the storm king returns Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 I love me some Baratheon brothers and we all know Robert was one of the greatest warriors of his generation and 10x the warrior then both his brothers, but who was a better commander?Lets give both Baratheon brothers 50000 men and a moderate size fleet with the goal of taking KL and the IT. The IT have 80000 men and a bigger fleet and are aware of the Storm lords betrail. Your allies are the same as RR but SE is not under siege by the Tyrells thus you will eventually have to face them in the field or figure out another way to win under these bad odds. So who wins Stannis or Bob or does the IT win every time?I think Stannis has a better chance in my scenario then Robert because he is smarter and this scenario requires unusual thinking in order to win. Robert would meet them on the field and lose unfortunatly he is not God lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikkel Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Despite claims to the contrary, there's no reason to believe Robert was an idiot or just a "berserk-fight-in-the-vanguard" kinda guy. He apparently was a very able commander as well, and very inspirational to his men. Stannis too has his share of legendary victories - outmaneuvering and smashing the Ironborn fleet at sea, and the victory at the Wall probably his finest ones - and Robert has his tree-victories-in-a-single-day and the Trident. I would probably tend to favor Stannis if it was just the two of them, but I think Robert's famous charisma (and Stannis' infamous lack of same) would tip the scales in Robert's favor over a longer campaign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Lannister Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 To be fair, Stannis screwed up monumentally at the Blackwater too. Leaving the Tyrells at his flank and not accounting for the location of Tywin's force were both huge errors. Though to be fair, our history is full of tragic defeats in pursuit of that decisive victory that will end the war. Whatever Robert's faults were, I don't think he ever made a mistake like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petyr's Little Finger Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Someone like Robert would favor quick attacks, sending all his troops to attack the enemy's stronger position. Sometimes this is good when one needs to seize the moment but at the same time a commander like Tywin could trap Robert and his forces. Stannis would be more cautious and strategic, he is the best person to lure an enemy into a trap like he did with the Ironborn fleet. Stannis will definitely be a better commander with limited resources than Robert but Stannis will not inspire loyalty in his troops like Robert. Overall I think Stannis is a slightly better commander than Robert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikkel Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Tywin really hasn't shown himself to be that brilliant of a commander. He consistently lost to Robb, and his sole victory during Robert's Rebellion came through treachery. I'm not saying he's incompetent, but he does seem to rely on the fact that the wealth of his House would generally allow him to field forces vastly superior than those of his opponents. He even lost to Edmure, which yes in hindsight was a blessing in disguise, but it's not like he wasn't trying to win at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Lannister Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Tywin really hasn't shown himself to be that brilliant of a commander. He consistently lost to Robb, and his sole victory during Robert's Rebellion came through treachery. I'm not saying he's incompetent, but he does seem to rely on the fact that the wealth of his House would generally allow him to field forces vastly superior than those of his opponents. He even lost to Edmure, which yes in hindsight was a blessing in disguise, but it's not like he wasn't trying to win at the time. Well Tywin's tactic at the Red Fork of presenting a weak flank with Tyrion and his clansmen only to have an ambush waiting behind it is something Robert could potentially stumble into. His style seems to be more of a thinker than a fighter so to say. Really I think Tywin's military reputation came mainly from him so decisively crushing the Reyne-Tarbeck rebellion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikkel Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Well Tywin's tactic at the Red Fork of presenting a weak flank with Tyrion and his clansmen only to have an ambush waiting behind it is something Robert could potentially stumble into. His style seems to be more of a thinker than a fighter so to say. Really I think Tywin's military reputation came mainly from him so decisively crushing the Reyne-Tarbeck rebellion. I would agree with that. Though I'm not convinced it is as great a feat, militarily speaking, as it's made out to be. I think it's mainly the decision to not just defeat and humble them, but to eradicate their houses root and stem that gains him his reputation. The Red Fork might have been a decent example of Tywin's organizational skills, if it hadn't been for the fact that the whole thing is a feint, so really it's (mostly) a case of Tywin underestimating and consequently being outmaneuvered by Robb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Lannister Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 I would agree with that. Though I'm not convinced it is as great a feat, militarily speaking, as it's made out to be. I think it's mainly the decision to not just defeat and humble them, but to eradicate their houses root and stem that gains him his reputation. The Red Fork might have been a decent example of Tywin's organizational skills, if it hadn't been for the fact that the whole thing is a feint, so really it's (mostly) a case of Tywin underestimating and consequently being outmaneuvered by Robb. Tywin was all about reputation. Along with the rebellion, look at his sack of King's Landing. He wanted people to fear going up against the Lannister armies and thus more likely to make a mistake or avoid fighting at all. Sun Tzu said "supreme excellence consists of breaking the enemy's will without fighting." I think Tywin understood that. Even with Robb's plot powered military genius, Tywin did win more often than not. Certainly when it matters. I'd say Tywin's biggest strength as a military commander came from his understanding that politics and warfare went hand in hand and influenced each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikkel Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 I'd say Tywin's biggest strength as a military commander came from his understanding that politics and warfare went hand in hand and influenced each other. Good point. Tywin certainly had this lesson down. edit: but this thread isn't about him, sorry for the derail, OP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithras Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Jon Arryn had told them that a commander needs a good battlefield voice, and Robert had proved the truth of that on the Trident. He used that voice now. “STOP THIS MADNESS,” he boomed, “IN THE NAME OF YOUR KING!” