If Drogo Invaded Westeros *long*

[Leif]

Westeros would just do to them what Athens did to Sparta.

[Samwell Gamgi]

He'd challenge Tommen to a duel to first blood but end up mortally wounding him, saying "If he dies, he dies." This would anger Myrcella into traveling to his home turf and challenging him to another duel to end the Cold War. Before the epic contest begins, he stares down the young, bold challenger and says "I must break you."

Oh you said Drogo no Drago. Sorry, I'm going to need some time on this.

[Pod The Impaler]

This thread again, huh?

Okay, I'll say what I said before.

If a Targaryen lands in Westeros with a great mass of Dothraki cavalry, Dorne pitches in with all the infantry and knights they can muster. The combined force breaks out into the Reach from the Dornish Marches, gathering up certain lords of the Reach along the way, and dominating the open spaces. Perhaps they get the Hightower or Redwyne fleets on their side. They also slowly prepare for laying siege, but don't try to take on any major fortress cities yet (so no Storm's End, no Casterly Rock, no King's Landing). Spies sow dissent in the capitol and other major strongholds. Eventually, the Iron Throne cannot just let them roam about controlling some territory and despoiling others. If the Iron Throne gives open battle, they will probably lose, not because of the Dothraki alone, but because what capabilities the Dothraki / Targaryen allies also bring in to the mix. So overall, if the Iron Throne wanted to battle them, they would have to either smash their forces the moment they make landfall, and/or make certain they get no new supporters once they land. Ironically, the best defense might be a good offense.

(Or if you asked Littlefinger, he'd say send the Mountain against Khal Drogo in personal combat, and while they battle, have archers rain poisoned arrows on them both. Nightsoil can be the Freys contribution.)

[Sir Tan Lee]

The Free Cities did not deploy Heavy Cavalry in the way that Westeros does.

I think that the Dothraki would definitely cause havoc, but only because Westeros was disunited. An alliance--perhaps even the Tyrell and Lannister alliance--of major Houses that yielded 15000+ heavy cavalry would decimate them.

People often compare the Dothraki to the Mongols, but the Mongols used a composite longbow that was actually incredibly advanced. The Dothraki's bow technology lags behind Westeros'.

Decimate means to kill one in ten in which case I agree.

On the bow part your just wrong. Mongols use Recurve bows and so do the Dothraki. Recurve bows can be smaller and have more power then Longbows, this is why they are so much better on horseback. As for heavy cavalry, their armor would slow their horses down significantly. Dothraki archers would be able to keep the heavy cavalry at a good distance. Also Dothraki are said to be substantially better at riding horses then Westerosi Knights are so better maneuverability and communication with their horses makes a difference..

[longlivestannis96]

Tbh I don't think anyone besides dorne would like the dothraki. Their culture is completely opposite to westerosi. They also don't know how to break into castles. And they're screwed when winter comes. And just imagine 100,000 people making the journey across the narrow sea.. How do u feed that many people?

[cealicu_ca]

The Free Cities did not deploy Heavy Cavalry in the way that Westeros does.

I think that the Dothraki would definitely cause havoc, but only because Westeros was disunited. An alliance--perhaps even the Tyrell and Lannister alliance--of major Houses that yielded 15000+ heavy cavalry would decimate them.

People often compare the Dothraki to the Mongols, but the Mongols used a composite longbow that was actually incredibly advanced. The Dothraki's bow technology lags behind Westeros'.

It was more the tactic of the Mongols that gave results. Yes, the technology of the bow helped but they did not need good range.

They used to do quick attacks with archer cavalry, retreat, attack again. Meanwhile, the slow and encumbered formations of enemy infantry was pinned down. Also, the mongols, being masters of hit-and-run, were a lot less vulnerable to counter-attack (even by enemy cavalry).

