Rob Stark was really not that great of a General

[Free Northman Reborn]

6 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Roose was pretty much broken. That host wasn't really a danger to Tywin. He could easily enough have pursued them and crushed them completely. That he didn't do that was due to the fact that he realized Robb and the cavalry wasn't with Roose at all.

And that it wasn't really necessary. Tywin wasn't on some mad quest to eradicate the Tullys or Starks. He wanted to deal with this uprising so that he could get around to deal with Robert's brothers. Had Tywin captured Robb or Catelyn he most likely wouldn't have killed them. He would have kept them as hostages or demanded some of the younger Stark sons as hostages and then he would have made a peace with them. Even more so while Cersei still had Ned. And with Robb capturing Jaime they could have reached an agreement even more easily.

Tywin himself didn't give shit about Jaime's life, by the way. When he sends Tyrion to KL it is clear that he expects Jaime to die in captivity. The smart way to deal with a hostage situation is to write them off as losses when they are captured. That way you can't be blackmailed. That's how Tywin intended to deal with another Lannister hostage situation back when Lady Tarbeck took those three Lannisters. A man like Tywin doesn't allow himself to be blackmailed. It is a sign of weakness.

Well, that's basically how wars go. You sound like a guy complaining that Napoleon didn't win in Russia despite the fact that he should have some success because you would like that. Or complaining about the halt order that allowed the British to escape being captured/killed by the Germans at Dunkirk. Stuff like that does happen in war. People make mistakes, don't know things they should know to make an informed decisions but have to make one anyway, etc.

War is not fair. People are not equally smart or talented nor do they command equally strong or well-equipped/provisioned armies. 

Hmmm. This is not really an argument I'm much interesting in having. I started in this thread by taking the position that Robb wasn't a particularly great general. Somehow I've ended up arguing with you about Tywin. My view is simply that Tywin wasn't that great a general either.

He had no influence in Renly's death. He had no influence over Balon Greyjoy invading the North. He had no influence over Catelyn alienating the Karstarks with Jaime's release, or Robb alienating the Freys by sleeping with Jeyne. And if it had been a Glover, Manderly, Karstark, Umber or Mormont in charge of the Green Fork host instead of Roose Bolton, he would not have had a traitor to work with to stab Robb in the back on that front either.

Martin stacked the deck. And for good reason. The plot needed the Young Wolf to fall. After all, George's original outline had the Young Wolf win a number of heroic victories but ultimately being tragically betrayed and defeated.

My point is, if the roles had been reversed, and Robb had been in Tywin's position, I would have considered him plopping himself down far from his own lands with enemies to the North, South and West a pretty terrible strategic outcome. Just because it was Tywin who did so should not suddenly make it a great strategic move.

[Bernie Mac]

5 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

And if it had been a Glover, Manderly, Karstark, Umber or Mormont in charge of the Green Fork host instead of Roose Bolton, he would not have had a traitor to work with to stab Robb in the back on that front either.

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. 

 

[Lord Varys]

27 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Hmmm. This is not really an argument I'm much interesting in having. I started in this thread by taking the position that Robb wasn't a particularly great general. Somehow I've ended up arguing with you about Tywin. My view is simply that Tywin wasn't that great a general either.

There you seem to be wrong. Tywin was simply a really great and talented man. A great general, a great politician, a great lord, a great Hand. He was a truly exceptional man. Robb simply wasn't. He was adequate, and profited greatly from the fact that Tywin underestimated him at first. But once Tywin had the measure of the man he destroyed him.

He arranged the Westerling trap for him, destroying his alliance with the Freys, and then he used the Freys to kill him. That was a master stroke.

The Red Wedding setting wasn't his idea. Tywin just wanted Robb dead, not half the North and Riverlands.

27 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

He had no influence in Renly's death. He had no influence over Balon Greyjoy invading the North. He had no influence over Catelyn alienating the Karstarks with Jaime's release, or Robb alienating the Freys by sleeping with Jeyne.

