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 Song of Ice and Fire / Military matters

Next 20 Messages Newest Messages
Brady
User ID: 0721754 		Apr 29th 6:56 AM
I thought it would be a good idea to have a post to discuss all things military.
Whos the best overall commander?
Best field leader?
What strategies should/could be employed by the various protagonists?
Tactical errors?
The strength of various forces?
Here are some of my random thoughts;
Brynden the Blackfish is the main mastermind behind Robb, his strategies are whats winning the war for the Starks. He planned the ambush of Whispering Wood and the Battle of the Three Camps.
Robb is obviously a great leader, but is relying on his wise uncle for advice(among others)
Well what does everyone think?
Ran
User ID: 0867924 		Apr 29th 7:21 AM

In any case:

Best overall commander -- Tough one. Robb's done strikingly well. On the other hand, I think I'd go with Tywin. He's made some mistakes, but his skill have kept him resilient to the failures, and he's recently won a tremendous victory that needed some audaciousness to carry out.

Best field leader -- Robb, because he leads by example, and because he's got an instinct -- a knack -- for it. On the other hand, this means that he's risking everything every time he goes out on the field of battle, and it will very probably come to pass that he will lose everything.

Strategies -- Robb almost certainly needs to withdraw, but I don't think he'll do that. Not when he thinks Roose Bolton sits strongly at Harrenhal. Probably the path he'll take is taking some number of troops North, trying to get through the Neck one way or another, while keeping the main of his forces in the south to guard the Riverlands.

Of course, this doesn't take into account whatever may happen with Jaime. He may be forced to capitulate and go North in peace.

Tywin's plan is easy enough. Mop up with Stannis -- he may need to get some ships from somewhere, probably the Redwynes, before he can go off to Dragonstone -- and then mop up with Robb. Split his forces into three bodies, I think -- one to go into the Westerlands, a mounted force. Another to head to Riverrun. Another to head to Harrenhal (of course, I suspect Roose is already ready to betray Robb, and might even be communicating with the Lannisters -- this step wouldn't be necessary then.)

Stannis -- Pray.

Tactical errors --

Robb -- I don't know. He's really not made any that I can see. He did make two strategic errors -- or diplomatic, I suppose. That was Theon and the Greyjoys, and Renly agreeing to work with him against the Lannisters.

Oh, well -- maybe taking Brynden into the west wasn't really necessary. If the Blackfish were still at Riverrun, I doubt Edmure would have been allowed to remove the Northerner garrison at the Twins, not without an argument at least. That move will almost certainly be the reason that Lord Walder will be able to betray him.

Stannis -- Listening to Melisandre. Otherwise, he did a good job of it, all considered. Oh, yes, putting that idiot Florent as Lord Admiral of his fleet. That guy is the sole reason he lost so many ships and men. Should have put Davos as the leader. ;P But he wouldn't have been able to command the lords and they would have gone in as an unorganized mess.

Tywin -- Sitting in Harrenhal too long -- a cautious, conservative policy, but it led to disaster with Robb hitting the west.

Strength --

I figure Robb has maybe 24,000 -- some 4,000 horse off in the Westerlands, some 10,000 with Roose, some 10,000 with Edmure.

The Lannisters have, probably, about 26,000 now, after the debacle with Stafford Lannister's forces. OF course, add in the Tyrells and the turned lords that Stannis had, and you're looking at something more like ... hrm. A lot. 65,000+, easy. With a lot of cavalry.

Now, as to Robb and Brynden:

It was Robb who planned the Whispering Wood, actually -- he's the one who tells them where to attack to draw out Jaime and where to set up for the ambush. What Brynden gives Robb, however, is the understanding of the way Jaime thinks that only experience would give a man. Maybe Robb would never have seen the possibility of the ambush if it weren't for Brynden, but I couldn't say.

And the Battle of the Three Camps is the same -- Brynden gives the advice that young Robb needs, because Brynden has years of experience and Robb doesn't, but it's Robb who implements that advice into the successful plan. Could Brynden have done the same? Sure. But it doesn't reduce the fact that Robb is already able to execute brilliant plans on his own, once he's given the information he needs. That's part of the reason Brynden is leading the outriders.

Also, it seems clear that it's Robb who planned the expedition into the west -- though he has the unfair advantage of having a preternatural warg to find a path -- and in all probability he's the man who nailed Stafford Lannister and his troops.

