Jump to content

Why did Balon declare war on the North


TheDonAJ

Recommended Posts

On 12.7.2016 at 1:06 AM, TheDonAJ said:

I understand he may have been angry at Ned for what happened in the Greyjoy rebellion, but, that can't be the main reason. At the time, both Ned and Robert were dead, so his anger towards Ned's son should have been just as strong as his anger towards Roberts "son". He saw the north as undefended, so took a stab at it- but really, during TWOFK most of the coast of Westeros was undefended, he could have got a lot more plunder, albeit at the cost of more ironborn casualties, in the far richer Westerlands, or fertile Reach. The North, doesn't have any claim to dominion over the Iron Islands, whereas the KotIT does, so, by attacking the North, Balon was bringing the Norths demise about quicker, and when the North was subdued, the Iron Throne would be able to turn their attention to the Iron Islands. I don't think Joffrey would have reversed his fathers victories against the ironborn by honouring any pact made between the Crown and the Greyjoys against the North, besides, shouldn't the Iron born pay the 'iron price' for their freedom, not have it granted to them by any King, Northern or otherwise.

 

Sorry about the long para, this just seems like a mistake on Balons' end. Then again, I'm not the most thorough reader.

Because he rightfully had no faith in the green Boyking to defeat Tywin Lannister, as proven when he wasted the strategic initiative after the defeat of Jamie and when he broke his contract with the Freys.

It seems Balons main goal was independence and some territorial gains near the coast.

The North was the easiest location for that, weakly defended sparsely populated and not very wealthy.

He also could retreat to the Islands if things went bad without having to fear retaliation from them North due to the lack of a fleet.

The Lannisters and the Ironthrone both had the means to directly threaten the Ironislands and with Tywin in charge Balon was rightfully weary of that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/11/2016 at 7:25 PM, Floki of the Ironborn said:

Wow, you've really thought this through. The only problem is that the Tyrell army and the Lannister army combined would destroy the Riverlands in revenge for the assault upon the Westerlands. Then they'd come streaming west to fight. The only hope would then be to have Stannis or the Dornish attack King's Landing to end the reason for the Tyrell-Lannister alliance to exist.

I agree with you that it is a stretch that everything would fall into place like this, but I would like to think that the Tyrells would only send a small support force like the Tarlys with the Lannisters to the West or the Riverlands because they would keep the bulk of their army in the capitol to protect Margery and send troops back Highgarden to protect from an Ironborn attack.  

Really the one thing that the North is missing is a fleet. Balon would have swayed the whole war and could have been a part of restructuring the Kingdoms with the Ironborn have probably the best chances of getting the West. But he's dumb and short sided like most Ironborn. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GallowsKnight said:

My own experiences of the game is if Lannister and Greyjoy fight neither has a chance to win. They bog each other down in such petty fighting for the whole time. Greyjoy can take but he can't hold well. But if the two unite they're quite a power block. I need to play this game again.

Exactly. Anyone who's played the game has been in Balon's shoes - better yet, they've seen Westerosi all out wars play out many times. Greyjoy going for Lanister either gets them both bogged down or ganged up on if he does beat him up (exactly like what happened in the Greyjoy rebellion), and the Greyjoy who leaves Stark alone let's stark win. And Greyjoy doesn't want Lannister bogged down because that leaves the everybody else's navy free to come kick his ass (again!).

Balon played it fine. He just couldn't see the red wedding coming, and he didn't anticipate various Northerners having left so much force back. If it wasn't for the Red wedding everyone would be bleeding themselves dry in the riveralsnds and at kings landing while he takes whatever he wants outside of the hotly contested riverlands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, lujo said:

Exactly. Anyone who's played the game has been in Balon's shoes - better yet, they've seen Westerosi all out wars play out many times. Greyjoy going for Lanister either gets them both bogged down or ganged up on if he does beat him up (exactly like what happened in the Greyjoy rebellion), and the Greyjoy who leaves Stark alone let's stark win. And Greyjoy doesn't want Lannister bogged down because that leaves the everybody else's navy free to come kick his ass (again!).

