Bernie Mac

Members
  • Content count

    271
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Bernie Mac

  • Rank
    Hedge Knight

Recent Profile Visitors

  1. No, he was in command of the Winterfell forces, Both Rodrik, Luwin and Bran point out the inexperience Robb chose to leave behind to defend his capital. Tywin knows the importance of the Rock and leaves it well defended, the young Robert knew the importance of Storm's End and it survives against the Tyrells. When Robb and his fool friend Theon decided to go to war they stripped the Stark's most valuable asset of all its experienced men. Robb the general made that choice and it backfired. Due to mismanagement of his resources. he fucked over the Karstarks and Freys making their choice to betray him pretty easy while leaving an 10k army with no clear objectives for 6 months is always going to cause problems. This is command 101, basic failings that Robb himself caused. He really was not. An incredible captain, brigadier, colonel. Small objectives he was good at, the larger scale of war he was bad at, he had little input and communication with the majority of his army. He instead took the best parts of his military, went off on adventures and expected everyone else to simply hold the line. A general plays Chess, Robb was playing checkers. He was great at what he was doing He was though. He was the North's commander, not just the North's cavalrry leader. I hate to be rude because it so good to see you commenting in a thread where you are not simply saying that the author did not write this so lets not discuss it, but people don't seem to know that a General has more responsibilities than only the men nearest him. Robb gave all his subordinates orders, he is their general. If they lose then he loses. It is that simple. OP is very clear that this is about Robb the General. When Robb beat Jaime and Stafford that counted as defeats for Tywin. Something many Robb fans happily accept but when it comes to him taking responsibility for the losses of some of his subordinates then the list of excuses comes out. Sure. That was a great move. Battle of the Camps is hands down one of the greatest wins in the series. He brought himself down through bad command. His weakness as a commander meant poor communication, ineffectual subordinates and mass mutiny against him. You know bad commanders, they tend to be betrayed by their own men. It is no coincidence that this happened to Robb. In fact one final point, allowing his men to drink themselves silly at he Red Wedding despite making this statement to his mother Robb looked more amused than afraid. "I have an army to protect me, Mother, I don't need to trust in bread and salt. But if it pleases Lord Walder to serve me stewed crow smothered in maggots, I'll eat it and ask for a second bowl." The fact that all of Robb's victories came because he surprised the enemy, the fact that Tywin had only recently surprised an unexpected Stannis, the fact that he knows the Freys were angry and yet he still allows his men to do this. It is just sloppy as fuck for any general. Are you really saying that no one in this forum has proclaimed Robb as the greatest military commander?? I will happily accept a wager on this with the proceeds going to a charity of my or your choice as it will be quite easy for me to find more than one example on this forum of someone making that claim. To the other Generals in the series. His performance than Tywin, Stannis and, on the war of the Five Kings alone, Balon. Renly was unlucy but did not do enough to be considered either good or bad. Obviously Robert, in my opinion, is the greatest we have seen. Aerys and Rhaegar (which ever was in command of that clusterfuck) the worst. In comparison with the other generals in the series Robb was not that great. of course responding to this OP it would help if everyone was aware of what the responsibilities of a General was. And you did not make good enough points. War is not a sport, there are not separate divisions and categorises for Generals by age. Or, you know, faction commanders to faction commanders. Both Tywin and Robb were the military generals of their faction. As commanders they can be compared. He lost it on his command, on the various points I have made And I hate to break this to you, but War generalship involves politics. Yes, he had reasons for making the stupid decisions he did as the General of the North. It does not make those decisions any less stupid. What about all the military mistakes I pointed out? Just going to ignore them? Yes they were. If a general pisses off his most important supporter then that is a command issue, a military one.