As for their preferred weapon - it closely resembles the "Sica" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sica) or the Falx (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falx) which was deadly in close combat. It was especially very efficient against shield wielders as it could pierce the shield. Because it was curved it allowed the attacker to bypass most of the shield's protection (you could reach the breast, neck, head, limbs etc.) even if the defender thought they were protected.

"The distinctive shape was designed to get around the sides of an opponent's shield, and stab or slash them in the back. Since the thraex gladiator's usual opponent was theScutum (large shield) carrying murmillo gladiator, such a weapon as the sica was necessary to make the duel more even and exciting."

The one thing that i believe would be the undoing of the Dothraki would be discipline. Standard armies, while they lack in mobility and... spontaneity they make up for discipline. Discipline usually wins battles (take a look at Hastings) especially in medieval times when you had masses of people going face-to-face against each other.

Also, as pointed in the books by Jorah, if i remember correctly, the Dothraki would have a very hard time going against the fortifications (as did the Mongols) because they lacked the patience and discipline to mount an effective siege (as well as the know-how to build siege weapons).

In my home country we have a lot of fortified monasteries that endured eastern invasions. Yes, people left on the open field were doomed, but those that managed to get behind the walls (provided they were strong and high) were relatively safe. The hordes would come and pillage the fields and burn the villages, but the population had refuge in those fortifications. And don't think about western castles... No, most of the fortifications were 10-15 feet high and maybe 3-6 feet deep. No moats, no trenches... But it was more than enough against an army that didn't have supplies (they were "supplying" from the villages and fields in the plains), nor siege weapons. They would generally speaking break like waves against the rocks.

Also, another important factor was that all the nomad armies required mostly plain. They could not fight efficiently in mountainous terrain (this is another reason why those fortified monasteries where in hilly or even mountainous terrains) in large enough numbers.

One last thing: the very structure of a nomad army means that even if they "conquer" some land, they will not have a seat of power. So even if by some miracle they would have been able to submit the seven kingdoms, they could not hope to keep them.

Conclusion:

The Dothraki would have mostly destroyed any field armies of the seven kingdoms. They have the tactics and the weapons (don't dismiss them). Armored knights represented a very small portion of the armies (500 out of 50.000 men for example, a mere 1%) and because of their armors, while fierce when meeting the enemy, the tactics of the nomadic armies means that they will rarely be efficient when used against hit-and-run tactics.

They (Dothraki) would however be helpless against fortifications and their upbringing and culture would work against that too. Even if somehow they would have been able to build siege weapons, they would not have the discipline and patience for such type or warfare.

Lastly, even if the seven Kingdoms were defeated into submission the Dothraki horde would not be able to hold them, not really.

[Morienthar]

The Dothraki aren't mongols god dammit!!!

The Dothraki have no armor,The Mongols did have armor,the Dothraki don't have heavy cavalry or infantry the Mongols did,The Dothraki are just unarmored horse archers,The Westerosi Heavy cavalry would have united under Bob and thrown them back into the sea if they were lucky and if they still fought back there would be a Dothraki genocide.

[Jordouche]

If Westeros knew of this attack before it started... The Dothraki wouldn't even reach Westeros. They are petrified of the sea... The Ironborn alone would probably take them out.

[cealicu_ca]

The Dothraki aren't mongols god dammit!!!

The Dothraki have no armor,The Mongols did have armor,the Dothraki don't have heavy cavalry or infantry the Mongols did,The Dothraki are just unarmored horse archers,The Westerosi Heavy cavalry would have united under Bob and thrown them back into the sea if they were lucky and if they still fought back there would be a Dothraki genocide.

Of course they are not Mongols. But they do have strong similarities - both in the use of archer cavalry and (presumably) the tactics that go hand in hand with that type of military unit: hit and run, harassment etc.

Also, the Heavy Cavalry is immobile. The Heavy Cavalry would be of little use against mobile and faster Archer Cavalry. True, they would destroy enemy infantry lines. But the Dothraki don't have infantry. The main body of the Dothraky khalasar is comprised of horseback fighters.

