Jump to content

Who Is The Most OVERRATED Battle Commander?


Vhailin

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, joluoto2 said:

Rhaegar Targaryen. Fought one battle, lost.

I never saw Rhaegar being praised for his warring skills, for his swordsmanship skills yes but as a battle commander, I think it's widely accepted that he wasn't the man of the situation at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cragen said:

Good commander chose were and when they will fight and Tywin loose to Robb every time, he was surprised and outmaneuvered every time.

Well technically they never fought a battle, but I guess Robb won some moral victories?

1 minute ago, Cragen said:

He let Robb enter Westerlands, where he pillage and took castles of his vassals.

If you are going to blame Tywin for not defending a magic goat-track that no one who actually lived around the area had ever found, then I guess Tywin really must be bad.

1 minute ago, Cragen said:

He would enter his trap if Edmur didn't stop him, do to lack of communications.

It is arguable whether A) The trap even existed or if it was only a way for Robb and Blackfish to bully Edmure or B ) If it had even worked, considering Tywin would had had a superior force and home-field advantage. So I question the relevance of a trap that never actually sprung (if it even existed) as a proof of Tywin messing up.

1 minute ago, Cragen said:

Tywin win his war politically not militarily and this make him great politician not military strategist. He is really overrated.

Well in the end Tywin won the war by crushing Stannis Baratheon at King's Landing, though of course that was a joint effort with Tyrells. But I do concede that for most of the WotFK Tywin wasn't very effective, as the circumstances were horribly against him (until Stannis saved him).

But in a fair analysis he didn't really make any severe mistakes either in the military domain besides the pair at very start, underestimating Robb's tactical acumen and wrongly assessing Walder's ambitions. From the win at the Green Fork he pretty much pulled a military campaign with no mistakes but the game had been heavily set against him at that point (with Robb taking out Jaime and Renly practically checkmating the whole war until, again, Stannis dealt with that).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Humble Maester said:

Well technically they never fought a battle, but I guess Robb won some moral victories?

If you are going to blame Tywin for not defending a magic goat-track that no one who actually lived around the area had ever found, then I guess Tywin really must be bad.

It is arguable whether A) The trap even existed or if it was only a way for Robb and Blackfish to bully Edmure or B ) If it had even worked, considering Tywin would had had a superior force and home-field advantage. So I question the relevance of a trap that never actually sprung (if it even existed) as a proof of Tywin messing up.

Well in the end Tywin won the war by crushing Stannis Baratheon at King's Landing, though of course that was a joint effort with Tyrells. But I do concede that for most of the WotFK Tywin wasn't very effective, as the circumstances were horribly against him (until Stannis saved him).

But in a fair analysis he didn't really make any severe mistakes either in the military domain besides the pair at very start, underestimating Robb's tactical acumen and wrongly assessing Walder's ambitions. From the win at the Green Fork he pretty much pulled a military campaign with no mistakes but the game had been heavily set against him at that point (with Robb taking out Jaime and Renly practically checkmating the whole war until, again, Stannis dealt with that).

He have 40k soldier in Riverlands, he have time advantage, time Robb need to rise banners and march them south is enough to deal with Riverlands and he failed, he underestimated Robb, because he thinks that Robb will march on him with his full strength, then he underestimated Roose Bolton he think that Roose will fight him to last soldier, he underestimated Mountain Clansmen, he thinks that they will run. If Edmur didn't push him back he would fallow Robb into Westerlands and Robb wouldn't met him in open battle and Stanis would took KL.

If you with moral victories think destruction of more then half of Lannister army then OK, those are moral victories, this war make Lannisters depending on Tyrells.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tywin is second best IMO, only after Robert. He foghts his battles outside battlefield which is something great commanders do.

Stannis would be third. He crushed Tyrion and was about to win with most of his forces still in reserve. Awfull timing and Tyrell-Lannister alliance defeated him. His only mistake is nepotism, Imry was among worst choises, even Davos would be better.

JonCon can be discussed after WoW, he was young at Stony Sept, now he has matured and he took Griffins Roost really smart.

he also took Storms End

Most overrated would be:

Tyrion- he inspires no love, loyalty and devotion, worked hard to build a chain that would be totally useless in Renly got to KL and yes, wildfire was good, but Cersei has as much credit as he has for that.