I forget who it is who said that the great commanders are simply the sum of their sub-ordinates -- Clausewitz, maybe? Robb is the one who gathers all the suggestions that the lords and Brynden give him, and comes up with the plan. He does a very good job of it.
Brady
User ID: 0721754 		Apr 29th 10:10 PM
I think the Martells are important militarily too, doesnt it mention somewhere that they have 50'000 troops. That could definetly swing the tide.
About Brynden, I went back and reread it, yeah Robb deserves more credit than I gave him. Bryndens definetly his best subcommander though. Alexander the Great was surrounded by great subcommanders like Antipater and Parmenio that helped him on to victory after victory.
Robb likewise needs counsellors, though he's got good ones in the Blackfish and Catelyn
Robbs biggest mistake was trusting Theon
Tywins mistake was in underestimating Robb twice, once at the first battle against Roose Bolton and again when he pulled back to harrenhal and tried to lure Robb out by pillaging the and
Blackstone
User ID: 9816503 		Apr 30th 2:04 AM
Interesting question, without a clear answer.

My choice for top feild commander -- Robb. Has done more with less. He has the Blackfish, but a lesser man, and a lesser commander wouldn't listen to him. He is lacking however, in grand strategy. His tactis are at worst sound, and at best brilliant, but his grasp of the overall situation is not up to snuff.

My choice for best strategist -- Tywin. He recovered admirably from Jaime's losses. Harrenhall was the best choice anyone could have made. If he had rushed to polish off Robb, Renly might have sped up the Roseroad. If he moves to Kings Landing Robb cutts him off from the west.

Robb's biggest mistake was trusting Theon, but in fairness to Robb he really didn't have a reason not to.

Tywin's biggest mistake was allowing Uncle Dolt command the new army, rather than Ser Kevan or a more formidable man. If he had done that, then Robb would be besieged at Riverrun and Tywin would have been free to deal with Robert's brothers.



Asian Dragon
User ID: 9056633 		Apr 30th 7:49 AM
Hi, new to the boards, been a long time
fan just hiding in the background, but
this thread caught my eye.
Anyone here read Sun Tzu's "Art of war"?
With Martin's lack of great detail and
graphics in regards to the actual battle
it makes me wonder if alot of the
stratagy and balances of forces makes
if he had read it or not.
If you are not familar w/ the book its a
great read into one of the foremost
stratagests of the world. Written circa
6th century BC (no one really knows). It's
not alot of gore, detail and "how to's"
more of philosphy and the like.
KingOfWinter
User ID: 0791694 		May 1st 0:13 AM
Best overall commander: Robb's a tactical genius, but he's inexperienced. Still, when the Blackfish is with him he's probably the most formidable commander currently in the field.
The best field leader is a more difficult question. Jaime is probably the most charismatic commander, but he's too impatient to be a good tactician. I'd call it a toss-up between Robb and Tywin.

Strengths of different armies. The Tyrells are the most powerful. I'd say they can muster about 55,000 trained soldiers. The Dornish, as has been noted, command 50,000. I'd put the Baratheons next, at 40-45,000, followed by the Lannisters with 30-40,000, the Tullys with 20,000-odd, the Arryns with an unknown number, and the Starks, with perhaps 20,000 as well. The Greyjoys are dead last in everything but naval power.
Various strategies: Robb has some difficult choices to make. If he goes north to deal with the ironmen, he leaves the riverlands undefended. OTOH, even if he can fend off the Lannister/Tyrell alliance, he'll have to leave the north to the tender mercy of the Greyjoy family and the Bastard of Bolton. Dividing his forces is probably the best way to go, but that leaves him with only a weak force to face the Lannisters.
Tywin: Split his army into two or three contingents. Send one to the west to deal with Robb, send one to deal with Roose Bolton at Harrenhal and then march north up the Green Fork, and send one after Stannis. Put competent commanders in charge; himself, Kevan, and Mace Tyrell or one of his vassals.
Stannis: Use his uber-assassin to take out the royal family and the Tyrells. With no heirs left, he could conceivably take the throne by default.

Mistakes: Tywin's counting on the Freys to stay out of the war, Stannis putting that Florent in charge of his fleet, Robb's trusting Theon.

