A mirror of the eeesite "A Song of Ice and Fire"

This is a mirror of the now defunct eesite ASOIAF webboard.

The discussions for G.R.R. Martin's awesome series "A Song of Ice and Fire" are now being held at: Current ASoIaF Webboard

You cannot post new messages to this board. Go to the Current ASoIaF Webboard for the most current discussions.

A Song of Ice and Fire / A Clash of Kings II / Tywin's Rep II

Next 20 Messages Newest Messages

Dirjj
User ID: 1954724 Feb 16th 0:54 AM
Last thread died.

I am one of the guys who believe that the battle was not a feint. Ran makes a excellent point about splitting the forces. The Lannister plan wasn't to take Riverrun, but to get back to the Westlands. If the cavalry got through, then they could rush on to the Westlands. There, they would be on superior footing (all horse, greater numbers). The Infanty could have marched to KL. All the infantry need do was reach the Capital, and re-inforce the Walls. I don't believe that Tywin had any intentions of fighting Stannis in the open. He also had no chance of defeating the Tyrells with his forces, especially in the open. His hopes were to defend KL and endure a siege.

Thus, I have a problem with Tywin's army. Someone speculated that Tywin's force at the Green Fork was somewhere between 25 to 30K. That's fine, but if so, I find it hard to believe that it had more than 10K horse. Most armies don't have that high a percentage of Cavalry. Combine that with the fact that most of Jaime's force was mounted, well that gives you an unbalanced force. I could undersand the Riverlands having a lot of horse, but not a mountainous area like the Westlands.

Now regarding what's more important, KL or Casterly Rock. Who says that the capital has to be at Kings Landing? Could Joffrey not move the capital to Casterly Rock if he so chose? I recall Rome moving their capital twice. Once to some town either in France or Germany. Then the move to Constantinople. I think Casterly Rock is more important because that is the source of Lannister wealth. KL is basically located in a neutral area, and that's why it was a safe capital. KL was a Targaryon capital anyway. Without the Westlands, where is Tywin to get the money to have any power at all. Without the West and it's gold, he could proclaim himself Emperor of Westeros, and it wouldn't do him a lick of good.

ab

KAH
User ID: 0541004 Feb 16th 1:13 AM
Tywin had some 10K horse at the Green Fork - 4K on the right, 3K at the left, and 2.5K in the reserve (IIRC).

Jaime, OTOH, had 2-3K horse against 12K foot, and as such a much more 'normal' relative number.

About this feint theory...I seem to recall that I advocated a more secondary goal for Tywin at the Red Fork - not going to the Westlands (it would be too risky vis-a-vis his ability to get back to KL in time), but to capture Edmure, and exchange Jaime for him.

I, Claudius
User ID: 0505634 Feb 16th 8:11 AM
Well, I never considered the option of Tywin dividing his forces and sending his cavalry to the Westerlands to deal with Robb while his infantry was marching to reinforce the garrison in KL. In my opinion it's a good plan, with 10k veteran infantry, KL would be very well defended and could withstand a long siege. I'm beginning to reconsider my position.

After rereading Catelyn's chapter that portraits the fight I've found that in the Lannister side were far more important commanders than those I remembered: Marbrand and Clegane but Clegane was leading the main attack, which means that he had many more troops than his usual fellows, maybe he was commanding the vanguard as he did against Bolton. There were also Lord Lefford, who was drowned, Crakehalls (a knight known as the Strongboar), Brax... Well this seems to me something more than a feint: a full scale assault. I don't know how I had the impresion that the whole thing was a feint, perhaps that was because I couldn't understand Tywin's intentions. Marching against Riverrun when KL and the crown were in danger didn't make sense to me.

BTW, were is the Mountain now? I don't remember Sansa seing him with the Lannister commanders in KL and it's hard not to notice him. Is he keeping an eye on the Lannister's back?, moving to Duskendale to prepare a wellcome party for the Glovers and the Tallharts?.