In the latest case you are mistaken. Robb was lured into a trap at the Crag. Tywin doesn't have to arrange Renly's death or arrange the invasion of the North to be a great general. The loss of the Karstarks is an insignificant affair, actually. Robb was a dead man walking before. If they hadn't been able to arranged the Red Wedding Roose and Walder would just have murdered Robb in some other way. That could have worked, too.

27 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

And if it had been a Glover, Manderly, Karstark, Umber or Mormont in charge of the Green Fork host instead of Roose Bolton, he would not have had a traitor to work with to stab Robb in the back on that front either.

What makes you think all those men are all that trustworthy? And, yes, as @Bernie Mac has said Roose was the perfect general for the Green Fork. Certain other Northmen may have lost the entire army there.

27 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Martin stacked the deck. And for good reason. The plot needed the Young Wolf to fall. After all, George's original outline had the Young Wolf win a number of heroic victories but ultimately being tragically betrayed and defeated.

I'm not really sure what you mean by that. This is a series of novels, and the author writes the story. He doesn't betray his characters or lures them into traps, he writes a story.

But the way he describes things we can be reasonably certain that Tywin is among the most competent and resourceful military commanders and generals in the story. If he had been fought a pitched battle against Robb he would have had a very good chance of winning it, even if they had been in an even situation - which is not that likely to happen considering the huge numerical advantage the Westermen have.

I'd also see it rather likely that Tywin would win a pitched battle against Renly or Mace even if they had the advantage in numbers. He is a very experienced commander, after all, while Renly has never even fought in a war.

For a similar reason I see Connington and the Golden Company defeat the Reach armies marching against them, even they are outnumber 2-3:1 simply because Connington has learned some valuable lessons in Essos and the Golden Company being professional, well-equipped, and well-disciplined soldiers. They know how to fight, how to hold their lines, how to follow orders, how to enact a stratagem that lures the enemy into a trap, etc.

27 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

My point is, if the roles had been reversed, and Robb had been in Tywin's position, I would have considered him plopping himself down far from his own lands with enemies to the North, South and West a pretty terrible strategic outcome. Just because it was Tywin who did so should not suddenly make it a great strategic move.

I'm not saying Tywin showed great abilities as a military strategist during the War of the Five Kings. But he knew how to use patience, and it is pretty much his well-earned reputation as the great (and ruthless) man that he is that ensures his victory. The Freys and Boltons know they can't stand against Tywin. That's why they betray Robb. The Tyrells know that a Lannister alliance is good idea, because Tywin is a man of his word, etc.

If you compare him to Robb then Robb's own reputation unmakes him. He gets this aura of the undefeated Young Wolf which, in combination with his own coronation, makes him incapable or unwilling to see the political realities after the Blackwater. He should have bent the knee, given up his crown, and made an honorable peace. That way he could have saved his life.

[Free Northman Reborn]

10 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

There you seem to be wrong. Tywin was simply a really great and talented man. A great general, a great politician, a great lord, a great Hand. He was a truly exceptional man. Robb simply wasn't. He was adequate, and profited greatly from the fact that Tywin underestimated him at first. But once Tywin had the measure of the man he destroyed him.

He arranged the Westerling trap for him, destroying his alliance with the Freys, and then he used the Freys to kill him. That was a master stroke.

The Red Wedding setting wasn't his idea. Tywin just wanted Robb dead, not half the North and Riverlands.

In the latest case you are mistaken. Robb was lured into a trap at the Crag. Tywin doesn't have to arrange Renly's death or arrange the invasion of the North to be a great general. The loss of the Karstarks is an insignificant affair, actually. Robb was a dead man walking before. If they hadn't been able to arranged the Red Wedding Roose and Walder would just have murdered Robb in some other way. That could have worked, too.

What makes you think all those men are all that trustworthy? And, yes, as @Bernie Mac has said Roose was the perfect general for the Green Fork. Certain other Northmen may have lost the entire army there.