Such a good game. It's a shame a lot of the heroes cards don't make sense for faction. Why isn't Patchface's card Melissandre? That would make far more sense. I wish there was an easy way to add the Arryns from the expansion too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, GallowsKnight said:

Such a good game. It's a shame a lot of the heroes cards don't make sense for faction. Why isn't Patchface's card Melissandre? That would make far more sense. I wish there was an easy way to add the Arryns from the expansion too.

There's been plenty of adaptations on the net, I've played some via forums/email, but I got kicked out of the group because the moderator didn't understant one of my moves. As a Lanister I publicaly declared on the first turn that if anyone makes an early move on Stony Sept I go after them madly and let Greyjoy win (which is basically the only way to play Lanister :D). What the fellow didn't understand is that if somebody makes a move on Stony Sept I've got no way to stop Greyjoy from doing whatever he wants anyway and thought I was being unsportsmanlike. I was just trying to make this clear in a way stupid enough that noone thinks I'm bluffing or scheeming.

But, man, that game was better than the books. I didn't care the commander cards didn't necessarily make sense, I'd still play it :) Played it a whole lot IRL, though, had a regular crew. We even figured out how to turtle up a Lanister properly on our own without the net.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, lujo said:

There's been plenty of adaptations on the net, I've played some via forums/email, but I got kicked out of the group because the moderator didn't understant one of my moves. As a Lanister I publicaly declared on the first turn that if anyone makes an early move on Stony Sept I go after them madly and let Greyjoy win (which is basically the only way to play Lanister :D). What the fellow didn't understand is that if somebody makes a move on Stony Sept I've got no way to stop Greyjoy from doing whatever he wants anyway and thought I was being unsportsmanlike. I was just trying to make this clear in a way stupid enough that noone thinks I'm bluffing or scheeming.

But, man, that game was better than the books. I didn't care the commander cards didn't necessarily make sense, I'd still play it :) Played it a whole lot IRL, though, had a regular crew. We even figured out how to turtle up a Lanister properly on our own without the net.

But half the game is threatening, bluffing and scheming? Seems odd to kick you.

I used to play it a lot in real life with a group of colleagues then I moved. But I should rope in some friends up here.

It's a truly fun game. I invented an alternative universe reason for the commander cards and setting. That Ned Stark never went south and Renly supported Stannis losing the Tyrell support. It's the one way I reconcile it. 

The Stoney Sept donut defense. Yeah it's great. 3 knights in their for most the game. Lannister is the only truly land based force in that game. There's a reason my friends and I called it "Game of boats".

The expansions are pretty neat. ADWD adds new cards and powers. Puts everyone into conflict immediately. And the 4 player AFFC is a faster different style. Competing for points not castles.

Umm... to keep this relevant to OP "Balon was mad, Aeron is madder, and Euron is maddest of them all"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, GallowsKnight said:

Umm... to keep this relevant to OP "Balon was mad, Aeron is madder, and Euron is maddest of them all"

It IS relevant to the OP. Basically it means we've been in many westerosi wars and can maybe see where Balon was coming from. One game you go for the Lanister right off the bat, kick his ass, and before you know it everyone and their grandma is after you.

Next time around you do what Balon did in the war of the 5 kings. It was Euron's OG plan of "attack Lannisport madly" in combination of rebelling while the realm was not fragmented that was stupid. Raiding up and down and evening the odds to prolong the war as along as possible because you rule "the game of boats" is brilliant. Unobvious and takes experience, but it's far from stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, lujo said:

It IS relevant to the OP. Basically it means we've been in many westerosi wars and can maybe see where Balon was coming from. One game you go for the Lanister right off the bat, kick his ass, and before you know it everyone and their grandma is after you.

Next time around you do what Balon did in the war of the 5 kings. It was Euron's OG plan of "attack Lannisport madly" in combination of rebelling while the realm was not fragmented that was stupid. Raiding up and down and evening the odds to prolong the war as along as possible because you rule "the game of boats" is brilliant. Unobvious and takes experience, but it's far from stupid.

Fair enough. Though what Balon failed to do was wait until the last or second last turn to seize the Reach and Northern castles thus squeezing onto the finish line as victor. 