Ran
User ID: 0867924 Feb 16th 8:15 AM
Tywins army at the Green Fork was closer to the 20k-25k area, but yeah -- he had a very large number of horse. As much as 11,000, though several thousand of that would be freeriders, sellswords, and people hastily trained and shoddily equipped.

Claidhaim
User ID: 8590713 Feb 16th 9:53 AM
Tywin's tactics are understandable, I think. He had Robb in the westlands raising havok, Edmure had severly limited himself in troops by letting all the small lords go back to defend their lands, and he had Roose Bolton at his back, sitting at the Twins.

IIRC, Tywin was not that concerned with Roose since he was known to be cautious and an attack from that quarter would be slow to develop. He could ignore that for now.

He knew about Renly and his great host sitting at Bitterbridge and knew him for the strutting peacock he was and that an attack on King's Landing from Bitterbridge would not come soon.

IMHO, Tywin was trying to cut off part of Robb's army. To obliterate the defenses in the Riverlands by taking the Fords and then Riverrun.

If he could do this quickly, he would force Roose to show his hand and he would most likely stay at the Twins or even move North to Moat Caillin until an opening presented itself. Roose wouldn't attack due to the numerical superiority of Tywin and the beating he took on the Green Fork. Edmure would be no more and the opposition in the Riverlands reduced to bands of warriors such as Berric and Thoros. Robb would be cut off from not only the Riverlands, but the North as well and would have to sue for peace on Tywin's terms.

Did Tywin send his foot to King's Landing before the attack on the Red Fork? I can't remember if it is stated in the book, but I kind of think not. It wouldn't fit this theory of mine.

On a side note, infantry in the Peninsular war were known to march up to 50 miles in a day if they did not have the constraints of hauling artillery or the large supply trains with them.

Ran
User ID: 0867924 Feb 16th 11:16 AM
Fifty miles a day would be extraordinary for anything short of lighter cavalry in the Middle Ages. In the early 19th century, roads were better, construction of wagons and carts were better, and so on.

Was that really a sustained marching speed? A forced march of a day and a night, I could see ... but they'd lose men on the way and would definently be exhausted afterwards. 30 miles a day seems to be the maximum speed that can be sustained over a few days, and the men have to be absolutely fit.

Jeff
User ID: 1536664 Feb 16th 12:08 PM
Someone commented earlier that Edmure's decision to hold the Red Fork didn't say much for his tactical prowess because everyone knew how defensible it was.

Wouldn't that include Tywin? What would make Tywin think he had any reasonable chance of forcing the Red Fork so successfully that he might succeed in capturing Edmure? The forces that did attempt the crossing got clobbered.

There is nary a hint that Tywin himself was present when Gregor made the big push to cross. Knowing when to throw additional forces into a breach, the timing involved, etc, all require a high degree of tactical acumen. Would Tywin really leave such a tactically difficult exercise to Gregor? Tywin would have to be present personally and able to observe the battle in order to make those tactical decisions, but he's never seen by anyone. A strong hint that he wasn't there at all.

Ran
User ID: 0867924 Feb 16th 12:32 PM
Given that Gregor _did_ gain the crossing -- briefly -- I think no one else but he had the implacable ferocity to make it by main force.

Tywin was no doubt aware of the difficulty -- but if he split his forces, and used the horsed attack on the Red Fork crossings to screen his movement towards King's Landing, then I imagine he was willing to risk it.

If it failed, he still had the advantage of surprise, and the remaining horse would catch up with him before he reached King's Landing. On the other hand, if it succeeded, his troops had their way clear to the Westerlands with enough horse and experienced men to halt Robb's looting and -- if not outright defeat him -- chase him out.

I think the specific goal of capturing Edmure is a little too high a price for the men lost, though. If Edmure was captured, no doubt Tywin would be glad of it, but I don't think he'd put it as the primary goal.

