Quoted By:
The last known position of the General was a couple of miles to the west of the bridge, at the banks of the river. They seemingly got very close. He was supposed to have started with the central force, heading directly south into the defenses, according to the plan.
There are a few other confirmed marked locations of fallen allied walkers and disabled tanks, mostly along the eastern route. The first few reports of retreating troops marked the positions. Those same reports also informed you that each spearhead was operating on a strict timetable and under heavy jamming close to the bridge, making coordination difficult.
The east group was apparently hit by at least 5 to 10 fast moving medium mechs, which ‘came out of nowhere’ and quickly routed the tanks and heavy mechs that the spearhead was composed of.
You are regretfully operating off of faulty human reports, which are agonizingly imprecise. 5 to 10? That’s literally double the count! And ‘out of nowhere’? That’s physically impossible.
Sophie’s looking at the same maps you are, and taking the benefits of having you collate the data together. Recon reports, mapping, starting division of attacking forces, and simulated outcomes.
“Their plan was flawed from the start,” she declares, “Dividing into three merely allowed each smaller portion to be overwhelmed in turn. Perhaps the general imagined that they were facing a much smaller enemy force, or that the defenders would be unable to redeploy quick enough to face each thrust?”
“I could.” You reply.
“Yes, we could also probably smash your way through any single attack force. That’s not the point, Beta. The point is that the eastern force was struck first, and then retreated. The enemy probably then redeployed to the center, and then to the west. Doesn’t really explain why the General ended up with the western force, I guess, but it’s a good enough working theory.”