Robb: great tactitian, terrible commander. I said that Tywin wins his battles outside battlefield and this is how wars are won, Robb doesn't get that. Rarely listened his advisors and I don't want to talk about Jeyne. Also treatment of Edmure was awfull.

Randyll: Yes he is really good, but not that good. He defeated Robert, but Duskendale was a disaster (he won but with heavy casualities against infantry with more men and surprise effect).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Cragen said:

He have 40k soldier in Riverlands, he have time advantage, time Robb need to rise banners and march them south is enough to deal with Riverlands and he failed,

He pretty much had Riverlands defeated by the time Robb marched south though, all their armies were off the field and the most important castle was under a heavy siege. The way Tywin fooled Edmure into scattering his forces and then defeating them piecemeal was one of the greatest showings of strategy Tywin had during the whole war.

Quote

he underestimated Robb, because he thinks that Robb will march on him with his full strength,

I conceded two mistakes out of which one was underestimating Robb. So that is fine, I don't think anyone can claim he didn't underestimate him. No one is perfect, not even Tywin (and he had good reasons to believe Robb would do as he thought he would, not every young untried lordling turns out to be an Alexander the Great after all).

Quote

then he underestimated Roose Bolton he think that Roose will fight him to last soldier,

I don't actually get what you mean by this. He thought Robb was attacking him (while it was Roose) and fought and defeated him with heavy losses to Roose. No one fights till the last man in battles so I don't see why Tywin would had expected that.

Quote

he underestimated Mountain Clansmen, he thinks that they will run.

True, though that ended up as pretty +/-0 situation for Tywin. He still crushed Roose overwhelmingly even without the trap.

Quote

If Edmur didn't push him back he would fallow Robb into Westerlands and Robb wouldn't met him in open battle and Stanis would took KL.

This is often debated point but both the books and GRRM himself point out that Tywin had excellent reasons to believe that Stannis wouldn't be moving from Storm's End in a good while so moving after Robb in West to take care of him was a good choice. Unfortunately for Tywin he was unlucky enough to not know that Stannis could use magical assassins, and fortunately for him Edmure managed to slow him down for long enough for him to hear about the imminent threat on King's Landing. Luck is always a factor in wars too.

Quote

If you with moral victories think destruction of more then half of Lannister army then OK, that are moral victory, this war make Lannisters depending on Tyrells.

This all depends on what part of Lannister fortunes you put on Tywin's shoulders. Was he to blame for losing 2/3 of the camps at Riverrun? Maybe partially. Was he to blame for the defeat of Stafford? Not at all if you ask me, it was due to Stafford's incompetence and most of all the magical goat track. In the end when Tywin commanded on the field he did as well as one could under the circumstances while his larger strategy was mostly constrained by negative events outside his own control. That is why I already conceded earlier that Tywin the Politician won the war, not Tywin the Commander, but Tywin the Commander did a competent job too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Cragen said:

He have 40k soldier in Riverlands, he have time advantage, time Robb need to rise banners and march them south is enough to deal with Riverlands and he failed, he underestimated Robb, because he thinks that Robb will march on him with his full strength, then he underestimated Roose Bolton he think that Roose will fight him to last soldier, he underestimated Mountain Clansmen, he thinks that they will run. If Edmur didn't push him back he would fallow Robb into Westerlands and Robb wouldn't met him in open battle and Stanis would took KL.

If you with moral victories think destruction of more then half of Lannister army then OK, that are moral victory, this war make Lannisters depending on Tyrells.

Wouldn't you underestimate 16 year old boy with no experience? Wouldn't you expect him to come to you with full strenght to avenge his father? Idea at GF was good, he didn't know what Roose would do, but he did win that battle anyway. Wouldnt you underestimate Clansmen? I mean look at what happened to wildlings, they are expected to flee. If Edmure lost Tyrells would go to KL and save the day.

He didn't lose half of army, Jaime did. I think Kevan would be better for leader of second army, but Jaime did win two battles before he lost to Robb so he isnt so bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, dariopatke said:

Tywin is second best IMO, only after Robert. He foghts his battles outside battlefield which is something great commanders do.