Richard
User ID: 2212414 Feb 16th 1:04 PM
Yes! I've brought someone around to the non-feint side! TodayL I, Claudius, tomorrow: the world! :) Seriously though, why would Tywin need a major assault on the Red Fork to screen his move from Harrenhal to King's Landing? If you just look at the map, the distance from Riverrun to Harrenhal is about 3/4 of the distance from Harrenhal to King's Landing, and one can go from Harrenhal to King's Landing by the Kingsroad; there are no major roads from Riverrun to Harrenhal. True, the distance from the Crossroads to Harrenhal is only about a 1/3 of the distance from Harrenhal to King's Landing, but even if that did necessitate some sort of screening offensive, it would have to have been against Bolton, not Tully. The attack on the Red Fork actually lengthened considerably the distance Tywin had to travel to reach King's Landing, because he had to go south of the Gods' Eye Lake.

Also, Dirjj, if Tywin simply meant to reinforce King's Landing and not actually raise the siege, that just reinforces my point: first, that the plan to raise the siege was either Tyrion's or Loras', second, once an army is besieged, it's defeat is inevitable unless it or some outside army can raise the siege. Whom would Tywin have been expecting to come rescue him, given that your argument concedes that Tywin didn't yet know of the alliance with the Tyrells?

Jeff, Tywin is known for commanding from the rear; he did so at the Green Fork. His leading a charge at King's Landing was considered somewhat unusual, if I recall. Why should it be that strange that Tywin himself wasn't seen by the Tullys, who had more important concerns right in front of them?

Ran, if Tywin would have been willing to send his cavalry, unsupported by his infantry, and under a subordinate commander, into the West to fight Robb at what would have been much closer to even odds, while depriving himself of much cavalry to use against Stannis, then he is less clever than even I thought. :)

KAH, I think your theory about capturing Edmure overlooks the fact that, had Tywin captured Edmure, he probably would have captured Riverrun as well, and therefore would have rescued Jaime.

Snake
User ID: 8890073 Feb 16th 1:45 PM
I don't know much about tactics but I think Tywin was trying to cross the Red Fork. If he had made it he had a shorter march to the West. Once there, he would have forced Robb to retreat or smashed him. Then he could have took the remenants of Ser Stafford's army and marched up behind the Tyrells and took them in the rear. He didn't know about Renly and probably knew the approximate size of Stannis army. So perhaps he thought Tyrion could hold off Stannis long enough for him to deal with Robb and then the Tyrells. I have no doubt that Tywin felt he could defeat both.

Ran
User ID: 0867924 Feb 16th 2:09 PM
Given that the westerlands is the only base of power the Lannisters have, it was far more vital for Tywin to preserve it then you might suspect.

Certainly, a protracted siege without any hope of aid, the west being ravished freely, would not help at all. And Tywin doesn't seem to want to bet even forces against Stannis -- a pitched battle could go too far either way.

On the other hand, Tywin might well have been aware of the Tyrells pitching in when he decided to split forces and leave Harrenhal. Then it makes even more sense (militarly) to send a good portion of his force to deal with the west when he knows that he'll be joining up with the Tyrells.

labor
User ID: 0798784 Feb 16th 3:24 PM
Richard, Snake, look at the map and look at the time. Lannister infantry could never make it in time to KL if it fought on the Red Fork.

Also, you all conveniently ignore that while Tywin doesn't normally fight on the frontline, Ser Kevan does. Yet neither hide nor horn of him was seen on the Red Fork as far as we have heard. Nor was Lannister infantry seen there either. Marbrand, Clegane and even Ser Flement Brax (if it was him - there are lots of Braxs around apparently) are all cavalry commanders.

Richard, if you don't see the advantage of Lannister forces coming on Stannis by surprise, then no wonder that the feint theory won't appeal to you.
That is what it is about, namely, that Tywin wanted to deceive Stannis into complacency. No screening maneuvres against Tullys, Boltons or whatever.
Yes, Tywin could have marched against Stannis from Harrenhal, but Stannis would have seen him coming and would have been prepared. It would have been much more difficult, uncertain and bloody to try to beat him if he was expecting an attack, considering that he had numbers equal to Tywin's and all of them trained fighters, i.e. knights and freeriders, even if yet unblooded in the latest war.