[The-Paul-Arron00]

Ned would have thrown him back into the sea

[Morienthar]

Of course they are not Mongols. But they do have strong similarities - both in the use of archer cavalry and (presumably) the tactics that go hand in hand with that type of military unit: hit and run, harassment etc.

There are few reasons why the mongols succeeded,they were of course good at what they did and had those hit and run attacks you mention,But you don't defeat an enemy in their homeland with hit and run tactics,that works for invasions and when you know the terrain very well.

The Mongols could fight open battles head on and come out on top,The reason for this is they could suffer a few blows with a sword due to their armor and because they had infantry to support their cavalry which contained even Heavy cavalry,The Dothraki don't have any of this,In open battles the Dothraki would be massacred the last time they faced a trained and well equipped army they lost their hair.If the Unsullied could defeat them easily what do you think will happen when they go up against plate armor and heavy cavalry.

The Arakh is utterly useless against any kind of armor Plate or Mail the only thing it could probably cut through is leather.

[Jon Wolfwalker]

The Dothraki aren't mongols god dammit!!!

The Dothraki have no armor,The Mongols did have armor,the Dothraki don't have heavy cavalry or infantry the Mongols did,The Dothraki are just unarmored horse archers,The Westerosi Heavy cavalry would have united under Bob and thrown them back into the sea if they were lucky and if they still fought back there would be a Dothraki genocide.

And yet there is a recent thread where George says they are the equivalent of Mongols in his eye.

40,000 mounted men with plenty of reserves vs. a Westorosi culture which is 1 in 10 for the most part bodes ill. The sheer number give them the advantage.

[Sorrow]

Let's take a look at the Battle of Qohor:

50,000 Dothraki, at least half of them warriors, were led by horse lord khal Temmo vs 3,000 Unsullied.

In their contempt for infantry, the Dothraki launched a direct frontal assault, in an attempt to simply ride down the heavy infantry. Eighteen times they charged and attacked the Unsullied ranks and thrice their archers wheeled past raining arrows on the Three Thousand, each time failing to break through. Finally the Dothraki halted their attacks after the Khal, his bloodriders and sons had been killed. Their losses were staggering: 12.000 dead. Only 600 Unsullied remained, but the victory was theirs nonetheless.

I think if the Dothraki faced the heavy-armored Westerosi they would stand no chance. They won't be able to cope with the terrain and they will be massacred by the well-disciplined knights and soldiers.

[cealicu_ca]

There are few reasons why the mongols succeeded,they were of course good at what they did and had those hit and run attacks you mention,But you don't defeat an enemy in their homeland with hit and run tactics,that works for invasions and when you know the terrain very well.

The Mongols could fight open battles head on and come out on top,The reason for this is they could suffer a few blows with a sword due to their armor and because they had infantry to support their cavalry which contained even Heavy cavalry,The Dothraki don't have any of this,In open battles the Dothraki would be massacred the last time they faced a trained and well equipped army they lost their hair.If the Unsullied could defeat them easily what do you think will happen when they go up against plate armor and heavy cavalry.

The Arakh is utterly useless against any kind of armor Plate or Mail the only thing it could probably cut through is leather.

:-) The reason the Mongols had infantry was that they did not have enough horses. Cavalry is superior to infantry in almost every way. Melee cavalry benefits from the speed and strength of the horse itself thus making any blows that much more devastating. Archer cavalry, while not having the range of standard pedestrian archers, make up in mobility. This is a fantasy world where the Dothraki somehow manage to have over 40.000 horses (plus a lot more extra for reserves and for sustenance). Go up against that many well-trained, fierce fighters, on horseback, and any army that would rely on infantry is dead. The infantry must stand still in order to efficiently defend against Cavalry, so this means that even if the infantry is equipped to fight Cavalry, if you only have Cavalry then you can just go around them (as they have to stand still) or use Archer Cavalry to pick at them slowly. If and when the infantry moves to attack they become vulnerable to melee cavalry charges.