Random stuff: I'd like to see Robb and Tywin face off. Robb's defeated armies three times the size of his, but Tywin's too experienced to be caught by a night ambush, unlike Jaime and Stafford. It would be an interesting contest.
Where did Tywin get his battle experience? He stayed out of the civil war until the end, and there were no other major wars besides the Greyjoy's abortive rebellion.
Hmm... by the end of A Storm of Swords, the Lannisters will rule all of the far south and probably the riverlands. They can't attack the Vale, and if Robb wins back to the north he's almost unassailable there as well. Otherwise, they'll be firmly in power.

Ran
User ID: 0867924 		May 1st 5:19 AM
Martin has said that Tywin brutually put down rebellions of some of the most powerful westerlords in his youth -- including utterly destroying House Reyne, the most powerful and richest of the Lannister bannermen, and its lord (called the Red Lion of Castamere), a formidable soldier and warrior in his own right.

So, I figure that's where Tywin has his experience.
Jeff
User ID: 1536664 		May 1st 1:58 PM
Robb has shown a nice talent as a tactical commander. But in each victory, Whispering Wood, Camps, and Oxcross, he seems to have had the element of surprise. He certainly deserves tactical credit for his ability to achieve surprise, but we have yet to see him command in a set piece battle where neither side has surprise, such as the battle Roose Bolton and Tywin fought on the Green Fork. It's inevitable that he won't be able to achieve surprise in every battle, so I'll withhold judgment on him until we see him fight such a battle.

From what we've seen, Tywin seems to be an excellent strategist, though we really haven't seen him do too much tactically other than defeat a heavily outnumbered Bolton. But I agree with Ran that GRRM has recognized Tywin's tactical ability. In a set piece battle between Tywin and Robb, I think I'd go with Tywin due to Robb's lack of experience.
Dirjj
User ID: 1954724 		May 3rd 0:27 AM
Actually, the only advantage that I think Tywin really has over Robb is in numbers. Strategy wise, they're probably even. After all, Robb had been tutored by his father (a foremost commander in his time) and Jory Cassell. Stategy is something you put on paper. Thus, Robb can hold his own when it comes to planning a battle. Plus, Robb might have an slight advantage, as his men will fight harder for him because they know that he's out there fighting with them. You'll die for someone like that. I think Tywins men would be more succeptable to a rout if push came to shove, while Robb's men would stick it out until ordered to withdraw.

After all, all strategy is tossed out once the battle starts anyway. The Commander with the best abiltiy to improvise and recover would be the one to win. At this point, Robb probably has more experience than Tywin because he's fought more recent battles. Most of Tywins experience is outdated by 10 years. I don't think much of his recue of Kings Landing because in my opinion, he's forces meant squat. It was the Tyrells that won the day.

ab
KAH
User ID: 0541004 		May 3rd 5:10 AM
Dirjj;

I'm not sure what you mean by Tywin's experience being 'outdated'.
Unless Tywin is growing senile, I don't think this assertion holds water at all.
sparhawk
User ID: 0436494 		May 3rd 5:24 AM
i think one thing everyone has forgotten is that robb's men have a fierce pride in him (witness the greatjon after grey wind took off one of his fingers, and in riverrun when he was proclaimed the king of the north). he leads them in battle, eats with them and seeks counsel from them. tywin, on the other hand, is an aloof figure and the view could be put forward that the only hold he has over his men is one of fear (also he leads from the rear, thus his troops have a morale disadvantage). thus, if a battle between the two is on a knife edge, tywin's men are most likely to break. robb has the almost perfect approach to war - the impestuosity of youth tempered by wisdom of experienced men such as the blackfish. this enables him to do things unexpectedly (witness, the battles of whispering wood, the 3 camps, and in the West). Tywins caution may be effective, but he could be being TOO cautious. he is an old man and improvisation dosen't come easily to old men. i would imagine he dosen't take into account the opinions of his field commanders either.
Ran
User ID: 0867924 		May 3rd 5:30 AM
You mean Rodrik Cassel, Dirjj.

And yeah, there's no way that experience grows "outdated" in a world which hasn't seen any major innovation in three hundred years. He smashed Roose Bolton pretty well, his Red Fork try was really a division of forces-cum-feint he made a gutsy move that paid off, and KL was a stunning win.