I'm not really sure what you mean by that. This is a series of novels, and the author writes the story. He doesn't betray his characters or lures them into traps, he writes a story.

But the way he describes things we can be reasonably certain that Tywin is among the most competent and resourceful military commanders and generals in the story. If he had been fought a pitched battle against Robb he would have had a very good chance of winning it, even if they had been in an even situation - which is not that likely to happen considering the huge numerical advantage the Westermen have.

I'd also see it rather likely that Tywin would win a pitched battle against Renly or Mace even if they had the advantage in numbers. He is a very experienced commander, after all, while Renly has never even fought in a war.

For a similar reason I see Connington and the Golden Company defeat the Reach armies marching against them, even they are outnumber 2-3:1 simply because Connington has learned some valuable lessons in Essos and the Golden Company being professional, well-equipped, and well-disciplined soldiers. They know how to fight, how to hold their lines, how to follow orders, how to enact a stratagem that lures the enemy into a trap, etc.

I'm not saying Tywin showed great abilities as a military strategist during the War of the Five Kings. But he knew how to use patience, and it is pretty much his well-earned reputation as the great (and ruthless) man that he is that ensures his victory. The Freys and Boltons know they can't stand against Tywin. That's why they betray Robb. The Tyrells know that a Lannister alliance is good idea, because Tywin is a man of his word, etc.

If you compare him to Robb then Robb's own reputation unmakes him. He gets this aura of the undefeated Young Wolf which, in combination with his own coronation, makes him incapable or unwilling to see the political realities after the Blackwater. He should have bent the knee, given up his crown, and made an honorable peace. That way he could have saved his life.

The issue is looking at things from the protagonists point of view. But if you switch it around, consider looking at things from Tywins point of view. Consider his position at the time.

You invade the Riverlands with 35k. Knowing that the North will come to their aid. Together these two kingdoms outnumber your forces by a considerable margin. And you will be fighting on foreign territory. Furthermore, at the time he had no information to suggest that the Vale would not join with the North and the Riverlands, considering that the Lady of the Vale was sister to both Catelyn and Edmure. So in that likely event, you would have been facing three kingdoms, far away from your own lands.

And this while an even larger force was marshalling in the Reach, also your enemy.

Not to mention that if Balon sided with Robb, the West would be open to Ironborn raiding at the same time.

Frankly, Tywin had no strategy to deal with all of these issues. His campaign was poorly thought through, and relied on an improbable set of events to eventually succeed.

My point is merely that if it was the Starks acting in Tywin's place, I would have considered their actions poorly conceived and strategically unsound.

[Bernie Mac]

10 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

There you seem to be wrong. Tywin was simply a really great and talented man. A great general, a great politician, a great lord, a great Hand. He was a truly exceptional man. Robb simply wasn't. He was adequate, and profited greatly from the fact that Tywin underestimated him at first. But once Tywin had the measure of the man he destroyed him.

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.

 

10 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

He arranged the Westerling trap for him, destroying his alliance with the Freys, and then he used the Freys to kill him. That was a master stroke.

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. 

10 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I'd also see it rather likely that Tywin would win a pitched battle against Renly or Mace even if they had the advantage in numbers. He is a very experienced commander, after all, while Renly has never even fought in a war.

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. 

10 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

 

If you compare him to Robb then Robb's own reputation unmakes him. He gets this aura of the undefeated Young Wolf which, in combination with his own coronation, makes him incapable or unwilling to see the political realities after the Blackwater. He should have bent the knee, given up his crown, and made an honorable peace. That way he could have saved his life.

In short he should have listened to his mother

[Dukhasinov]

2 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

I will say that a recent discussion on the Riverlands strength had me tick off the Lannister's victories in the WotFK, and frankly, if Robb had NOT dealt them some defeats, that would have had a ridiculousness in its own right. Because then you would have had 35k Westerman smashing the Riverlands border guard at the Golden Tooth, smashing the Riverlands main host at Riverrun, decimating the Riverlands forces along the borders, defeating the Northmen at the Green Fork and defeating the Northmen at the Whispering Wood.