We did try a house rule once where you could request transport on neighbouring fleets. That lead to some crazy scenarioes. Stark armies cut off in the Reach and other things. But overall it was too unbalanced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, GallowsKnight said:

Fair enough. Though what Balon failed to do was wait until the last or second last turn to seize the Reach and Northern castles thus squeezing onto the finish line as victor. 

Ehehehehehe. Well, if you ask the Reader and that faction of the Ironborn who got behind Asha (and Balon was married to one of them), if Balon just walked out with his Northern winnings  they'd have more land and timber than they knew what to do with. It wouldn't be too difficult to cut a deal with the Throne which lets them keep it all, provided the North lost, and provided that the Lannisters beat Stannis soundly. So he kinda did swoop in at the right time and grab the right stuff :) 

Quote

We did try a house rule once where you could request transport on neighbouring fleets. That lead to some crazy scenarioes. Stark armies cut off in the Reach and other things. But overall it was too unbalanced.

Yeah, that game is pretty tightly balanced as is. It is very important that everyone knows their very first opening moves, but no need to really fiddle with anything that the 2nd edition didn't fix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robb sent a letter to Balon saying he would make him King of the Iron Islands if Balon attacked the Lannisters.  Balon saw this as an insult.  If Balon wanted to be King, he would make himself King.  Not be given a Kingdom from Robb, as payment for fighting Robb's enemies.  Also, Balon thought that he would become some vassel of King Robb and not a true King.  His opinion was, if Robb gave him a crown, Robb could also have it taken away.  And Robb expected Theon to be Balon's successor, and Balon saw Theon as having been "turned".  

Balon saw the North was weak with Robb and his army now in the South.  And by capturing Moat Catlin, he could trap Robb's army in the South, and keep the Southern armies out as well. Balon was interested in ruling the Iron Islands and the North.  Euron, wanted to capture and rule all of Westeros. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty easy to explain: It was the easiest way to conquer some land.

It was lightly held and strategically vulnerable, currently in rebellion, and despite it being better quality land than what is found on the Iron Islands the Iron Throne didn't really care about it. By attacking the North, he doesn't close the door on any potential alliance with the Lannisters either as can be seen with Tyrion, Tywin, and Mace and the Reach Lords all considering a potential alliance with Balon at one point or the other.

The one really stupid thing Balon did was crown himself though, here I have to agree with The Reader, by crowning himself, even if he intended to eventually bend the knee, he showed bad will towards the Iron Throne, whoever sits it. It would have been better to attack the North in the vague name "of the Iron Throne" and demand to keep your conquests (the North's Western Coast) in exchange for your service. I understand Balon's crown might have been an extra to negotiate, giving him more leverage, but I think it was a pointless risk to take.

On 11/07/2016 at 7:27 PM, lujo said:

Anyone who's played the AGoT boardgame, knows that playing the Lanister practically requires you somehow talk the Greyjoy not to trounce you right away. However, this usually ends up with the rest of everybody ganging up on the Greyjoy imediately afterwards. Which also describes the first rebellion, so Balon would have been in the position to know this. If a Greyjoy wants to get something out of an all-out brawl, he needs a strong Lanister drawing everybody else's hate instead of the Greyjoy.

I need to play this game again soon.

The Lannisters in it are in a position where an alliance is absolutely necessary. Should the Tyrells and Greyjoys ally, you're done for. Should the Greyjoys and Northmen ally, you're fucked. You basically always start in a precarious position, and must profit from the fact that you are the weakest player around to save your ass and forge an alliance with one or more player. The Lannisters are in serious need of some balancing, as are arguably House Baratheon, who are absurdly strong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AvengerofWinterfell said:

1, he's an idiot and turned down a chance truly accomplish something (teaming with Robb and winning independence)

He won independence. The Iron Islands independence has outlasted the Norths.

1 hour ago, AvengerofWinterfell said:

2, the bulk of the Norths fighters were away so it was an easy target.

This seems to be the most logical. No Northern navy and a, pretty much, undefended Capital and coast meant it was easily accomplished with few casualties.

Also has to be taken into account that Robb's army would be much further away to retaliate than the Lannisters would and unlike the Westerlands, the North has a natural choke point that could keep out Robb and his army.

1 hour ago, AvengerofWinterfell said:

3, irrational hatred of the Starks for helping to beat him in a war he started.