Tywin's plan, it seems to me, would have done a smashing job of saving KL and ruining Stannis's day even if he didn't have the Tyrells with him. It's just that Stannis would end up with a large part of his force surviving, since Tywin would be on the wrong side of the river.

That would certainly prove troublesome later, but...

Oh, speaking of mistakes ... well, this is really a problem for Tywin. And that is that he hasn't had any really great commanders under him. Oh, Addam Marbrand and Gregor Clegane are both great on the field but they don't appear to be strategists. And Kevan seems to be competent, but little more

Tyrion might have been able to help in this regard, but obviously that didn't work. With Randyll Tarly now on Tywin's side ... maybe. Hard to say about Tarly, since he seems a rather direct-thinking guy and primarily a field leader. But he might be a pretty good strategist.
KAH
User ID: 0541004 		May 3rd 6:01 AM
Sparhawk;

Leading from the rear has the advantage of seizing opportunities that offer themselves during battle.
This is much more difficult when you're in the thick of it already.

And I think that the notion of Tywin not listening to his sub-commanders is positively wrong - we know from Tyrion's assessment of him that he prefers to hold silent during war councils, presumably to pick out the golden kernels out of whatever the bannermen comes up with.
sparhawk
User ID: 0436494 		May 3rd 6:28 AM
kah;
leading from the rear may give the adv. of picking out oppurtunities in battle, but leading from the front inspires pride and respect in the troops . battles turn on the smallest thing and troops are more likely to fight all the harder if their general is in the thick of it with them. Phillip of Macedon was a prime exponent of this, and he conquered all of greece and was just about to invade persia when he was assasinated.
with seasoned campaigners like the blackfish in the rear, robb can have the best of both worlds
KAH
User ID: 0541004 		May 3rd 6:50 AM
Sparhawk;

I agree that having the Blackfish in the rear would be the smartest thing to do for Robb.

I'm not sure if this is how he's doing it, since so far Brynden seems to lead the van or the outriders, but then, we have yet to see Robb going into a fight were he doesn't have the element of surprise, so it doesn't really prove anything.

Anyhow, I think this doesn't invalidate Tywin doing the correct thing by positioning himself in the rear.
If he cannot inspire other than fear in his troops, he _should_ leave the more advanced positions to charismatic leaders as Jaime or Addam Marbrand.
Jeff
User ID: 1536664 		May 3rd 8:16 AM
Reconsidering my past remarks, I would say that Robb's victories perhaps might be more because of his strategic/operational ability to achieve surprise rather than being a function of his "tactical" ability. A misuse of terms on my part.

Personal courage by a leader is great, but I don't think we should overlook the fact that Tywin's great reputation also serves as an inspiration to his own men. It seems that the entire military class in Westeros considers Tywin an outstanding commander -- one reason Robb decided not to confront Tywin directly was because of his reputation -- a very smart strategic move, I think. Anyway, troops love a commander who wins. Robb certainly has been very successful, but we shouldn't short Tywin on this either.

As for leading from the rear/front, I think leading from the rear is much less of an advantage than some might think. Westerosi military units do not have great tactical mobility. These aren't legions, phalanxes, or even Mongol umani -- they're polygot collections of infantry and cavalry. Once they're pointed in a certain direction, that's pretty much it. An entirely different rule applies in the modern era or when armies had better communication and more cohesion, but that's just not the case in Westeros.

The most a commander usually can do is hang with the mobile reserve and commit it, and himself, at the critical time. That's what Alexander did, and his armies were a lot more flexible than those in Westeros. To a certain extent, that's what Tywin attempted to do at the Green Fork. He structured his battle line so that the left would fail, and he could strike Bolton's exposed flank as Bolton advanced But that didn't require many decisions on his part during battle -- the left flank would fail on its own, and all he really needed to do was time the attack on the exposed flank. And he may very well have led that attack personally -- we just don't know.

sparhawk
User ID: 0436494 		May 3rd 8:27 AM
good point, jeff.
however, the knights are essentially heavy cavalry, therefore flexible. one thing i haven't seen so far is any one commander using them as mobilr shock troops to his advantage.
Jeff
User ID: 1536664 		May 3rd 8:54 AM
The knights certainly are mobile, but i'm not sure that they are all that flexible tactically. Mobility does not equal flexibility. Flexibility involves being able to change orientation, formation, and direction while maintaining tactical cohesion. You _have_ to train together in order to be able to do that, and Tywin's army is not a standing force that has trained together extensively. It consists of his bannermen and their retinues, which are by definition not a cohesive force. That was the biggest limitation of most feudal armies.

