Talk:Siege of New Alexandria

Raid?

Why was this renamed "Raid on New Alexandria". It doesn't appear to be a raid. DA BEST 21:08, September 23, 2010 (UTC)

A raid is to

• to demoralize, confuse, or exhaust an enemy
• to ransack or pillage a location
• to obtain property or capture people
• to destroy goods or other things with an economic value
• to free POWs
• to kill or capture specific people
• to gather intelligence.

Seeing as Brutes were mainly here as shocktroopers instead of Sangheili, this would add to Demoralizeing UNSC Troops as Brutes have there own Phycological Warfare.(Example being that they have know to consume human flesh)Sith-venator Wavingstrider (Commlink) 21:30, September 23, 2010 (UTC)

• There were Elites there too as well as Jackals and Grunts. I killed plenty in the game so I know.--WarGrowlmon18 21:48, September 23, 2010 (UTC)

I saw mostly brutes, but that's not the point. The point is that it technicly was a raid.Sith-venator Wavingstrider (Commlink) 21:51, September 23, 2010 (UTC)

See here.Tuckerscreator^(stalk) 22:01, September 23, 2010 (UTC)

Cool Story Bro, but I'd take that up with Subtank.Sith-venator Wavingstrider (Commlink) 22:23, September 23, 2010 (UTC)

As per provided quote, it's easy to say that the Covenant attack on the city is a raid than the typical war-battle.- 5əb'7aŋk^(7alk) 22:27, September 23, 2010 (UTC)

That being said the city was glassed by battlecruisers as can be seen on the New Alexandra level VARGR 00:25, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be Raid ON New Alexandria? Having "of" in there doesn't sound grammatically correct. --LOST-The Cartographer 00:47, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

This was a large-scale fight, in no way a raid. A raid wouldn't involve three Covenant ships actively attacking the city. CaptJim 04:42, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

Refer to the official military definition of a raid and not the local dictionary, as pointed above.- 5əb'7aŋk^(7alk) 15:05, October 1, 2010 (UTC)

That's what I did. It wasn't small-scale (not that a raid has to be small scale, but they usually are, and they certainly are never on a level so large that an entire city ends up getting demolished. Plus, this involved more Covenant ships than some engagements that are listed as battles) and a raid has to be accomplished so quickly that the attackers have to be able to escape before the defenders are able to organize any kind of effective counter attack or any kind of coordinated response. This was much closer to a battle.CaptJim 00:31, October 2, 2010 (UTC)

Move to "Raid on New Alexandria"

Most real-life military raids (for example, on the town of X) follow the naming of "Raid on X" or "X Raid". I suggest that we move the page to comply with these. Raid of New Alexandria also sounds grammatically incorrect and a bit silly.--The All-knowing Sith'ari 17:48, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

I think "Siege of New Alexandria" might be a more fitting title. It lasted for five days, after all, and doesn't "raid" usually refer to a shorter battle? --Jugus (Talk | Contribs) 17:52, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

I'm actually now leaning towards simply moving it back to "Battle of New Alexandria".--The All-knowing Sith'ari 17:53, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

Five days is quite short for a battle, no? - 5əb'7aŋk^(7alk) 17:58, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

The Battle of Installation 00 was shorter than that! Tuckerscreator^(stalk) 18:01, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

So were the battles of 04 and 05. Matt 2108 18:03, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

But those were on a large scale.- 5əb'7aŋk^(7alk) 18:04, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

And New Alexandria was a capital city. Regardless, though, the name Raid works just fine, and while I actually prefer the name "Raid of" rather than "Raid on", it should probably be done for uniformity purposes so that it matches all the others.Tuckerscreator^(stalk) 18:09, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

Still, we do have a Battle of Mombasa, Battle of Havana, etc. "Battle" is a pretty broad term, with a lot of different forms of battle that fall under it. So most of the time, it's simpler just to call it "Battle" unless the exact nature of the battle needs to be specified (e.g. Raid of Reach, to make clear that it wasn't a planetary scale battle). --Jugus (Talk | Contribs) 18:12, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

What if this page was combined with Evacuation of New Alexandria? Both seem to be about the same event, except that the evacuation article currently only deals with events after the arrival of Noble Six. Could it be expanded into an article similar to this one? / / STRYKER   [ COM | LOG/M | LOG/S | AAU/HUM ] 01:17, October 5, 2010 (UTC)

Five day battles aren't exactly unheard of. Take Midway, for example. Regardless, substantial amounts of troops were deployed and the besieging and total destruction of a capital city is definitely not the end result of a mere raid but an all-out battle. CaptJim 05:37, October 5, 2010 (UTC)

New designation: Fall of New Alexandria

Since there is controversy regarding New Alexandria being called a "battle", while others find calling it a "raid" to be equally unsuitable, I would like to suggest a new name: Fall of New Alexandria. At the same time, I would also suggest merging it with Evacuation of New Alexandria, and consider both engagements to be one single conflict. Agreements? Objections? Other suggestions? Demands that I should be thrown to a pack of ravenous Brutes for wasting everyone's time? -- SFH 23:38, 25 November 2010 (EST)

Title change

I'm going to have to bring up a previous suggestion again for the title. Template:Article Quote

So why not "Siege of New Alexandria"? It would make more sense than "raid", seeing as raids are generally intended to destroy/accomplish a certain objective. It's pretty obvious from Exodus that the Covenant intended to do more than just accomplish a certain objective in New Alexandria. The three corvettes and thousands of troops they deployed would more likely indicate more permanent occupying force, thus "siege".

/ / STRYKER   [ COM | LOG/M | LOG/S | AAU/HUM ] 00:53, 26 November 2010 (EST)