As i've said, the Dothraki would have used the open field. Knowing the terrain is something you either already do (living on it) or.. scout. Plains would give a major advantage to the horseback army of the Dothraki. Again - mobility. The small numbers of Heavy Cavalry of any opposing army would be useless, simply because 1) they would be in insufficient number 2) they would be encumbered by the heavy armor and thus less mobile. you can't kill something you can't catch.

Also, the part where you say that the Arakh is useless... i know that Jorah said that but even him is (at least partially) wrong. The Arakh is as good as the broadsword, if not better. Also, Jorah's description of what the broadsword can do is not really accurate. Broadswords used for piercing? Maybe, but to a minimal effect. It's hard to use something as long as the broadsword for piercing, even more so against Plate armor (Plate armor will simply deflect it away).

Against Mail armor - the broadsword is inferior to the Arakh. Being a curved weapon the wielder can easily switch the angle and turn it from a slashing/cutting weapon to a piercing weapon which, because of the curvature, would be even more devastating. Mail armor is very vulnerable to piercing.

Against Plate armor both weapons would be as good (or as bad), probably the Broadsword having a bit of lead (because of it's weight) simply because Plate armor offers great protection against both piercing and slashing. However, Plate mail is vulnerable to bludgeoning. This is because the force of the hit is translated into the body, so it doesn't need to destroy the armor, it will break bones, cause internal hemorrhage and such. So Jorah is right that the broadsword would have the lead against Heavy Plate armor, but for the wrong reasons and greatly exaggerated.

One more thing. The average Dothraki warrior would be vastly superior, in terms of fighting skills and endurance to the average Westerosi fighter. All the Dothraki are good fighters, while most of the troops in Westeros are made out of simple folk, many of them not having held a sword/pike/axe ever in their life.

In the end it's not about the weapons. You could destroy a cavalry charge with heavy wooden pikes if you like (history has some such examples).

It's all about the mobility and tactics of the Dothraki vs. the discipline (and walls) of the Westerosi.

In an open field battle the Dothraki would massacre any Westerosi army, even simply because of the sheer number of Cavalry, each of them being a superior fighter (vs. armies made out of 10-15% trained fighters and 90-85% simple folk). But after that - the Dothraki could only pillage. They are not built for siege. And yes, there's lots of logistical reasons why an invasion of Westeros by the Dothraki would be next to impossible.

[cealicu_ca]

Let's take a look at the Battle of Qohor:

50,000 Dothraki, at least half of them warriors, were led by horse lord khal Temmo vs 3,000 Unsullied.

In their contempt for infantry, the Dothraki launched a direct frontal assault, in an attempt to simply ride down the heavy infantry. Eighteen times they charged and attacked the Unsullied ranks and thrice their archers wheeled past raining arrows on the Three Thousand, each time failing to break through. Finally the Dothraki halted their attacks after the Khal, his bloodriders and sons had been killed. Their losses were staggering: 12.000 dead. Only 600 Unsullied remained, but the victory was theirs nonetheless.

I think if the Dothraki faced the heavy-armored Westerosi they would stand no chance. They won't be able to cope with the terrain and they will be massacred by the well-disciplined knights and soldiers.

"In their contempt for infantry, the Dothraki launched a direct frontal assault" - this is why they lost. Add discipline to that too. But they lost on their own mistake, not because the Unsullied are superior. They lost because of not employing the right tactic. Cavalry bests infantry always. If infantry is equipped to deal with cavalry then it means that the infantry unit is immobile (because they can only deal with cavalry by using long pointy spikes lol) so you can either wait for them to move or pick at them with your archers. And when they move - bam! Melee cavalry charge. Done. But if instead you insist on charging at them while they are well equipped (the weapon of choice for the Unsullied is the spear) then you WILL sustain heavy losses.