Stannis would be third. He crushed Tyrion and was about to win with most of his forces still in reserve. Awfull timing and Tyrell-Lannister alliance defeated him. His only mistake is nepotism, Imry was among worst choises, even Davos would be better.

JonCon can be discussed after WoW, he was young at Stony Sept, now he has matured and he took Griffins Roost really smart.

  Hide contents

he also took Storms End

Most overrated would be:

Tyrion- he inspires no love, loyalty and devotion, worked hard to build a chain that would be totally useless in Renly got to KL and yes, wildfire was good, but Cersei has as much credit as he has for that.

Robb: great tactitian, terrible commander. I said that Tywin wins his battles outside battlefield and this is how wars are won, Robb doesn't get that. Rarely listened his advisors and I don't want to talk about Jeyne. Also treatment of Edmure was awfull.

Randyll: Yes he is really good, but not that good. He defeated Robert, but Duskendale was a disaster (he won but with heavy casualities against infantry with more men and surprise effect).

 

Winning wars outside battlefield make Tywin great politician, not battle commander. Hole point of battle commander is to win battles on battlefield. From what we see in TWOFK, Tywin is nowhere close to best battle commander nor military strategist. He was able to win war because Stanis killed Ranly, this weaken Tywin enemy and give him space for political machinations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, YorEmixam said:

Aren't you contradicting yourself?... Tyrion made best of what he had, Aerys would have burn his own city, Cercei probably would have done the same trying to catapult it over the city walls.

It's like saying Stannis is not a good militairy commander because he didn't build the ships himself..

I think I'd be contradicting myself if I called Tyrion bad. But that's not what I'm saying. He's just overrated by some fans. The chain was a good idea, and he came up with some good training drills, plus he had the right ideas about managing morale. That's all good. His decisions improved outcomes for House Lannister. 

But when people echo his statements that he saved the city, I think they're overrating him. The wildfire that won the naval engagement would have been there without him, and he certainly doesn't deserve the credit for Renly's ghost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Cragen said:

Good commander chose were and when they will fight and Tywin loose to Robb every time, he was surprised and outmaneuvered every time. He let Robb enter Westerlands, where he pillage and took castles of his vassals. He would enter his trap if Edmur didn't stop him, do to lack of communications. Tywin win his war politically not militarily and this make him great politician not military strategist. He is really overrated.

I don't know why Jon is overrated and why would anyone think he is great general. We know he have potential to become great commander, but he need to win few battles to fulfill potential.

People tend to rate Jon's victory at the Wall as proof of a "great" commander while discounting Mance's awful strategy, woefully inferior troops, and the more or less impregnable position. Jon certainly didn't do a bad job, but it would have been difficult to do so with a 700 ft high wall, dedicated defensive fortifications, and siege weapons to fight back with. Frankly expecting anything less than someone who grew up learning how to fight from a master at arms and warfare from both a maester and a nobleman who'd fought and commanded over two wars would be absurd.

If Mance had just sent a few hundred raiders a few leagues down the wall in both directions, he easily would have swept over the Wall (or at least prevented the NW from destroying his turtle.) The entire battle speaks more to Mance's lack of education and his lack of proficiency as a commander than Jon's epic command ability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Humble Maester said:

He pretty much had Riverlands defeated by the time Robb marched south though, all their armies were off the field and the most important castle was under a heavy siege. The way Tywin fooled Edmure into scattering his forces and then defeating them piecemeal was one of the greatest showings of strategy Tywin had during the whole war.

I conceded two mistakes out of which one was underestimating Robb. So that is fine, I don't think anyone can claim he didn't underestimate him. No one is perfect, not even Tywin (and he had good reasons to believe Robb would do as he thought he would, not every young untried lordling turns out to be an Alexander the Great after all).

I don't actually get what you mean by this. He thought Robb was attacking him (while it was Roose) and fought and defeated him with heavy losses to Roose. No one fights till the last man in battles so I don't see why Tywin would had expected that.

True, though that ended up as pretty +/-0 situation for Tywin. He still crushed Roose overwhelmingly even without the trap.

