strangeakp.blogg.se - World of warships legends trophies

Plutarch suggested that in comparison, Octavian arrived at the battlefield with a mere 250 ships, 80,000 infantry and 12,000 mounted troops.Īlternative accounts indicate that Antony and Cleopatra's naval forces numbered around 230 vessels, accompanied by 50,000 sailors and 115,000 soldiers, while Octavian ventured eastward with approximately 100 ships and 120,000 soldiers. In addition, Cleopatra and Antony received support from several allies, including Bocchus of Libria, Tarcondemus of Upper Cilicia, Philadelphos of Paphalagonia, Sadalas of Thrace, Mithridates of Commagene, and Archelaos of Cappadocia.

Octavian’s Trolling and Propaganda Against Mark Antony.

What if Cleopatra and Octavian Had Been Friends?.

He claimed that their forces consisted of no less than 500 ships, 100,000 legionaries and armed infantry, along with 12,000 cavalrymen. Meanwhile, according to Plutarch, the famous couple’s army was even more impressive. At first glance, it is indeed astonishing that with such numerical superiority, Cleopatra and Antony's forces ended up on the losing side. In contrast, Cleopatra and Antony reportedly commanded 290 galleys, 50 transports, 20,000 infantry, and 2,000 archers. ( Public domain ) Surprising Defeat with Numerical Advantage at the Battle of ActiumĪccording to certain researchers, the Roman forces in the Battle of Actium comprised 250 galleys, 16,000 infantry, and 3,000 archers. ‘The Meeting of Antony and Cleopatra’ (1885) by Lawrence Alma Tadema. However, their convictions were ultimately shattered as reality proved them wrong. With unwavering confidence, the renowned duo had nurtured the belief that they were adequately equipped to confront the forces commanded by Octavian. And this is the idiocy that people trying to "fix" torpedoes willfully ignore when they say torpedo alpha should be low and they can do all this flooding damage instead.The Battle of Actium proved to be a catastrophic blow to the hopes and dreams of Cleopatra VII and Mark Antony.

It's 1-2 points of bonus damage on top of the actual meat of a torpedo hit. Pretty sure the flooding change was at the demand of BB mains who thought flooding was too severe, so WG gutted the mechanic to appease their cash cows but tried to frame it as a buff to the DDs they were screwing, hoping that destroyer players were too stupid to do basic math and discover that 2 stacks of "new" flooding still does less than 1 "old" flooding over full duration.Īnd people still DCP flooding instantly, when it was framed as "A buff since it's not as severe so people will let it roll like fires!" which I predicted would never be the case and- guess what- isn't the case.įlooding is not a primary or secondary or even tertiary damage source. Better solution would have been not to have an automatic DCP. CV's automatic DCP causing flooding to be a death sentence.