Richard
User ID: 2212414 Feb 16th 5:47 PM
Labor, the mere fact that a feint by Tywin to fool Stannis might have been a good move doesn't mean that that's what happened. Also, the fact that Kevan Lannister is not mentioned in the second-hand reports that Catelyn hears, which, after all, from only one of the fords, doesn't mean much. Also, there is the simple fact that the assault involved a large number of troops over a long period of time. Even assuming that reports of the battle would reach Stannis, and that those reports would have to be of a battle large enough for Stannis to be fooled, such a major attack was probably unnecessary, especially considering the tendency of battle reports to become inflated, especially in pre-Modern warfare. Also, if you assume that Stannis is going to hear fairly detailed and timely reports of a battle going on very far away, it is unreasonable to think that he won't hear of a large approaching army. The Tyrells and the Lannisters ultimately achieved tactical surprise by coming north through the Kingswood; Stannis had actually mentioned to Davos, I think, his desire to capture King's Landing before the Tyrells could arrive on his rear, so he was aware of the threat in any case. Also, Labor, there is no scale on the map saying how great the distances are or how much time would be needed to traverse them, nor does the text say explicitly how much time actually passes between the battle of the Red Fork and the end of the battle of King's Landing. One ought to bear in mind, however, that Stannis' assault on King's Landing was critically delayed because he had to spend waiting for his ships, which were held up bad weather, to arrive from Storm's End, and by the raiding of Tyrion's clansmen. This could have given the Lannister-Tyrell army time to arrive. Also, Catelyn learns by raven of the fall of Storm's End to Stannis during the battle of the Red Fork. Now, the distance from Storm's End to King's Landing is almost exactly the same as the distance from Riverrun to the Goldroad. Consider that Lannister and Tyrell scouts ran into one another somewhere in the middle of the Reach between the Goldroad and the Roseroad, throw in Stannis' aforementioned delays, and it's hardly impossible for the Tyrell-Lannister army to have arrived late in the day of the battle of King's Landing.

Jeff
User ID: 1536664 Feb 16th 6:01 PM
Commanding from the "rear" I accept -- commanding when you cannot even see the battlefield is not commanding at all. I'm not saying that Tywin had to lead the charge -- Gregor was the right guy for that. But the decision as to whether and when to reinforce Gregor's assualt is the truly difficult and key decisiion because a river assault is so difficult. If the Tullys can't see Tywin, Tywin can't see the Tullys and so could not observe the progress of Gregor's attack.

Ran, Gregor did apparently reach the other side with some men. But he could not stay there. That leaves us with two alternatives, both of which support the feint theory:

1) Gregor _barely_ reached the other side and was still at far too great a disadvantage due to terrain that he was forced back with great loss. In other words, he was unable to obtained a militarily significant foothold and his "success" was too limited to even qualify as symbolic. If this is the case, my characterization of the Red Fork as a virtually impregnable position (given the balance of forces), remains correct.

2) He actually obtained a militarily significant foothold but it was not reinforced. This is an even worse option for the "no-feint" theory because _why_ wouldn't it have been reinforced if it truly was successful? You don't waste men trying to obtain a viable foothold but then refuse to reinforce it. Unless the troops needed to reinforce it had already left the battle area and were marching towards KL. In which case, the attack was a feint.

Richard
User ID: 2212414 Feb 17th 0:03 AM
Jeff, bear in mind that there were a number of fords, and Catelyn only got reports from just one; it's entirely possible that Tywin was at another. Also, be realistic: someone standing at the edge of a cluster of trees, for instance, would have no difficulty seeing out of the cluster of trees, but people far from that cluster would have great difficulty seeing hum. Also, in his armor and from a distance, Tywin just looks like a man in red, so that to a Tully soldier whose view of Tywin is obscured by the Lannister soldiers who he's fighting right in front of him, Tywin would just look like some guy off in the distance.