This is often debated point but both the books and GRRM himself point out that Tywin had excellent reasons to believe that Stannis wouldn't be moving from Storm's End in a good while so moving after Robb in West to take care of him was a good choice. Unfortunately for Tywin he was unlucky enough to not know that Stannis could use magical assassins, and fortunately for him Edmure managed to slow him down for long enough for him to hear about the imminent threat on King's Landing. Luck is always a factor in wars too.

This all depends on what part of Lannister fortunes you put on Tywin's shoulders. Was he to blame for losing 2/3 of the camps at Riverrun? Maybe partially. Was he to blame for the defeat of Stafford? Not at all if you ask me, it was due to Stafford's incompetence and most of all the magical goat track. In the end when Tywin commanded on the field he did as well as one could under the circumstances while his larger strategy was mostly constrained by negative events outside his own control. That is why I already conceded earlier that Tywin the Politician won the war, not Tywin the Commander, but Tywin the Commander did a competent job too.

OK, we agree he is great politician no debate with this.

Nothing Tywin has done in TWOFK didn't make me consider him great battle commander. Yes he defeated Roose, but it is not some incredible victory and probably other commander would win there. Strategy wise Tywin didn't show more much, he didn't make any military move that would put him a top over Robb, he was unable to stop him militarily. He win war politically, I have nothing against it, but that doesn't make him military genius way many people think of him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, MinotaurWarrior said:

I think I'd be contradicting myself if I called Tyrion bad. But that's not what I'm saying. He's just overrated by some fans. The chain was a good idea, and he came up with some good training drills, plus he had the right ideas about managing morale. That's all good. His decisions improved outcomes for House Lannister. 

But when people echo his statements that he saved the city, I think they're overrating him. The wildfire that won the naval engagement would have been there without him, and he certainly doesn't deserve the credit for Renly's ghost.

I'm not saying he's one of the best commander, but he is pretty smart.I'm just giving him due credit. The chain was more than just keeping the ships in the bay, but it split Stannis Navy in two. Would the wildfire had been as effective as that if the plot was made and handled by.. well anyone in KL at that time? I dont think so.

 

I know after burning all those ships my next statement lose credit, but I believe Tyrion could be a great battle commander if he had the trait Stannis, Tywin and Tarly as, the lack of consideration for human life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cragen said:

OK, we agree he is great no debate with this.

Nothing Tywin has done in TWOFK didn't make me consider him great battle commander. Yes he defeated Roose, but it is not some incredible victory and probably other commander would win there. Strategy wise Tywin didn't show more much, he didn't make any military move that would put him a top over Robb, he was unable to stop him militarily. He win war politically, I have nothing against it, but that doesn't make him military genius way many people think of him.

I don't really disagree with this. Tywin did a "competent job" during WotFK but that by far was not instrumental to how the war ended. I guess I am repeating myself a bit in saying that Tywin was very heavily constrained in his actions due to two separate threats.

I guess my point is that while what he did during WotFK doesn't really show him to be a great commander but neither does it show him to be a poor one. In the end he did what he could, which wasn't too much, but still enough not to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

People tend to rate Jon's victory at the Wall as proof of a "great" commander while discounting Mance's awful strategy, woefully inferior troops, and the more or less impregnable position. Jon certainly didn't do a bad job, but it would have been difficult to do so with a 700 ft high wall, dedicated defensive fortifications, and siege weapons to fight back with. Frankly expecting anything less than someone who grew up learning how to fight from a master at arms and warfare from both a maester and a nobleman who'd fought and commanded over two wars would be absurd.

If Mance had just sent a few hundred raiders a few leagues down the wall in both directions, he easily would have swept over the Wall (or at least prevented the NW from destroying his turtle.) The entire battle speaks more to Mance's lack of education and his lack of proficiency as a commander than Jon's epic command ability.

That is my point, he shouldn't be considered great. Most valuable thing he has done is keeping moral high as much is possible at given circumstance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Humble Maester said:

I don't really disagree with this. Tywin did a "competent job" during WotFK but that by far was not instrumental to how the war ended. I guess I am repeating myself a bit in saying that Tywin was very heavily constrained in his actions due to two separate threats.

