It has a major risk of leaving us completely open to their own artillery fire, which by word of QM, and given that this is Ghrond, is all enchanted ammo to make what's normally wooden bolts extra destructive to our forces. The crux of the arguments has been whether we should risk getting f'ed by artillery fire and focus on their main force for the possibility of massive damage, which is the option TehChron's plan supports, or give up on said possibility of an advantageous opening salvo opening the way for mass Druchii casualties to better safeguard our own forces against the potential damage the artillery can inflict-like homing bolts slamming into the wings of Oskana and killing her, Kerillian and Natasha, magically explosive bolts destroying our walls, or any other possibility, given that we are dealing with a magical group pretty much only rivaled by Hoeth, Tzeentchians, and the Slaan
I feel that this point of view is monofocused on artillery to artillery and ignores the other dimensions of the battle. If possible, can we review the tactical situation :
AIR - we know that Druchii dark pegasi armed with crossbows and lances have taken the air. The Whitewings have largely fallen back to recover, and Natasha on Oskana remains the most significant air presence we have.
I ASSUME that Natasha and Oskana are taking a defensive stance closer to our walls, given the Druchii air superiority.
GROUND : we know the Druchii elite units are on the field, marching on open ground without cover. Our own units are exhausted while theirs are fresh, but we have the advantage of the final wall. We also have the gambit to unleash the flagellants and the cavalry.
The Druchii may or may not have the ability to scale the walls, but I am leaning that they do, as we have not spotted ladders. Either that or they are relying on their artillery to bring down a gap of the wall.
ARTILLERY - We know via WOG that their artillery is enchanted, and is using the remains of the previous wall as cover. In contrast, while our artillery is also covered by the wall, ours is also depleted.
Assuming that my above understanding is correct, I believe that the Druchii artillery will focus on the walls to open gaps to increase the exposure for their superior and fresh soldiers to utterly massacre our tired and inferior ground.
Given that our air has no real option but to attempt to mitigate the damage of Druchii air, and that we agree on use of flagellants and cavalry, the only real point of contention is whether we focus the artillery on attempting to supress the Druchii artillery, which has cover, vs aiming for the relatively open Druchii infantry.
I believe the Cordwood plan is superior, as chances for maximizing the damage on their ground should be higher, especially in conjunction with the flagellants and cav, as compared to successfully suppressing their artillery, which has cover.
By the end of the day as well, the Druchii ground managing to close with our army unmolested feels to me as defeat, whereas losing our air, walls, or artillery are relevant only in that we lose tools to keep the Druchii ground away, saying nothing of the psychological angle if we are able to inflict grievous casualties on their ground.