As to your point about the Lannister's not reinforcing Gregor's beachhead, I respond: random chance, which Clausewitz points out is one of the three essential elements of warfare. Maybe they tried to reinforce it, but couldn't get reinforcements across the river in time, before the beachhead was reduced by the Tullys. It happens.

Lastly, the pro-feint people don't seem to really be responding to the most important piece of evidence against the attack's having been a feint: the battle lasted almost 2 DAYS! That is too long and too bloody for a feint. Sorry for shouting. :)

I, Claudius
User ID: 0505634 Feb 17th 3:13 AM
IIRC Gregor's force was repulsed by a charge of Edmure's reserve cavalry. It seems that he had assembled a force of 2k of mounted troops ready to strike where the Lannisters might have a oportunity for a breakthrough. It's not clear that Edmure commited all his reserves there, but it seems that the battle was fierce.

IMHO Tywin never send all his cavalry to the attack, being a cautious commander, he knew that an assault of the fords would force his troops to engage the enemy piecemeal, even when a breakthrough was achieved. When he realised that the Tullys had a strong reserve he retreated.

About the feint. Tywin might have send small groups of cavalry from different bannermen, all of them showing their banners, giving the impression that it was a massive assault. That could explain the reports about Brax, Lefford, Marbrand, Clegane, Crakehalls, their main force maybe was not there, only a small group of men with a huge banner. That would be a cunning feint, taking a few hundred cavalry of each one of his bannermen, Tywin could form a force of one or two thousand, more than enough to make Ednure think that he was under a massive attack.

Richard, the battle lasted 2 days but in the first one the Lannisters only probed the Tully defenses. If it was a feint that means nothing, if the Tully stayed in the defensive the Lannisters could have kept "probing" for days. But if Tywin really wanted to give the impression of a mass attack he had no other choice than to send Gregor to do the job.

labor
User ID: 0798784 Feb 17th 3:53 AM
Richard, as long as we don't know what exactly did happen, one theory which fits the facts is as good as the other ;) .

Anyway:

1. We know for a fact that Stannis did know about Tywin's march to the Red Fork before he set out from Storm's End. Thus, he'd also know about the battle. And it has nothing to do with riders - remember the raven-post. This is also a reason why the account of battle wouldn't be as inflated as in the case of real pre-modern one.

2. Why would Stannis hear about the approaching army if it didn't pass any sites with the ravens and if it did maintain the strong screen of outriders? Robb managed to accomplish a comparable feat quite well.
Also, Lannister army didn't approach through the Kingswood (the Tyrell one did), but rather attacked on the same bank as KL, i.e. there was a river between them and Stannis during the march, which would make it easier to remain unnoticed.

3. Catelyn hears deatailed reports from 3 fords, and Edmure writes her about attacks at the dozen fords. Ser Kevan never gets mentioned.

4. The distances. If one takes a ruler and measures the distances "as bird flys", one sees that Riverrun is about 30% farther from KL as Storm's End is.

5. The time. Skirmishing and fighting continues for 5 (sic!) days after the news of the fall of Storm's End arrive to Riverrun. And I think that you will concede that the raven would have needed at least 2 days to get there.
Thus, according to your theory, Lannister foot set out to KL at least _7 days_ after the fall of Storm's End.

We know that Stannis most likely went or at least sent his van for KL at once, after Storm's End fell. That's what Davos counceled him and Stannis agreed.
Stannis's vanguard arrived at KL 2 days before Sansa's "flowering" began and it was still continuing on the day of the battle. Thus I'd say that Stannis's van arrived at KL no earlier than 5 days before the battle. I am not sure how much the wildlings might have delayed the van - it had no baggage train and Ser Guyard Morrigen didn't seem the type who'd go slower because a few scouts and outriders have been killed. Now, let's be generous and say that he was delayed by 2 days and that he could have appeared 7 days before the battle.