Basically allowing Tywin to defeat two other powerful kingdoms with a combined strength significantly exceeding his own, without suffering any major losses himself. That would have made for a rather one sided and frustrating story.

Basically, Tywin marching into a foreign territory, and smashing a kingdom with a strength not far below his own without suffering any losses, and then sitting with basically his full starting army undiminished, biding his time on foreign territory, only to defeat another kingdom's fresh armies.

Just wouldn't have worked. Why was Tywin not suffering ambushes and raids from the Riverlands on whose home turf he was? Why was his forces not diminishing due to desertion, sickness and other common issues the way all other armies appear to suffer if they are camped in foreign territory? Why were his supply lines never in danger?

Jon tells Stannis that the Umbers know every rock and every tree in their territory and would bleed his forces every step of the way, and this despite the Umber's main forces having been anihilated 1500 miles away in the Riverlands. Why is Tywin not suffering similar issues?

Is he supposed to be some superman? Are the Riverlanders supposed to be utter weaklings? It seems to me the Northmen have been rather effective in every southron campaign they have engaged in, and Tywin would have been stupid to underestimate them. And that things went pretty much the way they should have once the Northmen joined the war. It should not have been the upset some saw it as. Certainly if Eddard was leading them, it would have been the expected outcome. He was after all the greatest general of Robert's Rebellion. Winning the war for Robert according to Robert himself.

But that in itself should have earned the Northern forces in general a certain reputation for efficacy and a high threat level.

We don`t have a great deal of detailed information on Tywin`s campaign in the Riverlands, but we do know that the Westerlands, in terms of manpower and material resources, is arguably the most powerful of the seven kingdoms, rivaled only by the Reach. The Riverlands is vulnerable to having few natural barriers to invaders, which is why they spent most of their history being double-penetrated by the Iron Islands and the Storm Kings. He also used the tried-and-true feudal tactic of conducting chevauche raids on the lands of the Tully`s vassals, encouraging them to leave the Tully`s main army to defend their own lands. Edmure made this even worse by intentionally dividing his forces to protect his hinterlands, allowing his small detachments to be defeated in detail. And Tywin WAS suffering from guerilla raids, i.e. the Brotherhood without Banners. His supply lines were never in danger because "Supply lines" are mostly a concept of material intensive, logistics-heavy modern warfare. Before there was a need to supply armies with a constant flow of fuel, spare parts, and ammunition, most armies lived off of forage. In fact, they talk about feeding the army through forage A LOT in the books. ("You haven`t been robbed! You`ve just been good and foraged!") Hannibal`s army was able to camp out in Italy for 14 years while the Romans controlled the sea. He did that by taking everything he needed from his enemies` civilian population. Tywin is also not suffering from desertion because his forces are well supplied, close to home, and mostly victorious. He might well have suffered from grumbling lords while Rob was raiding in his backyard, but we don`t have Tywin`s POV. On the other hand, Tywin has a reputation for not tolerating lip from anyone in his service.

[Bernie Mac]

49 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

The issue is looking at things from the protagonists point of view. But if you switch it around, consider looking at things from Tywins point of view. Consider his position at the time.

You invade the Riverlands with 35k. Knowing that the North will come to their aid.

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

Quote

 

Together these two kingdoms outnumber your forces by a considerable margin.

Not that we have seen. Larger, possibly, even likely, but not by a considerable margin. 

Quote

 

And you will be fighting on foreign territory. Furthermore, at the time he had no information to suggest that the Vale would not join with the North and the Riverlands, considering that the Lady of the Vale was sister to both Catelyn and Edmure. So in that likely event, you would have been facing three kingdoms, far away from your own lands.

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. 

Quote

And this while an even larger force was marshalling in the Reach, also your enemy.

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. 

Quote

Not to mention that if Balon sided with Robb, the West would be open to Ironborn raiding at the same time.

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. 

Quote

Frankly, Tywin had no strategy to deal with all of these issues. His campaign was poorly thought through, and relied on an improbable set of events to eventually succeed.