  2. No, it was a mistake full stop. "The oldest were men grown, seventeen and eighteen years from the day of their naming. One was past twenty. Most were younger, sixteen or less. ....Your lord father took the cream of his guard to King's Landing, and your brother took the rest, along with all the likely lads for leagues around. Many will not come back to us, and we must needs find the men to take their places." Considering that you have argued Robb's age as a factor then him stripped Winterfell of its experience and replacing it with untrained teenagers is clearly a mistake, right? And of course Robb did not even leave anyone to train these boys. It was Cat who had to send Rodrik home. "The Blackfish," Robb said. "Thank you for joining us, ser. We need men of your courage. And you, Ser Wendel, I am glad to have you here. Is Ser Rodrik with you as well, Mother? I've missed him." "Ser Rodrik is on his way north from White Harbor. I have named him castellan and commanded him to hold Winterfell till our return. Maester Luwin is a wise counsellor, but unskilled in the arts of war." Robb went to war against the King, knew that some of his lords could change sides and that he would need a force to police his lands. This was a bad command decision. Leaving Winterfell exposed was just dumb. Of course they could when they are poorly defended, which Winterfell was. Theon captured Winterfell with a few dozen men, had a larger force came they would have easily overwhelmed the poorly defended Northern capital like they did Torrhens Square and Deepwood Motte. Yes. Robb had the Greatjon raw his sword on him in his own hall, he does not trust Roose and does not know many of his, soon to be new, vassals well enough. In a civil war anyone could turn traitor and given that the North has no Navy and has a Wildling problem him leaving his capital so exposed is just the sign of an awful General. And yes, I understand his age is a factor, but an awful decision remains an awful decision no matter the age of the person making that decision. Did I? I will take your word for it as I am unable to read your post properly as you seem unable to use the quote button properly. I hold my hand up and admit I mistyped if I did call him a teenager. There you go, I was wrong about someting in my post and happily admit to it. Where did I claim that? Please discuss things I actually said rather than make up arguments that you think I said. I am only going to defend points I have made, not engage in strawman arguments. Actually no, he gave vague instructions. "Would that it were. My brother commands in Riverrun?" "Yes, my lady. His Grace left Ser Edmure to hold Riverrun and guard his rear." Notice how every single Riverlord agrees with Edmure's plan? Notice how Robb had to remove Edmure from everyone else so he could blame him for the Balckwater? Either Robb was lying to him when he blamed him for Stannis' defeat or his original instructions were vague as fuck as every Riverland noble considered Edmure was making the right call. Either Robb is a poor commander who communicates poorly or he is a slippery motherfucer who is trying to pin his poor command on his uncle. And while we are on the subject, Robb was gone for around half a year. What kind of instructions are 'do nothing and stay in Riverrun"? Edmure has 11k men, Roose has 10k me. Why leave 4/5ths of your army to do nothing but hold their position until you decide to return. Please give me some of your excuses why this is a sign of a good commander? I thought the medieval setting goes without saying. But I will reiterate, he is an awful at communicating his pans to his delegates even for a medieval commander. Not once have I argued otherwise. What I will point out is that generals with good delegation, good communication and fine forward thinking on average tend to more successful generals. If your argument is that Robb lacking these qualities does not matter as war is about the luck of the draw then I am going to be honest, I earlier overestimated your intelligence on this subject. However I will give you the benefit of the doubt and beleive you just phrased your meaning poorly. Never once claimed otherwise. They were all a few years older than the 15/16 year old Robb. I said they were similar age. Nineteen year old Tywin being three years older than sixteen year old Robb when he beat Roger Reyne is a similarity. You are confusing the word similar with being exactly the same. You said that Robert and Ned had seasoned veterans helping them in battle. i merely pointed out that so did Robb. Your original point had nothing to do with them ruling lands. Are you just going to move the goalposts every time one of your misinformed points gets debunked? Hoster did not get involved fairly early. Of the major battles Hoster did not get involved till after the Battle of Gulltown, the Battle of Summer Hill, the battle of Ashemark. He was not involved in the war at an early stage. Robert had time to wait for Jon to call his banners, attack Gulltown, travel home, call his banners, fight his own bannerman, return to Storm's End and hunt and hawk for a time with his captured guests, travel to the Reach and fight Tarly, then travel to the Riverlands before Hoster joined. Did Robb not have a war council of experienced and victorious veterans of war? Robb also did not have a crown on his head when he scored his two most famous victories. He also listened to his mother's advice before he wore the crown. It was only after he became King that he decided he knew best and that is when his command turned to shit. Ned and Robert being willing to listen to more experienced heads only makes them better commanders. Robb deciding that he knew best was a major factor in his downfall. Case in point Cat telling him not to send Theon or Edmure suggesting that he does not execute Karstark. Both ignored and Robb paid dearly for both decisions. 19 year old Ned was a far better commander than his 16 year old son. Maybe those three years made all the difference but Ned was better. Course I can. They are teenagers. And Robb was almost 16 before his first ever battle. Yo, wrongly, thought was only 14. I really don't understand this, you incorrectly thought something that informed your opinion, happens to us all, but when pointed out your error you instead double down on your earlier opinion. Didnt say what? I'm sorry, but I really have no idea which parts you are replying to. Press double space to separate quotes so you can answer the part you want. If this is too hard separate each part with the quote function and then answer directly underneath. If for some reason this is not possible, owing to software or some other problem, then perhaps number each of my points in bold and then number your points so I have some idea what point you are replying to. I hope this was helpful. I did. I rated all the relevant criteria that makes us a general. i did not jist point out the he led the North and the Riverlands to defeat, I pointed out specific failings at command. I was also pointed out that he was an excellent brigadier/colonel and could well have risen to become a great commander with greater experience. Points you seem to have ignored. Yes, I readily admit that Robb was handicapped. Does not change the fact that he was a poor commander.
