbered, the defenders attempted to delay construction and resist the attackers as best they could during the assembly phase.

As military equipment was given to Greek troops, RomanDiCario scammed Greece by temporarily joining the Greek army to receive a free diamond armor set, including potions, before leaving the nation shortly thereafter.

Islamic Egypt and the Ottoman Response: Appqle, hearing of the invasion, then reached out to Skippz_ and Apigale, the leaders of the Ottomans, and asked for their protection and help in defending against the Greeks. They obliged and began to plan their defense of Giza, marking the beginning of Ottoman involvement in the war and the start of a broader Greco-Ottoman conflict.

Day 2

The second day of the Siege of Giza marked a dramatic turning point in the conflict, as Greece began to lose the overwhelming advantage it had gained at the outset. Having started the day with a lead of 46,090 siege points, the Greeks saw their advantage rapidly collapse to 17,940 points by the end of the day, a devastating loss that signaled the beginning of their downfall.

Greek Logistics: One of the primary issues plaguing the Greek side was their supply line crisis. As troops died during battle, they frequently dropped their potions and gear, unintentionally supplying the Ottomans with resources. These looted items were quickly recycled and redistributed to Ottoman fighters, allowing their forces to become stronger with each Greek death. The Greeks struggled to maintain potion supplies to keep up with the demands of war, and their ability to equip fresh fighters dwindled. Additionally, the number of Greek fighters online dropped significantly, falling from their initial 30 to 40 players to just 14 to 15 troops at a time. Meanwhile, the Ottoman coalition surged as more players were rallied into battle. Volunteers from allied nations flooded the frontlines to support the Ottoman defense, bolstering their ranks and shifting the tide of war. Greek coordination began to fall apart as well. A large portion of their fighters were unable to join the Greek voice chat, forcing them to communicate solely through in-game chat. This breakdown in communication severely hampered their ability to strategize and respond quickly to battlefield developments.

Espionage: To make matters worse for the Greeks, it was discovered that Senator lucqent, a prominent member of their political leadership, was acting as a spy for the Ottomans. He was promptly expelled from the Greek government and went on to found the state of Cyrenaica. Despite this, lucqent maintained a close relationship with MrTytanic, another influential Greek senator and the next in line for the Greek throne, raising concerns about lingering influence and trust within Greek leadership.

By the end of Day 2, what had once looked like a swift and overwhelming Greek victory had turned into a grinding and uncertain siege. The Ottomans, once on the defensive, now stood emboldened, with momentum shifting steadily in their favor.

Day 3

Giza Victory: Day 3 of the Siege of Giza marked the total collapse of the Greek war effort. What started as a confident invasion had become a disaster. In just 24 hours, Greece's siege score dropped from 17,940 to -41,030, a massive swing that handed the Ottomans a dominant defensive victory. The defending town of Giza declared victory at 8:39 PM EST on August 5, 2022, officially ending the battle. Greece was forced to pay 2,055 gold as war reparations, rubbing salt in an already deep wound.

Greek Perspective: Greek morale was shattered. They had not only lost the battle but been humiliated in front of the entire server. The Ottomans, who had started as the underdogs, completely outplayed and outlasted their attackers. The Greeks severely underestimated their opponents, both in coordination and resilience. By the end of the siege, Greece was suffering a massive equipment shortage and had no way to resupply its troops with potions or gear. The Ottomans, on the other hand, were thriving off of looted gear from fallen Greek soldiers.

In a last-ditch effort to hold the army together, Greek leadership started handing out military ranks to anyone who stuck around. Players with no PvP experience like iboxvx were suddenly in charge, despite having little to no understanding of what they were doing. It was a clear sign that leadership was grasping at straws. Furthermore, the Greek Senate erupted in civil conflict. Senators turned on each other, arguing over who was responsible for the decision to invade Egypt and how such a massive blunder had been allowed to happen. Some demanded exiles, others fought for praise, and trust within the Senate collapsed.

Global Condemnation: The aftermath of the siege rippled far beyond Giza. Greece’s aggressive and poorly justified attack sparked global outrage across the EarthPol server. Many nations openly condemned the invasion, calling it an unnecessary and unjustified war driven by arrogance rather than strategy. The global community rallied behind the Ottomans, praising their resilience and unity in the face of overwhelming odds. Even players and nations who had no prior allegiance to either side expressed support for Giza’s defenders.

This wave of condemnation accelerated the collapse of Greece's diplomatic standing. The Protectorate Pact, Greece's primary alliance network, formally disbanded as member states distanced themselves from the failed campaign. One by one, Greece’s allies began to back away, embarrassed by the poor planning and appalled by the recklessness of the leadership. Trust in Greek diplomacy all but evaporated, and the nation found itself increasingly isolated on the world stage.

Meanwhile, the Ottomans capitalized on their rising reputation, forming a new alliance with MonteNEGO and beginning preparations for a counteroffensive aimed at the Greek city of Larissa. What was meant to be a Greek show of strength had turned into a moment of international disgrace.

Tactics

Greece: The Greek strategy revolved around brute force and overwhelming numbers. Their goal was simple: flood the battlefield with as many fighters as possible to secure the siege banner quickly and decisively. This tactic relied heavily on mass coordination and assumed that sheer manpower would be enough to dominate the defenders. Greek troops rushed forward in waves, attempting to overwhelm Giza’s defenses with raw aggression rather than precision.

Ottomans: In stark contrast, the Ottomans employed a much more refined and adaptive approach. Rather than meeting the Greeks head-on with equal numbers (which they lacked), they deployed small, agile groups of elite fighters who relied on coordination and mobility. These Ottoman strike teams focused on isolating individual Greek fighters who had splintered off from the main group. Once isolated, these targets were picked off one by one — often with the very gear the Greeks had lost in previous engagements.

This “divide and conquer” approach proved devastating. The Ottomans were not just killing enemies; they were looting them and turning their gear against the rest of the Greek army. As the battle wore on, the Ottoman fighters became increasingly better equipped — with many now using Greek diamond armor, weapons, and potions.

These small but highly skilled Ottoman squads — often numbering just 2-4 fighters — exploited the disorganized and bloated Greek ranks. They struck at flanks, intercepted reinforcements, and sowed chaos behind enemy lines. What the Greeks thought would be a straightforward siege devolved into a tactical nightmare as their ranks were steadily dismantled.

Logistics

Aftermath

Significance

The Decline of Greece

Despite initiating the siege with overwhelming numbers (42 Greek players online versus just 3 defenders), the Siege of Giza ended in a disastrous defeat for Greece. As the largest nation on the server at the time, Greece’s loss to a much smaller force of Islamic_Egypt and Ottoman-aligned defenders was a severe blow, not just tactically but psychologically.

The defeat shattered Greek morale. Once seen as an unstoppable force, Greece’s massive player count proved ineffective when it came to coordination and execution. The loss led to a collapse of trust in Greece’s leadership and military power, beginning the Decline of Greece. Once surrounded by numerous allies and trade partners, Greece quickly found itself isolated — its strength now viewed as superficial, its influence diminished.

The fallout was swift and dramatic. Towns began to leave the nation, key players quit the server, and even arescartier himself departed. His co-king, grantykied, attempted to stabilize the situation but ultimately ceded control of the nation to the PvP group Noobville, led by AJMoody. This moment marked the beginning of the decline of Greece in V5 — a once-mighty empire, now fractured by its own ambition and internal strife.