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. 

 

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

The issue is looking at things from the protagonists point of view. But if you switch it around, consider looking at things from Tywins point of view. Consider his position at the time.

You invade the Riverlands with 35k. Knowing that the North will come to their aid.

Does he know that back then? Robert is still alive at this point and Ned actually (falsely) admitted to his king that Catelyn had laid hands upon and unjustly abducted the brother-in-law of the king. What do you think the outcome of that would have been if Robert hadn't died. I wouldn't put all that much money on the Starks.

Quote

Together these two kingdoms outnumber your forces by a considerable margin. And you will be fighting on foreign territory. Furthermore, at the time he had no information to suggest that the Vale would not join with the North and the Riverlands, considering that the Lady of the Vale was sister to both Catelyn and Edmure. So in that likely event, you would have been facing three kingdoms, far away from your own lands.

Tywin may have judged Lysa correctly. She wasn't willing to go to war. Family relations are less important than character traits, are they?

Quote

And this while an even larger force was marshalling in the Reach, also your enemy.

You are confusing the time line - when Tywin starts the war Robert is still alive and Renly is still in the capital. If Robert had lived the Tyrells and the Reach and the Stormlords would have followed the summons of the king. And the king would have been honor-bound to support wife's brother and father-in-law against the Starks and Tullys. Blood is thicker than water. Your family comes before your friends. Robert may have loathed Cersei but he was indebted to Tywin. He could not side with Ned against the Lannisters. At least not without evidence for the incest or the murder conspiracy Cat was believing in. And the latter was build on sand. Tyrion had nothing to do with the death of Jon Arryn or the attempt on Bran's life.

Quote

Not to mention that if Balon sided with Robb, the West would be open to Ironborn raiding at the same time.

Tywin judged Balon correctly. You don't challenge Lord Tywin. And Robb couldn't have forced Balon to do as he liked him to do because Balon didn't give shit about Theon. Threatening to kill Theon wouldn't have stayed Balon's hands. He would have attacked the North in any case.

Quote

Frankly, Tywin had no strategy to deal with all of these issues. His campaign was poorly thought through, and relied on an improbable set of events to eventually succeed.

Yet it is the only thing he could do. You defend your honor and your family if they are attacked. Nobody gets away with abducting Lord Tywin's son from some inn.

Quote

My point is merely that if it was the Starks acting in Tywin's place, I would have considered their actions poorly conceived and strategically unsound.

Still, they would have been forced to do something like he did, too. That is what motivates Robb's actions, after all. King Joffrey imprisons and eventually executes Eddard, and Robb goes to war to free/avenge him. He has to do this to save face and defend the honor of his family. The truth doesn't matter there. Let's assume for a moment Ned was an evil and ambitious schemer who cooked up a lie about Cersei's children to steal Joff's throne and and make Stannis king.

Robb would have still declared war on Joff, never mind the truth. Because that's what a lord has to do in the feudal setting of this world. You cannot ignore slights or insults like that.

1 hour ago, Bernie Mac said:

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.

There are some similarities there but Roger Reyne should have known better. He fought with Tywin on the Stepstones. Robb was untempered steel. Tywin was already tempered. People didn't expect the Rains of Castamere but the Red Lion had reason not to underestimate Tywin.

Tywin had no reason to believe that this 14-year-old boy was some kind of ruthless genius. But then, being a young genius himself he shouldn't have underestimated him.

Quote

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.

Oh, I didn't mean Tywin arranged Robb's entire campaign, but chances are that he and Sybell/Rolph arranged the marriage between Robb and Jeyne. Sybell would never have made Jeyne Robb's nurse nor would she have allowed the marriage without Tywin's permission. Tywin was the kind of guy who would severely punish - even eradicate - a vassal family who would actually dare to enter into a marriage alliance with Robb. Switching back to the winning side later on may not be enough to save them - and most certainly wouldn't have given the Westerlings and Spicers any of the rewards they received from the Iron Throne.