  3. He lost the North, even before he arrived at the Twins only a third of his Northern army remained the rest defeated in various battles. And of his remaining men half was against him. He was the commander of the North and they had lost, lost big time. I really don't understand the Robb is the Greatest General commander discussions on here. If the books ended after the battle of Oxcross I'd agree, but they didnt and his shitty planning and decisions caught up with him and the North faced the consequences for their war leader being inexperienced and naive.
  4. Only part of your post I disagree with. Robert would have made both sides accept peace. He would not have had his two main supporters go to war. As mediocre a King as he was, he wanted peace and unity not a civil war against any of his closest allies, which in his mind was the Lannisters and Starks.
  5. Except he did not think they would. Tyrion gloats that his father was wrong about that one. Tywin quite clearly thought that the captured Ned would keep the North in check Not that we have seen. Larger, possibly, even likely, but not by a considerable margin. The Riverlands and Crownlands border the Riverlands. It is hardly far away from his own lands. And as I pointed out, Tywin does not think either side will join in rebellion against the Crown. He is 50% wrong. They were not marshalling at the start of the war. Tywin, grandfather of King Joffrey Baratheon, has no reason to think the Reach is going to turn rebel. When people talk about GRRM being unfair towards Robb the general they often forget that when he stupidly decided to go to war against the Crown, the Reach and Stormlands were still loyal. He was making a rash decision and Tywin pretty unlucky that he went from being the Hand of the majority of the real,m to a fith. Tywin seems to have planned for that possibility. Despite the Royal navy largely being with Stannis Tywin has the Westerland navy remain in place. Balon thinks it impossible to take Casterly Rock, and that even that even in the possibility of taking Lannisport they would never keep it. Robb claims to not have the strength to threaten either one, he sneaks past Golden Tooth rather than try to take it (a source is with Cat is shocked he got past such a strong castle). Tywin seems to have done well in securing the West's major assets against the Ironborn. Places like the Crag are no loss while the inland Ashemark is likely too far away for the Ironborn. Not really as many of these issues were only issues for him after war had broke out. A decent commander adapts with the circumstances , which is what Tywin did. But he was disadvantaged, his children cuckolding the King cost him, his grandson executing Ned Stark cost him, Robb Stark having a magical direwolf that finds hidden pathways the Westerland people don't know about cost him. Stannis having a magical assistant that won him Storm's End in a fortnight instead of half a year cost him (though in fairness that magical assassin also helped him). Why Tywin is a great commander (though not the greatest in the series I still think that is Robert) is on top of being the best logistics commander, possibly the fastest commander, good at delegation he is also the one who can quickly process changes to the the war effort.
  6. I think there is a great comparison to be had with Robb and Tywin. Tywin as a teenager came up against and experienced and formidable opponent in Roger Reyne who, like Tywin, underestimated his teenage opponent. The young Tywin could have easily ended up like Robb, dead. I don't think he did. It just seems like it is too hard to plan for Robb to sneak into the West, defeat Stafford and target a particular castle in a realm that is meant to be the size of a European country. And then of course Robb getting injured an using a Westerling as a nurse. Rather than some other camp follower. Just too many variables too actually plan. Likely he got word of it after the injury and gave his full backing to the Westerlings and communicated with them in back channels while Robb was injured. But planning it before seems a little unrealistic even in this world that features dragons and wights. I tend to think that Renly would have won, the numbers seem to great for anything better than a Pyrrhic Crown victory. It would be interesting to see what Tywin's plan was to win. Had he made contact with any of the sellsword companies in Essos, was he hoping to use some of the defeated Riverland and Northern army in his defence of Kings Landing or some other plan. From what we know it looks the advantage was strongly in Renly and the Tyrell's favor to beat Tywin. In short he should have listened to his mother
  7. Had it been a Greatjon or one of the others the foot may have been decimated. "I put the least disciplined men on the left, yes. I anticipated that they would break. Robb Stark is a green boy, more like to be brave than wise. I'd hoped that if he saw our left collapse, he might plunge into the gap, eager for a rout. Once he was fully committed, Ser Kevan's pikes would wheel and take him in the flank, driving him into the river while I brought up the reserve." Cat wanted Roose to be chosen because of his caution and it was this caution that likely saved more of the Northern foot.