Thus you'd have Lannister foot beginning their march south 7 days after Stannis's mounted van did (and after a battle on the Red Fork, no less) and arriving 7 days later than Stannis's van could have arrived if not for the wildlings.
But Stannis's van would be well-horsed, i.e. capable of making good speed _and_ Lannister foot would have to cross a distance which is longer by third.

Such march is, IMHO, quite impossible, unless we are speaking about Aeil or Massai here.

6. Whether such a fierce attack on the Red Fork was necessary or not I don't know. Are there any pertinent historical examples? Certainly, the Lannister troops skirmished long enough (i.e. 4 whole days). But you should bear in mind that it was Gregor who commanded the bloodiest fight at Stone Mill. He is a psycho and might have just lost it.

7. We have an indirect evidence that the (foot) march from the Red fork to KL would be indeed implausible:

Ser Aenys Frey: "King Stannis thought that Lord Tywin was a thousand leagues away as well and it undid him."

Tyrion (in delirium, alas, upon seeing his father): "It had to be a dream, since Lord Tywin was a thousand leagues away, fighting Robb Stark in the west."

KAH
User ID: 0541004 Feb 17th 6:16 AM
Richard;

If Riverrun had fallen at once; well, then all the better for Tywin. He'd have Jiame back _and_ Edmure for hostage.

However, the same did not occur when Jaime smashed Edmure 'under the walls of Riverrun', and captured edmure to boot. Riverrun was besieged, but not overrun.

In any case, just capturing Edmure might have been
a very nice plum for Tywin - he would have the Tully heir to exchange for his son. Some might think that losing all those men for Jaime's sake was not worth it, but this is nobility we're talking about.

Robb Stark took 20K men south after his father's arrest. I think Tywin well could have swallowed a few thousand men dead, if it gave him his son back. Not such losses as to risk losing overall in the end, of course.

Jeff
User ID: 1536664 Feb 18th 8:28 AM
The description of Gregor's attack is that it was the main attack, the "hammerblow" predicted by Brienne. It makes no sense for Tywin to be commanding a minor probing attack rather than the hammerblow.

I suppose Tywin could have been hiding in the trees, but why would he do that? The presence of a commander is always good for morale, which is one reason why they fly banners, etc. The close he was to the river, the better he could observe and command.

As for the ferocity of the attack, I can only say that a half-hearted attack would not have made as effective a feint. He may have lost 1-2k in the attack. But considering the stakes that was not too many men.

Ran
User ID: 0867924 Feb 18th 12:27 PM
Gregor's attack was one of many main attacks -- battles had broken out across a dozen of the various crossings. Gregor's was also the only apparently successful one -- unfortunately, it took so long for him to gain his foothold that Edmure had time to bring his cavalry reserve.

If the reserve had not been immediately present, it's very difficult to say just what would have happened. Would Lannister troops further back been called forward to start reinforcing their position? I certainly think so, but I suppose it's debatable.

I _do_ believe that a 'half-hearted' assault would have worked just as well -- half-hearted in the sense that the commanders knew they were to retreat earlier than would be their usual wont. The men wouldn't have to know about it. The impression Stannis would get of Lannister movements and aims would have been just as incorrect if only six hundred men had ended up killed, or whatever.

It may be that Addam Marbrand and some other commanders did retreat sooner rather than later. Gregor Clegane is Gregor Clegane. On the other hand, Lord Lefford died, and that's not a small death. A small mixture of commanders among the troops is of course necessary, but whether they would all expose themselves enough to be killed if they knew they were just a misdirection seems unlikely.

Clearly, we've developed three different views. It was a feint, or it was a full-out effort, or it was something of both -- an effort to gain entry to the westerlands to chase Robb out and sustain the Lannister powerbase which also served as a misdirection.

For my part, I'm going to hold with the latter view, with only some reservation (the other option being that it was a full-out effort without any attempt to split forces -- Martin seems to deny the idea that it was a complete feint in his mail, where he calls the move a great risk and even says 'Was Lord Tywin marching west a huge risk? Of course it was.' )

Next 20 Messages Newest Messages