Quote

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.

It would depend on how the battle went. 30,000-40,000 men can win against 80,000 men under the right circumstances. And Tywin also may have been able to drive a wedge between Renly and some of his followers.

Quote

In short he should have listened to his mother

Basically, yes.

[Dorian Martell's son]

On 8/12/2017 at 1:03 PM, Dukhasinov said:

snip

You are talking about being a leader and politician, not a general. A general is measured by one thing, victory, and Robb had it in spades. As Lady Blizzardborn has said :

20 hours ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Would you say that a lawyer who never lost a case was not that great of a lawyer?

Or a physician who never lost a patient was not that great of a doctor?

Tywin Lannister, one of the greatest generals Westeros probably ever had, could not beat this kid. 

Robb had natural raw talent. What he lacked was experience. You can't blame him for being his age and having grown up during a time of peace. Given twenty more years, Robb would have outpaced even Tywin.

 

[Bernie Mac]

56 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

And the king would have been honor-bound to support wife's brother and father-in-law against the Starks and Tullys.

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. 

[Bernie Mac]

51 minutes ago, Dorian Martell's son said:

You are talking about being a leader and politician, not a general. A general is measured by one thing, victory, and Robb had it in spades. As Lady Blizzardborn has said :

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. 

[John Doe]

On top of what OP said, I think the Blackfish should get more credit for Robb's victories. He was a seasoned commander who advised him during the entire war, and without him, I very much doubt Whispering Wood could have happened. His second victory happened only because Stefford was a fool and Robb's wolf managed to find a path previously unknown to anyone.

And we never saw Robb command an actual battle, every one of his victories was an ambush. 

[Trigger Warning]

The real question is what was Robb's plan for harrying the West pre secret magic wolf path. Ah wonderful, this fortress that dominates the passage into the West is no longer relevant, how lucky that we didn't discuss the threat that it poses nor fear what Tywin might do should we be unable to bypass it. 

The issue with Robb is that he hasn't actually fought a battle that wasn't given to him on a plate. You can't engineer a battle where you have complete surprise against a completely unprepared enemy every single time. 

[Lady Blizzardborn]

4 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

<snip

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. 

<snip

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. 

 

Leaving the force he did behind at Winterfell was only a mistake because he was betrayed from the inside. No one who hadn't grown up at Winterfell could have taken it the way Theon did. Are you saying great generals should expect their allies to betray them? I see you've made Rodrik Cassel a teenager. He'll be thrilled to be young again.

Ah, so you expect GRRM to have written down every single order Robb ever gave to anyone, and never left anything out. I see.

He gave Edmure instructions that allowed for some flexibility. He did not tell Edmure to take major steps without consulting the other generals. In the military, you follow orders, you do not create your own. 

Lack of communication is partly an issue of being in a medieval setting with only horsemen (who can be killed) and ravens (which can be shot down). And partly a rookie mistake as well. I never said it wasn't.

Generals with good delegation, good communication, and fine forward thinking can also end up exposed. It's the luck of the draw.

That's still 4+ years older than Robb. In that time frame a lot of maturing goes on. 

Blackfish, Greatjon, Karstark. All men who led their own men, not entire regions, and who also followed other men who were higher placed than they were.

Hoster got involved fairly early, and men with injuries can still plan strategy.

It's, as you would say, common sense. The men in the highest positions and with the most responsibility for planning the early strategies of the rebels would be those with the most experience. Just as Robb relied on advice from older men, so would Ned and Robert have done. But as neither one of them had a crown on their heads, they didn't have to be the ultimate deciders on anything. Jon Arryn was the first to call his banners and was for all intents and purposes the leader of the rebels at the beginning.

At Castamere, Tywin was already a battle veteran. Robb was not. And "a teenager" is a broad term. It encompasses a range of seven years. As I've mentioned these are critical years in terms of maturity and personal growth, as well as ability to think comprehensively. You can't say a 19 year old with battle experience is comparable to a 15 year old without it.