I guess my point is that while what he did during WotFK doesn't really show him to be a great commander but neither does it show him to be a poor one. In the end he did what he could, which wasn't too much, but still enough not to lose.

I guess we didn't disagree, we misunderstood each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me it is a tossup between Tywin and Stannis. Stannis pre-book 1 was a genius. Once our story started, it seems like Mel sucked strategic abilities out with everything else. The Blackwater was a disaster. He blindsided the wildlings with superior technology. He blindly marches toward Winterfell in a massive blizzard with low numbers. If anything even close to the show happens in the book....

At some point people need to realize that attacking because some red witch says you are a God doesn't equate to a good military strategy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, YorEmixam said:

I'm not saying he's one of the best commander, but he is pretty smart.I'm just giving him due credit. The chain was more than just keeping the ships in the bay, but it split Stannis Navy in two. Would the wildfire had been as effective as that if the plot was made and handled by.. well anyone in KL at that time? I dont think so.

 

I know after burning all those ships my next statement lose credit, but I believe Tyrion could be a great battle commander if he had the trait Stannis, Tywin and Tarly as, the lack of consideration for human life.

So, then I think we're more or less on the same page. Tyrion is smart and makes positive contributions. 

1 hour ago, Humble Maester said:

Well technically they never fought a battle, but I guess Robb won some moral victories?

If you are going to blame Tywin for not defending a magic goat-track that no one who actually lived around the area had ever found, then I guess Tywin really must be bad.

It is arguable whether A) The trap even existed or if it was only a way for Robb and Blackfish to bully Edmure or B ) If it had even worked, considering Tywin would had had a superior force and home-field advantage. So I question the relevance of a trap that never actually sprung (if it even existed) as a proof of Tywin messing up.

Well in the end Tywin won the war by crushing Stannis Baratheon at King's Landing, though of course that was a joint effort with Tyrells. But I do concede that for most of the WotFK Tywin wasn't very effective, as the circumstances were horribly against him (until Stannis saved him).

But in a fair analysis he didn't really make any severe mistakes either in the military domain besides the pair at very start, underestimating Robb's tactical acumen and wrongly assessing Walder's ambitions. From the win at the Green Fork he pretty much pulled a military campaign with no mistakes but the game had been heavily set against him at that point (with Robb taking out Jaime and Renly practically checkmating the whole war until, again, Stannis dealt with that).

He also lost Harrenhal / Armory Lorch (a valuable dog) and spawned the BwB. I mean, he very quickly solved the Harrenhal problem, and the BwB came out of left field, but those were in fact mistakes.

And I don't think it's completely unfair to judge him on the magical BS he failed to anticipate. I mean, a failure to appreciate the gravity of sudden magical BS is what cost the Lannisters their crown. Tywin needn't have been so surprised to learn he lives in a fantasy setting. 

Still though, he managed and died a winner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cragen said:

Winning wars outside battlefield make Tywin great politician, not battle commander. Hole point of battle commander is to win battles on battlefield. From what we see in TWOFK, Tywin is nowhere close to best battle commander nor military strategist. He was able to win war because Stanis killed Ranly, this weaken Tywin enemy and give him space for political machinations.

Battle Commander is both tactician (on field) and politician (outside field).

Stannis is brilliant tactician, but he is terrible politician which still makes him really good commander, but not great. 

My point is that great commander has to be good on field, to inspire loyalty and respect of his men and to be wise outside field (and therefore make his position on field easier so these are related and equal important).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, dariopatke said:

Battle Commander is both tactician (on field) and politician (outside field).

Stannis is brilliant tactician, but he is terrible politician which still makes him really good commander, but not great. 

My point is that great commander has to be good on field, to inspire loyalty and respect of his men and to be wise outside field (and therefore make his position on field easier so these are related and equal important).

Battle commander, I don`t know what is unclear about meaning of this. Being great politician doesn`t make you great battle commander. Politics play great role in war time, but again great battle commander decide outcome of war on battlefield, Tywin wasn`t able to do so. That mean he is not great battle commander. TWOFK show that he isn`t great strategist either, I wrote about that in my earlier posts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...