• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Unhit

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  1. I agree, it was definitely fun to watch. I absolutely didn't intend to take away from that (apologies if I did)
  2. Reach (assuming the same weapon, obviously) is limited by the fighter's arm length, whether on horseback or on foot, and on horseback you cannot move as well, so if anything your reach is likely to by worse. Same with speed (at least indirectly due to hampered movement)
  3. That is, unfortunately, a widespread but major misunderstanding. I can't go into all the details now, but let me just point out that there is a reason that (heavy) cavalry went out of fashion as pikemen took over (very simplified). And where heavy cavalry cannot charge into troops in orderly formation, light cavalry such as the dothraik has no way of doing that to any effect. A second point is that even in 1v1 combat, it is arguable whether the horserider is at an advantage, especially once the charge is done and you are mostly circling around a particular spot. The person on foot is much more mobile in their movements. Exactly!
  4. Good point about the additional characters, budget etc. - but when I saw the scene on my rewatch, Asshai came to my mind quite clearly. It might not be fully irrelevant to the main story, because Jorah might also learn stuff about the old legends etc. there. But yeah, probably not worth the effort, from a series-production point of view. Oldtown seems more likely there.
  5. I agree with those pointing out the rather unusual (well, ridiculous) fact that apparently, the forestless Iron Islands will provide enough wood to build a new fleet. In an instant. To play a role in this season, most likely. However, equally weird is the fact - very much related, but not pointed out so far, at least in this very context - that in order to take the fleet with her, Yara needs men. They didn't vote for her at the kingsmoot because they probably are simple soldiers and sailors who have no vote. But still. Now the fleet is gone with all the soldiers and sailors. Even if Euron gets a new fleet in two days, where would he take the people to man them from? But at least it's consistent with the books in the sense that in the books, the economy/manpower/etc. of the Iron Islands has always been massively deus ex machina too Edit - because it's also ontopic: really liked Theon.
  6. That's a really good point. It's not just about the weirdness of how this one scene came about and played out in the first place - but about the massively volatile long-term prospects, so to speak, LF has navigated himself into.
  7. Yeah, that was the one scene I really didn't like in this otherwise very good episode. Imo, it didn't make sense for multiple reasons. 1. As you said, where would they intercept? All the paths lead through the Vale. So if LF really wants to accuse Royce, he has to imply that Royce was in line with the Boltons landing in the Vale and operating within the Vale. I find it excessively hard to believe that someone you label a traitor to such a degree is one you could reasonably claim to trust afterwards, without raising suspicion from others. 2. Why threaten Royce in order to get him to lead the army? I was always under the impression that Royce would be in favour of entering the war anyway. He might have doubts about the side to choose (maybe) - but LF could still use his grip over Robyn Arryn to "enforce" the right direction then. But then again, Royce should be aware that Sansa is a traitor/accused of regicide by the ruling house (Lannister), so the very fact that he at least implicitly consents to hiding her from them means that he wouldn't join on the Lannister side. Of course, if LF had tried to enter the war "normally" without threatening Royce, he would have had to make up another story how Sansa got North. And this is probably the crux of the whole issue: what would be a more credible story that would not totally discredit LF? So maybe that's why he had to go for this - still highly dubious and, to me unconvincing - approach. He shouldn't have sent Sansa North like that in the first place. Pretty sure he could've gotten Robyn to March there either, to take back Sansa's homeland, blahblah, then they can marry and rule it together....and oh noes, suddenly Robyn died.
  8. On topic: good points raised here. I personally have no clear idea of how the Dothraki will feature in the end game. But then again, no clear clue about the end game either. But I'm very curious to see and find out after being pleasantly surprised by the last episode.
  9. No clue about the absolute strengths, and I doubt it will be made explicit in the show. I expect Jon to have the Mormonts behind him, and I do expect him to join with the Manderlys, who I see as openly opposing the Boltons now, with the Umbers turning cloak during the battle (I've argued in more detail why I think this is plausible - albeit risky - in the Umbers thread in this subforum). So it will be: Jon/Wildlings + Mormont + Manderly vs. Boltons + Karstarks + Umbers turning into Jon/Wildlings + Mormont + Manderly + Umber vs. Boltons + Karstarks and then a sound victory for Jon's side greatly outnumbering the other. Whether and how the Vale features into this - no clue. I guess we may know more next week. Yes, Littlefinger was seen in a snowy forest in the Riverlands - but that could be the first signs of Winter there, could it not?
  10. I agree with those saying it was Bran's version of the story. Ned told him he would've died if not for Howland. Little kid Bran made a heroic story out of it, remembering that detail, but imagining that his dad fought valiantly nonetheless. He probably imagined a 1v1, somehow Howland Reed was also there, but for the kid Bran who knows the story of the greatest swordsman ever Dayne, the story's all about his father defeating him in single combat. It's all in Bran's head. And who could blame him? In my opinion, therefore, what the show showed is how it went down "in the books" (if we had more than a dream sequence) as well, at least similarly (personally, I somehow always had the image of Howland tossing a net over Dayne to demobilize him and buy Ned time to get up, dunno why ). Ned's not proud of it, and that's why he never made a fuzz of the defeat. This isn't butchering Ned or anything. It had been if they had had Sean Bean walk about KL in S1, telling Jaime "I dealt with Dayne, I can deal with you" or similar. He never did.
  11. I didn't like the fact that he was dualwielding too much. But I have to say that given that, I found his fighting style, especially his attacks, appropriate and suitable, ultimately making the scene/dualwielding quite convincing nonetheless (at least not a 100% stretch on suspension of disbelief): if I remember correctly (but I only watched it once so far), every Stark man slain by Dayne received a rather swift, but highly effective cut - not a full-strength blow - to vulnerable parts of their bodies, and that was well in line with the fact that Dayne was wielding two swords and couldn't possibly have used full power on blows all the time. Made me think/reminded me of the witcher Geralt of Rivia, especially how he fights (respectively the descriptions there) in Sapkowski's books: the sword was really used to cut and slice, not to hack. In that respect, too, Dayne's fighting style stood out from many other people in the show, I think.
  12. I am also in the "the Umbers are actually plotting against the Boltons" camp. Why give up Rickon? To not end up an oathbreaker, and because it DOES have advantages (see below). It's a huge risk. But it is necessary to get this close to Ramsay. I suppose the Manderlys may then turn out to be the only house "openly" supporting the Starks, i.e. siding with Jon in the likely battle of the bastards. Once again, for this, it also makes sense to bring Rickon to the Boltons first, if the Umbers actually support the Starks: have news get to the Manderlys that the last remaining stark heir has been found - so Manderly moves out with his army in an attempt to safe him. Battle starts with Ramsay, Karstarks and Umbers on the one side, Jon, Wildlings and Manderly (plus some others like Mormont, if that's what Davos was doing there) on the other. Ramsay might feel somewhat safe. Umbers turn on him. Ramsay loses. So, once again: of course it is insanely risky to put Rickon there. But if the above mentioned is their plan, I don't think there's any way around it to make it seem credible (that the Umbers support Ramsay while, in fact, they will betray him). The Umbers and Manderlys may have considered going openly against Ramsay from the start, but, who knows, maybe for fear of 20 good men () may have decided that this was the safer way to ensure that the battle is actually won. After all, if you have the heir but lose the battle, the heir is definitely done for. Of course if you win the battle but lose the heir over it, that's not any better. All I'm saying is that for the loyal Northern lords, there IS a trade-off, you lose some, but you win some: putting Rickon at risk significantly increases the chances of winning the battle by unexpected turncloaks. It's definitely not a "lose-lose" situation.