I didn't say that. Way to twist words.

If you're going to rate someone as a general, all factors have to be taken into account. If the rating requires comparing a newbie to a middle aged man who is perhaps the best military mind of his generation, the kid should be given a handicap. That is the point. 

[Lady Blizzardborn]

1 hour ago, Bernie Mac said:

He lost the North, even before he go to 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. 

The people you're arguing with have not said Robb is "the Greatest General." You are putting words in people's mouths...or keyboards.  Let me simplify this for you.

The thread title is "Rob Stark was really not that great of a general." Not great is a subjective term. In order to discuss it we need to know not great compared to whom. The OP compared Robb to Tywin. I pointed out that it's not a good or fair comparison. The only guy who comes close to a fair comparison to Tywin in terms of leadership and military ability would be Barristan the Bold, who is even a bit older than Tywin, I think. The next closest would be Stannis. It's a simple question of comparing apples to apples, or comparing apples to shrimp. 

Robb lost the war based not on his military abilities or lack thereof but on his personal and political decisions. If he hadn't been friends with Theon he might have been less trusting of him. If he hadn't seen how people treated Jon, he might have been willing to risk fathering a bastard on Jeyne Westerling. If he'd been a bit older and wiser, he would have insisted on marrying a Frey girl right away instead of waiting until the war was over. If he'd been less attached to his mother, he might have thought as far as her being desperate enough to let Jaime go in the vain hope she'd get her daughters back. These are not military mistakes. The fact that they impact the war does not change the fact that his most detrimental decisions--the ones that actually cost him the war--were not military ones.

[Lady Blizzardborn]

42 minutes ago, Trigger Warning said:

The real question is what was Robb's plan for harrying the West pre secret magic wolf path. Ah wonderful, this fortress that dominates the passage into the West is no longer relevant, how lucky that we didn't discuss the threat that it poses nor fear what Tywin might do should we be unable to bypass it. 

The issue with Robb is that he hasn't actually fought a battle that wasn't given to him on a plate. You can't engineer a battle where you have complete surprise against a completely unprepared enemy every single time. 

That's an excellent point. Sadly, we never got to see how Robb would handle a battle with less favorable odds, because he got killed before that happened. You could almost say he was charmed, and so he had to die. Alas, these are the choices the author made.

[Dorian Martell's son]

1 hour ago, Bernie Mac said:

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. 

His measure as a general is reflected in this tactical data. Losing the north reflects on his greatness as king.  And most of his army died because he was betrayed long before he went to the twins. 

1 hour ago, Bernie Mac said:

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. 

I don't understand them either but that isn't what we are talking about. Robb was an incredible general, Leading an army at 15, never being defeated in battle, outmaneuvering one of the greatest generals alive to retake his Mother's family  seat, ravaging unopposed through the heartland of his enemy, and only being brought down by treason, treachery and the violation of the most sacred tradition on the continent.  

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

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. 

Sure, that's what he wanted. And then he went hunting, ignoring that his kingdom was descending into war. Upon his return - and assuming that Ned hadn't found out the incest in the meantime, and told Cersei about it, leading to Robert's death - he may have tried to enforce such a peace. But if Tywin had come to KL with his army, showing the steel behind his demands he would have gotten what he wanted if he had not insisted on Ned's head.

It may have been the moment where Tywin had demanded that Robert release Jaime from the Kingsguard and confirm him as heir to Casterly Rock.

But if war had been inevitable Robert would, in the end, have been forced to side with his wife's family over his old friend. That's what you have to do in such a setting. The queen's family is the king's family. And the king cannot allow his family to be attacked with impunity.

Things may have changed if Robert had believed that his wife and her family were betraying him. But without the incest story he wouldn't have believed that.

[Bernie Mac]

1 hour ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Leaving the force he did behind at Winterfell was only a mistake because he was betrayed from the inside.

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. 

 

Quote

 

No one who hadn't grown up at Winterfell could have taken it the way Theon did.

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. 