Not really irrational, they had held his heir hostage long after he officially became an adult while Lannisport and Oldtown had long ago released their Ironborn hostages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He actually loved the sons that he knew and raised who died but lost Theon and wanted Theon to prove he was ironborn by betraying his "bro" Robb.

Theon succeeded and failed simultaneously by conquering Winterfell but disobeying the planned attack on the North that may have worked. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As been mentioned before if Balon would have joined with the North it would have been Dalton Greyjoy all over again. I don't doubt that he would have made a heafty profit by wrecking the western coast and gain the enemity of the Westerland lords. Problem would of course have been that no matter if its Joffrey, Tommen, Renly or Stannis sitting on the Iron Throne, they are not going to give up the Westerlands or allow the Ironmen to reave across their coasts. A such it would be large reward now and massive retaliation afterwards when the Reach and royal navy comes calling regardless of who is king.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, thelittledragonthatcould said:

He won independence. The Iron Islands independence has outlasted the Norths.

This seems to be the most logical. No Northern navy and a, pretty much, undefended Capital and coast meant it was easily accomplished with few casualties.

Also has to be taken into account that Robb's army would be much further away to retaliate than the Lannisters would and unlike the Westerlands, the North has a natural choke point that could keep out Robb and his army.

Not really irrational, they had held his heir hostage long after he officially became an adult while Lannisport and Oldtown had long ago released their Ironborn hostages.

he didnt really win anything, everyone else was simply too busy fighting each other to deal with him.

exactly

its still kind of irrational.  He's held hostage because of Balon's actions and Balon is still in power.  Theon's age has nothing to do with when he's released (case in point, Lord Manderly's son was an adult when he was taken hostage) .  As for the other hostages, Im not sure about the one who went to Lannisport but the one taken to Oldtown (Blacktyde) was released upon reaching adulthood because he was actually the Lord of his House.  His father died in the rebellion so he was released to assume his birthright upon reaching manhood.  In Theon's case he would likely have been returned to Iron Islands in similar fashion had Balon died but he's still alive so no reason to send him back as Balon still needs to be kept in check. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GrrM needed Robb's (and the north) downfall to be tragic, and appear to be utterly complete.  The entire sequence of events seem contrived and purely for the convenience of the plot.

1-Robb puts Roose in charge of his second army.  I don't have the books on me, but IIRC, Jon thinks to himself that his father never had cause to complain about Roose, but had never trusted him.  If Jon knew this, so would Robb.  When Ned knows trouble is coming, he instructs Catelyn to get word to Glover and Tallhart, and to keep Theon close.  Wouldn't she know, along with Jon and Robb most likely, that Ned trusted Glover and Tallhart the most out of his bannermen.  And Roose the least.

2-Roose's token effort.  Had Roose any concern about loosing that battle, then all he had to do to march close enough so that Tywin knew he was there.  His main purpose was to keep Tywin's attention away from RR.  Just being in the vicinity would have effectively held Tywin in place.  Instead he force marches overnight, only to stop and form up a mile away, giving the westermen time to form up.

3-Rickard Karstark's betrayal.  Does no one else think this is a little thin?  The Karstark's have been loyal for a long time, Rickard fought with Robb's father and grandfather, but when his sons die he loses it a kills two captives.  Hurting the war effort.

4-Catelyns betrayal.  I'm probably in the minority, but I understand this betrayal more than any of the others, as grevious as it was.  It was a slim chance, and I understand trusting in the Kingslayer is like building on sand, but there was a slim chance that would get her daughters back.

5-Theon's betrayal. Balon's attack is not nearly as dire if Theon doesn't take one of the strongest castles in Westeros with a handful of men.  And while Theon is a treacherous bastard and it seems in character for him to do such, you really have to stretch believability for him to actually get it done.

6-Walder's overkill.  Walder has a grevience to be sure,  but arranging the mass murder of hundreds of people through treachery by breaking on of the oldest laws of Westeros and by doing so gaining the enmity, or at least letting everyone know they can never trust you, seems way over the top.

So his mother, best friend, and three of his lords betray him.  And I might be forgetting something.

