User blog comment:Leolab/User Siege Tourney, Round 3 of 91: Beastman14 (Ryan) vs MasterofAwesomeness (Master)/@comment-24180428-20130317035011

I vote for Ryan/Beast. Beast holds way higher x-factors then Master. Neither warrior are very tactical, but Ryan still has better tactics. If you don't know how to organize your troops you will get slaughtered. Master's troops have little loyalty to him, and will dessert whenever they see their leader's horrible idea of a battle stratagy.

Master's archers are his only hope for survival, but they only have bows and no melee weapons. Once some of Ryan's troops get in close range or the archers run out of arrows they are useless. Now when comparing the two generals in a 1 on 1, Master stands more of a chance. Master has better armor and a better polearm. His main problem is that Ryan has a better long range, and short range weapons. The crossbow will be more accurate then the bow as well as having a better range. The ild, cutlass, and throwing knife will be useless against both general's armor. The mace is the only effective weapon for Master and the crossbow the only one for Ryan.

Overall Master may be able to beat Ryan if he doesn't get killed by the crossbow, but overall his army is not well led. Ryan wont immediantly fight 1 on 1 with Master and will instead overwelm the defenders with his superior led troops. So Ryan would win 60% of the time and Master 40% of the time.