[Sorrow]

"In their contempt for infantry, the Dothraki launched a direct frontal assault" - this is why they lost. Add discipline to that too. But they lost on their own mistake, not because the Unsullied are superior. They lost because of not employing the right tactic. Cavalry bests infantry always. If infantry is equipped to deal with cavalry then it means that the infantry unit is immobile (because they can only deal with cavalry by using long pointy spikes lol) so you can either wait for them to move or pick at them with your archers. And when they move - bam! Melee cavalry charge. Done. But if instead you insist on charging at them while they are well equipped (the weapon of choice for the Unsullied is the spear) then you WILL sustain heavy losses.

What makes you think the Dothraki won't make the same mistake in Westeros? As far as I know the Dothraki are not renowned for their intelligence or knowledge of how to wage war strategically correctly.

[cealicu_ca]

What makes you think the Dothraki won't make the same mistake in Westeros? As far as I know the Dothraki are not renowned for their intelligence or knowledge of how to wage war strategically correctly.

Daenerys. Jorah. :-)

Alsom don't mistake a simpler culture with lack of intelligence. They made a mistake not because they were stupid, but because they were too proud. Well, you could say that that is stupid :-))

[Sorrow]

Daenerys. Jorah. :-)

Alsom don't mistake a simpler culture with lack of intelligence. They made a mistake not because they were stupid, but because they were too proud.

At the time of the invasion Daenerys would still be a girl unfamiliar with military tactics. Jorah does know the advantages and disadvantages of the knights of Westeros, however he is the one who retells the Battle of Qohor, saying that 3,000 Unsullied would crush 50,000 Dothraki. Let's not forget that the lords and commanders of Westeros are far smarter than Daenerys and Jorah combined. Take Tyrion for example and his master plan with the chain and the wildfire at Blackwater Bay. Him or Tywin Lannister or any other smart man would surely think of some clever tactic that would take the Dothraki by surprise. The Westeros lords have the intellectual advantage over the hordes of Dothraki. We have no evidence to the contrary - the nomads never used any smart strategies rather than kill and pillage. Combined with their forces who can match the Dothraki by sheer number they can deal with the threat. War is not always about who can field more people.

[cealicu_ca]

At the time of the invasion Daenerys would still be a girl unfamiliar with military tactics. Jorah does know the advantages and disadvantages of the knights of Westeros, however he is the one who retells the Battle of Qohor, saying that 3,000 Unsullied would crush 50,000 Dothraki. Let's not forget that the lords and commanders of Westeros are far smarter than Daenerys and Jorah combined. Take Tyrion for example and his master plan with the chain and the wildfire at Blackwater Bay. Him or Tywin Lannister or any other smart man would surely think of some clever tactic that would take the Dothraki by surprise. The Westeros lords have the intellectual advantage over the hordes of Dothraki. We have no evidence to the contrary - the nomads never used any smart strategies rather than kill and pillage. Combined with their forces who can match the Dothraki by sheer number they can deal with the threat. War is not always about who can field more people.

Oh well, we're talking "what if" about "what if" from a fantasy book lol. Yes, what you say is true. But if you apply what you say than anything else goes mute. Without a good leader (or better yet, as you describe, a mindless horde).

So we must agree on some common things: like both armies having good leadership :)

[Morienthar]

:-) The reason the Mongols had infantry was that they did not have enough horses. Cavalry is superior to infantry in almost every way. Melee cavalry benefits from the speed and strength of the horse itself thus making any blows that much more devastating. Archer cavalry, while not having the range of standard pedestrian archers, make up in mobility. This is a fantasy world where the Dothraki somehow manage to have over 40.000 horses (plus a lot more extra for reserves and for sustenance). Go up against that many well-trained, fierce fighters, on horseback, and any army that would rely on infantry is dead. The infantry must stand still in order to efficiently defend against Cavalry, so this means that even if the infantry is equipped to fight Cavalry, if you only have Cavalry then you can just go around them (as they have to stand still) or use Archer Cavalry to pick at them slowly. If and when the infantry moves to attack they become vulnerable to melee cavalry charges.