Still, though, as to the OP, Theon (by way of Balon) is the linchpin.  Roose's betrayal is contingent on Walder's betrayal, and vice versa, and both are contingent on Theon taking Winterfell, not Balon attacking the north.  Balon is a rebel no matter who wins except Robb Stark.  If Balon doesn't attack the north, or if Theon warns Robb, they don't have the opportunity to betray Robb in such a devestating manner.  Or if Theon doesn't have delusions of grandeur, then the north is still not in near so bad a shape as the west.

If Balon does the sensible thing, the only thing he can do if he wants to be king, and joins Robb, then Tywin is in a dire situation.  The westerlands are being raided by Robb and Balon, Stannis is licking his wounds on Dragonstone, the Martells are brooding in the south, and the Arryns are ringed in stone at the Eyrie, the Riverlands are secure and Tywin has lost Harrenhal.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Always believed it was spite. Ned took Theon who is ironborn and in a sense turned him soft. Plus the north was a easy target compare to castely rock like the north is the only true place with no real white expect from the harbour 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, King Ned Stark said:

GrrM needed Robb's (and the north) downfall to be tragic, and appear to be utterly complete.  The entire sequence of events seem contrived and purely for the convenience of the plot.

1-Robb puts Roose in charge of his second army.  I don't have the books on me, but IIRC, Jon thinks to himself that his father never had cause to complain about Roose, but had never trusted him.  If Jon knew this, so would Robb.  When Ned knows trouble is coming, he instructs Catelyn to get word to Glover and Tallhart, and to keep Theon close.  Wouldn't she know, along with Jon and Robb most likely, that Ned trusted Glover and Tallhart the most out of his bannermen.  And Roose the least.

2-Roose's token effort.  Had Roose any concern about loosing that battle, then all he had to do to march close enough so that Tywin knew he was there.  His main purpose was to keep Tywin's attention away from RR.  Just being in the vicinity would have effectively held Tywin in place.  Instead he force marches overnight, only to stop and form up a mile away, giving the westermen time to form up.

3-Rickard Karstark's betrayal.  Does no one else think this is a little thin?  The Karstark's have been loyal for a long time, Rickard fought with Robb's father and grandfather, but when his sons die he loses it a kills two captives.  Hurting the war effort.

4-Catelyns betrayal.  I'm probably in the minority, but I understand this betrayal more than any of the others, as grevious as it was.  It was a slim chance, and I understand trusting in the Kingslayer is like building on sand, but there was a slim chance that would get her daughters back.

5-Theon's betrayal. Balon's attack is not nearly as dire if Theon doesn't take one of the strongest castles in Westeros with a handful of men.  And while Theon is a treacherous bastard and it seems in character for him to do such, you really have to stretch believability for him to actually get it done.

6-Walder's overkill.  Walder has a grevience to be sure,  but arranging the mass murder of hundreds of people through treachery by breaking on of the oldest laws of Westeros and by doing so gaining the enmity, or at least letting everyone know they can never trust you, seems way over the top.

So his mother, best friend, and three of his lords betray him.  And I might be forgetting something.

Still, though, as to the OP, Theon (by way of Balon) is the linchpin.  Roose's betrayal is contingent on Walder's betrayal, and vice versa, and both are contingent on Theon taking Winterfell, not Balon attacking the north.  Balon is a rebel no matter who wins except Robb Stark.  If Balon doesn't attack the north, or if Theon warns Robb, they don't have the opportunity to betray Robb in such a devestating manner.  Or if Theon doesn't have delusions of grandeur, then the north is still not in near so bad a shape as the west.

If Balon does the sensible thing, the only thing he can do if he wants to be king, and joins Robb, then Tywin is in a dire situation.  The westerlands are being raided by Robb and Balon, Stannis is licking his wounds on Dragonstone, the Martells are brooding in the south, and the Arryns are ringed in stone at the Eyrie, the Riverlands are secure and Tywin has lost Harrenhal.

 

As this seems to be after the Blackwater Tywin is in a position of strength and ready to finish off the separatists with the Tyrells and some Stormlords having added their strength to his, the Vale and Dorne has passed on any great oppertunity to pounce on the Lion while Stannis is trying to clamp his severe arteries together on Dragonstone. It will be a long and bloody war before all is done no doubt, but anyone can see the writing on the wall, just like people did do after the Blackwater.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...