  8. It could also have been 10 million Riverland soldiers, riding on miniature pink submarines. Are we not allowed to rule out possibilities that seem unrealistic or do we accept everything as a possibility until confirmed by the author? Yes or No? He said Robb came South with 20K men. Was that bullshit? He says the Riverlands has around 20k and we, the readers,never see more than 20k combined Riverland soldiers. Why is this bullshit? And Cat thinks to herself "not nearly as many". Is she also bullshitting? Is this your game? Any quotes from the books that you don't like will automatically be called bullshit? Yeesh! Wait what? As many as 20K Riverland soldiers? So while Tywin is at Harrenhal, Roose nearby, and only sending raiding parties of the hundreds to shock and awe the civilians Tywin has somehow killed around 8,000 Riverland soldiers? If that is what you really believe then good for you. But I suspect this is bullshit. Were is it claimed they were mostly absent? "Tyrell swords will make me king. Rowan and Tarly and Caron will make me king, with axe and mace and warhammer. Tarth arrows and Penrose lances, Fossoway, Cuy, Mullendore, Estermont, Selmy, Hightower, Oakheart, Crane, Caswell, Blackbar, Morrigen, Beesbury, Shermer, Dunn, Footly . . . even House Florent, your own wife's brothers and uncles, they will make me king." Highlighted are the Hightowers and their vassals. They seem to make a pretty significant presence in his army even if the old Hightower and his sons are not directly present (and it is not actually clear if that is true)
  9. Whether the 15 year old Lyanna willingly went with Rhaegar does not change that it was still an abduction. Edmure was not free to come and go as he pleased before he was 16 so Lyanna, as a female in pretty sexist world, is not going to either.
  10. OP is talking about Robb's strategies against the only commander he thought he was facing. That is why the comparison always comes up. There is not a single military conversation on this forum that mentions one and not the other in terms of command. Robb being young and inexperienced did not realize that he may well have more than one enemy so focused all his energy on one faction; Tywin's No. OP is talking about command. The majority of his OP is about movement, strategy and leadership. He is not talking about individual battle command but the role of a General (its in the title of the thread). What Robb was great at was controlling an individual platoon but as General of the North (and eventually the Riverlands) he was in command of the whole show. This topic is clearly about Robb the General. Robb was not just responsible of the troops that were directly present with him but every one under him. Stripping Winterfell of every one but the untrained teenagers is a poor decision when a General goes to war. This is not a case of planning for every single circumstance, this is just common sense. He told Roose and the larrgest part of his army to fight Tywin at the Green Fork and then not another objective for half a year. This is not a case of planning for every single objective but just poor strategy. He gave Edmure vague instructions and did not clue him into what he was doing when he disappeared to the Westerlands for half a year. Poor communication and general planning. Generals with poor delegation, communication and lack of forward thinking will always get exposed. It is just poor command. Robb is 15 when he goes to war "Grey Wind was restless too," Robb said. His auburn hair had grown shaggy and unkempt, and a reddish stubble covered his jaw, making him look older than his fifteen years. And was actually close to 16 before his first battle "I will be sixteen soon enough," Robb said. "And you are fifteen now. Fifteen, and leading a host to battle. Can you understand why I might fear, Robb?" He turns 16 in ACOK. Robb, at 14, was not a commander. This is what I disagreed with. Ned was born in 263 and war broke out in 282. Ned was very likely still a teenager. A ward with no experience of Leadership or battle (given that the realm had been in peace for the last two decades) Robb and Ned were in similar positions and both teenagers, though Ned a little older. I did not claim they were exactly the same, but similar. Blackfish, Greatjon, Karstark? Robb was likely surround with just as many experienced warriors given that the North had fought and been victorious in two wars in the last 20 years. Hoster was not involved at the start of the war and gets immediately injured in the first battle. For Jon Arryn read the Blackfish; both benefited from able counsellors. Where is that claimed? Not initially. And of course they had half the realm fighting against them. Robb was facings a smaller percentage of the realm than his father was facing. Castamere is what I was counting. He, like Robb, was still a teenager. I said similar, not exactly the same. And I am not sure your point. This is a conversation about commanders and Robb was one. Pretty much everyone who labels him bad mentions his age and inexperience. No one ignores this but if telling people they can't talk about him as a commander because of his age is redundant.