As i've said, the Dothraki would have used the open field. Knowing the terrain is something you either already do (living on it) or.. scout. Plains would give a major advantage to the horseback army of the Dothraki. Again - mobility. The small numbers of Heavy Cavalry of any opposing army would be useless, simply because 1) they would be in insufficient number 2) they would be encumbered by the heavy armor and thus less mobile. you can't kill something you can't catch.

Also, the part where you say that the Arakh is useless... i know that Jorah said that but even him is (at least partially) wrong. The Arakh is as good as the broadsword, if not better. Also, Jorah's description of what the broadsword can do is not really accurate. Broadswords used for piercing? Maybe, but to a minimal effect. It's hard to use something as long as the broadsword for piercing, even more so against Plate armor (Plate armor will simply deflect it away).

Against Mail armor - the broadsword is inferior to the Arakh. Being a curved weapon the wielder can easily switch the angle and turn it from a slashing/cutting weapon to a piercing weapon which, because of the curvature, would be even more devastating. Mail armor is very vulnerable to piercing.

Against Plate armor both weapons would be as good (or as bad), probably the Broadsword having a bit of lead (because of it's weight) simply because Plate armor offers great protection against both piercing and slashing. However, Plate mail is vulnerable to bludgeoning. This is because the force of the hit is translated into the body, so it doesn't need to destroy the armor, it will break bones, cause internal hemorrhage and such. So Jorah is right that the broadsword would have the lead against Heavy Plate armor, but for the wrong reasons and greatly exaggerated.

One more thing. The average Dothraki warrior would be vastly superior, in terms of fighting skills and endurance to the average Westerosi fighter. All the Dothraki are good fighters, while most of the troops in Westeros are made out of simple folk, many of them not having held a sword/pike/axe ever in their life.

In the end it's not about the weapons. You could destroy a cavalry charge with heavy wooden pikes if you like (history has some such examples).

It's all about the mobility and tactics of the Dothraki vs. the discipline (and walls) of the Westerosi.

In an open field battle the Dothraki would massacre any Westerosi army, even simply because of the sheer number of Cavalry, each of them being a superior fighter (vs. armies made out of 10-15% trained fighters and 90-85% simple folk). But after that - the Dothraki could only pillage. They are not built for siege. And yes, there's lots of logistical reasons why an invasion of Westeros by the Dothraki would be next to impossible.

Correction Heavy cavalry is superior to infantry when used well.

Horses what ever you have seen in movies cant mow down people and kill them with a single hit.

Arrows especially broad heads don't pierce mail and I'm sure people who don't use armor don't have Bodkin Tips.

The Jorah Rhakaro scene was show only and yes Jorah is wrong that Swords can be used effectively against mail,But he isn't wrong in regards to the arakhs inability to slash open Mail or plate.

Mail is designed to stop slashing.

There is just no real reason to believe the Dothraki are superior to Westrosi knights and Men at Arms.

and if you think that Westrosi armies are farmers with pitch forks you are sadly mistaken.

Read this once...http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/91171-come-into-my-castle-the-ways-of-warfare-in-westeros/

Daenerys. Jorah. :-)

Alsom don't mistake a simpler culture with lack of intelligence. They made a mistake not because they were stupid, but because they were too proud. Well, you could say that that is stupid :-))

Dany was a Kid.(She still is but that's another thing)

And do you really think Drogo would have listened to the Andal.

even if he did Westeros has Ned,Tywin,Bobert,Randyll,Stannis...These guys on a battlefield could think circles around Jorah.

So we must agree on some common things: like both armies having good leadership :)

But they didn't at the time Drogo was planning his invasion did they??

The maximum they would have gotten is a few thousand spears from dorne but the Tyrells would jump at the opportunity to stamp them down.