There also is the command and control issue. The battlefield is a very confusing place, and there are no radios to obtain status reports, relay commands, etc. So tactical plans necessarily must be simple. Now, if Tywin holds back a significant force of knights, or even footmen, and then decides the right moment and place to commit, that's within the capabilities of the units he has. But other than leading that reserve force, the most important thing he does is simply order his troops on the field before the battle begins.

I'm not saying that a commander should fight in the front lines from the first moment of combat. In _most_ cases, that would be dumb, though the Greeks seemed to do it as a matter of course quite successfully. He can observe (not lead) from the rear until the battle has sorted itself out a bit, and then make his move.

Actually, we've no real evidence that Robb won't "lead" in the same way as Tywin because he hasn't fought a set piece battle. Robb's personal leadership style was dictated by the battles in which he has fought. Whispering Wood was an ambush. Even in modern terms, an ambush is basically a "wind-up" exercise. You set your guys in place, and then let everything go at a prearranged signal. No "commanding from the rear" is necessary, possible, or desireable. So Robb jumped right in.

The Battle of the Camps seems to have been another surprise attack, with speed being the critical element. Again, the key element was formation of the battle plan. Once the attack started, Robb really wouldn't have had much "commanding" to do. Same with Oxcross. That was a lighting raid, again with no need for a reserve or for anyone to "command" at all.

I think Robb might command a bit differently in a set-piece battle where he would have a reserve to commit.
Ran
User ID: 0867924 		May 3rd 9:28 AM
KAH,

I didn't mean to suggest that Tywin doesn't listen to his lords. However, his lords don't seem to offer anything new -- there is no one half as skilled as a strategist as himself. Now with Randyll Tarly ... perhaps he'll have someone whose ideas will open new possibilities for him.

After all, Napoleon would not have done half the things he did if he didn't have a few brilliant men under him.

Jeff,

Tywin certainly led the reserve in, to some degree. Tyrion remarks on seeing his father thunder past.

I agree with the rest of your analysis of things, however. Communication is such that a commander has very little control over what happens once a battle starts. Being in front can serve as inspiration to a fair number of men, but the dangers and problems often outweigh the benefits. On a purely tactical basis, being in the front can be very useful, but you give up some things.
KAH
User ID: 0541004 		May 3rd 10:48 AM
Ran;

Well, there might be other reasons than actually good advice for Tywin to listen to his lords.

I find that working out a problem of some sort in my head, is much easier if I have a colloquial group around me who throws around good and bad ideas, and right and wrong assessments of the problem I'm dealing with, than if I should take it on all of my own.

Also, appearing to consider all the lords ideas might be better for morale, than if he just gave them the orders outright. These are feudal lords, and expect at least to say their piece, before their overlord decides.


Jeff,

I suppose you're correct wrt the limited flexibility of the units.

However, there's something I'd like to know your opinion about, then.


If the flexibility and ability to communicate are so limited as you propose, then the set-piece battle (I think) could possibly (from one side's PoV) be divided into two phases;

I) The committal of the foremost three or four main units.

II) The committal of the reserve.


IOW; the first units actions are given carefully crafted orders beforehand exactly what to do.
Once these have been decided, and the battle ensues, these cannot be redirected without great difficulty, following your argument.

The reserve (and it's commander) waits to see how phase I comes along.
If everything goes as planned, then the reserve can carry out it's part of the plan.

However, if things do _not_ go as planned, the reserve commander has to quickly consider what to do, and give orders accordingly.

Once the reserve has committed itself, I think (still following your argument) the time for any more clever orders are done - it's either fight or retreat.
But until the moment of committal, there should be
some room for last-moment changes, if the situation called for it.


Hence, the reserve provides a skilled commander with the best (albeit still limited) opportunity to influence the outcome of the battle, once it has begun.

Were I Tywin, I'm not sure I'd trust anyone but myself in the reserve. I could always trust my sub-commanders to follow pre-set orders.
I'd be less willing to trust them with coming up with some intelligent decisions of their own, unless they were _really_ experienced and trustworthy.

Or so I believe. What do you think?
Next 20 Messages Newest Messages