  11. eh? Read the post and see who I am replying to. It was not you but somone who brought up Renly's betrayal. And I pointed out the truth in the matter. Stannis had gone to Storm's End, had begun cutting down Renly's forests to make siege equipment before Renly had even arrived and threatened to 'destroy' his brother. Stannis is clearly the aggressor in this situation. I am sorry if you think that someone pointing out what actually happened in the books in 'trolling'. Sure. Just like Stannis did not do battle in winning Storm's End and Dragonstone, right? I'd still count them as victories for Stannis. I take it that you don't? That Stannis did not win either of those settlements? Still a victory, no? Where did I say that you called Rodrik smart?
  12. OP is clearly talking about overall command. His leadership of the North (and then the Riverlands) in their war. Generals and War commanders are, generally speaking, in charge of more than just their individual platoon. Robb was the North's war commander; he was responsible for his subordinates actions. That is what command details. Weak commanders give vague instructions (Edmure) no instructions (Roose) or leave subordinates undermanned (Rodrik). As I said before, Robb is an excellent Brigadier or Colonel, but a pretty average (at times inept) Commander. And of course Robb looks fantastic in the battle field compared to his subordinates. Robb divides the North's military into two, him taking the cream of the crop (the cavalry) and taking on the 15k with Jaime (who has a smaller cavalry) while having Roose face a larger force with 7k cavalry to his 500. Is anyone really surprised that Robb's force was the more successful of the two in that situation? It should be noted that Robb heads West with around double the cavalry that he leaves Roose and Edmure to face Tywin, any other factions and generally keep the peace in the Riverlands. He limits their options and capabilities while he can target undermannned castles and farmers while avoiding the likes of the Golden Tooth, Casterly Rock and Lannisport . Not only does his magic direwolf help him but he automatically takes the cream of the crop leaving all three of his subordinates in a weaker position. King Robb lost battles. King Robb does not have to be present at his capital for its loss to count as a defeat. He was 15/16. And this is a conversation about commanders, which Robb was one. There is not a separate thread for jnr Commanders, but you are more than willing to start one. No one is denying that Robb was young, just like Daeron I was young, Robert and Ned were young and Tywin was young. I'd argue all fared better in their exploits at an age comparable to the young Wolf. Robb is not alone in being a young commander in charge.
  13. I imagine they need special dispensation from the King or the Lord/Lady Paramount to do so as it is not either of their best interests if this happens I'd also imagine that the House being swallowed up would fight against it as these Houses seem to cherish their names and histories so are not likely to be happy and sit around and let it happen.
  14. Renly betrayed his nephew, not Stannis. If Stannis had evidence that Joffrey and his siblings were bastards he should have shared it with Renly (and his bannerman) there and then. Instead he just proclaims himself the King and expects everyone to simply say yes. In fact if any brother betrayed anyone it was Stannis not trying to warn Robert, but that is the topic of another discussion. Yes. There is nothing wrong with using tricks. Stannis seemed well satisfied with that. "I can give you such men, yes. I have a hundred knights who would sooner read than fight. Be open where you can and stealthy where you must. Use every smuggler's trick you know, the black sails, the hidden coves, whatever it requires. Stannis himself's most famous victory was lulling the Ironborn into a trap and then being able to attack from the the North and the South. Maybe. Wait, so the Boltons constantly trick their enemies and you don't think they are capable of doing it again? Stannis brought the battle to Renly. Renly did not attack Dragonstone and then tell Stannis he would destroy him. Stannis is the aggressor in this situation, of course it is different. Like Stannis did not take Storm's End or Dragonstone in a battle. They all count though, right? He actually did. There was a garrison left with Amory Lorch. I didnt call it particularly impressive, bit then your claim was not about impressive victories but victories. Which was pretty spectacularly stupid of Rodrik considering he had been fighting against the Boltons in the Hornwood lands.
  15. Not really. Stannis attacked Renly's lands and forced a battle between the two by telling him he would destroy him if he did not submit to him. Stannis threw down the gauntlet, Stannis actively came looking for the fight as he was desperate for the support of the Lords loyal to Renly. It applies far much more to Stannis than it does to Renly Did Ramsay not win against a larger army at the Battle of WInterfell? Did Ramsay not win back Moat Calin for the North? Did Roose not win back Harrenhal in the Riverlands?