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Arthur Hightower Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 The problem with the Battle of the Blackwater, from both a military and story perspective is the the actions of the 2 supposed competing commanders: Tyrion and Stannis, barely mattered at all. There really isn't anything Stannis could have done to stop his defeat, even if he had spotted the enemy host a day before and deployed to meet them, he still would have been outnumbered 3:1 or more, and 1/2 of his army owed fealty to a lord fighting on the other side. Even if he takes the capital, he loses, because he is still surrounded by an army multiple times the size of his own, and has no prospects of supplying the city in the long term. Robert was never in a situation close to that, except maybe at the Stoney Sept, where there was an allied army close enough to save him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Arthur Hightower Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Tywin was all about reputation. Along with the rebellion, look at his sack of King's Landing. He wanted people to fear going up against the Lannister armies and thus more likely to make a mistake or avoid fighting at all. Sun Tzu said "supreme excellence consists of breaking the enemy's will without fighting." I think Tywin understood that. Even with Robb's plot powered military genius, Tywin did win more often than not. Certainly when it matters. I'd say Tywin's biggest strength as a military commander came from his understanding that politics and warfare went hand in hand and influenced each other. Excellent point, Tywin's strength really was the fear that he inspired, after all when the Golden Company was considering invading westeros, Tristan Rivers doesn't say: "its safe to invade now, the royal fleet is burned/Stannis is attained and at the wall/the West/Riverlands/north has lost much of its military strength et cetera" he states "the risk is not what it was now that Tywin Lannister is dead". Whatever else he was, Tywin was a PR genius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkbringer Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 To be fair, Stannis screwed up monumentally at the Blackwater too. Leaving the Tyrells at his flank and not accounting for the location of Tywin's force were both huge errors. Though to be fair, our history is full of tragic defeats in pursuit of that decisive victory that will end the war. Whatever Robert's faults were, I don't think he ever made a mistake like that.He would have lost it all at the battle of the bells if the others hadn't saved his foolhardy arse. But his three victories in a day was top notch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Stannis' greatest assets are his versatility; attack, defend, naval...and his discipline.His weaknesses are his repetition of the same fundamental blunder and his allowing personal pride too supersede military priorities.Robert doesn't have demonstrated weaknesses, but we can infer a couple; generals who lead from the front are trading off control & command for inspiration. Additionally, while not a demonstrated weakness, he also has never shown an ability to defend a position, seemingly always on the offensive.His strengths are aggression, inspiration and initiative. Robert may be a great commander...not certain, as all his battles are of the same ilk, but it's a definite possibility. Stannis has made mistakes a great commander simply does not make, but his all around resume is extremely impressive and puts him in the 'very good/solid' range imo. Real life comparisons: Robert: William the Conqueror, Edward IV, Patton, the Lionheart, Date Masamune.Stannis: Mark Antony, George Washington, Antipater, Wellington, Robert Curthose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee-Sensei Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 He would have lost it all at the battle of the bells if the others hadn't saved his foolhardy arse. But his three victories in a day was top notch. Do we even know enough about that battle to call him foolhardy for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyLittleFinger Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Do we even know enough about that battle to call him foolhardy for it? How dare he be severely wounded from fighting on the front lines! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkdude103 Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 I think the IT would win the tyrells not being able to fully join the war is probably why aerys lost the reach numvers are just to many it would have overwhelmed robert at the trident Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Lannister Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Do we even know enough about that battle to call him foolhardy for it? I think the more foolhardy thing during that battle was Jon Connington not looking in the brothel right away. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laughing Storm Reborn Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Robert sometimes is perceived as stupid because well he´s a fat drunk when the books begin, but a fat drunk with a military IQ over 9000...The thing is, Stannis ALSO has the same military IQ with different specialities...In my opinion both have the same chances, it depends if the battle requires Robert´s quicker and deadlier offense or Stannis pragmatic approach...But let´s not forget the numbers, you can be Napoleon himself but against numbers (russia) every genious is in trouble, unless you have war tech and tactics advantage like alexander the great vs the persians Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laughing Storm Reborn Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 The battle of the bells began as a proper battle only after ned´s army arrived... it´s not called a battle if one commander is hidding wounded with his troops resting and the other is circling the city with a numerous and fresh army... it was a siege with a finding mission (we don´t call it the battle of storm´s end), a proper battle requires both armies to be in battle mode and when that happened Robert (still wounded) himself went after Jon Con (famous warrior with notable feats) and almost killed him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.