Quote

 

Are you saying great generals should expect their allies to betray them?

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. 

Quote

 

I see you've made Rodrik Cassel a teenager. He'll be thrilled to be young again.

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. 

 

Quote

Ah, so you expect GRRM to have written down every single order Robb ever gave to anyone, and never left anything out. I see.

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. 

Quote

He gave Edmure instructions that allowed for some flexibility. He did not tell Edmure to take major steps without consulting the other generals. In the military, you follow orders, you do not create your own. 

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?

 

1 hour ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

 

Lack of communication is partly an issue of being in a medieval setting with only horsemen (who can be killed) and ravens (which can be shot down). And partly a rookie mistake as well. I never said it wasn't.

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. 

Quote

Generals with good delegation, good communication, and fine forward thinking can also end up exposed. It's the luck of the draw.

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. 

Quote

That's still 4+ years older than Robb. In that time frame a lot of maturing goes on. 

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. 

 

Quote

Blackfish, Greatjon, Karstark. All men who led their own men, not entire regions, and who also followed other men who were higher placed than they were.

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?

 

Quote

Hoster got involved fairly early, and men with injuries can still plan strategy.

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. 

 

Quote

It's, as you would say, common sense. The men in the highest positions and with the most responsibility for planning the early strategies of the rebels would be those with the most experience.

Did Robb not have a war council of experienced and victorious veterans of war?

Quote

 

Just as Robb relied on advice from older men, so would Ned and Robert have done. But as neither one of them had a crown on their heads, they didn't have to be the ultimate deciders on anything. Jon Arryn was the first to call his banners and was for all intents and purposes the leader of the rebels at the beginning.

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. 

Quote

At Castamere, Tywin was already a battle veteran. Robb was not. And "a teenager" is a broad term. It encompasses a range of seven years. As I've mentioned these are critical years in terms of maturity and personal growth, as well as ability to think comprehensively. You can't say a 19 year old with battle experience is comparable to a 15 year old without it.

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. 

Quote

I didn't say that. Way to twist words.

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. 

Quote

If you're going to rate someone as a general, all factors have to be taken into account.

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. 

 

Quote

 

 

If the rating requires comparing a newbie to a middle aged man who is perhaps the best military mind of his generation, the kid should be given a handicap. That is the point. 

Yes, I readily admit that Robb was handicapped. Does not change the fact that he was a poor commander. 

[Moiraine Sedai]

On 8/12/2017 at 4:03 PM, Dukhasinov said:

   There has been a lot written about Rob Stark`s tactical genius compared to his strategic and political incompetence, but I submit that his tactical brilliance is very much overrated. It seems to me that he won tactical victories because he looked for the easiest tactical opportunities regardless of whether or not they promises strategic gains. I`m not going to touch on his disastrous marriage or his foolish release of Theon Greyjoy, because it`s been gone over and gone over, and I think everyone is familiar with it. It`s also very popular to compare Rob Stark favorably with Tywin Lannister, on account of Rob outmaneuvering him so many times before his ultimate defeat. However, Rob and his cause were eventually destroyed by Tywin`s machinations. It doesn`t matter how many jabs you land of you`re knocked out by a hard right in the third round. Tywin failed to pin Rob down because Rob`s audacity and extremely risky maneuvers were hard to predict, especially for a seasoned and cautious commander like Tywin Lannister. If Rob and Tywin were playing Street Fighter, Tywin would be stringing together combos, while Rob would be furiously buttonmashing (Probably with Blanca). Rob`s sending his cavalry off to relieve Riverrun while sending his foot on a delaying action against Tywin came as such a surprise because it was so foolish. If Roose Bolton`s withdrawal in good order from the Green Fork had turned into a route, it would have been a complete massacre, without the Northern horse to screen the withdrawal. And then he continued to push his luck by keeping his force divided, leaving Roose Bolton to his own devices while taking his cavalry and newly acquired Riverrun men to raid the Westerlands. And while drawing Tywin away from Harrenhal by attacking the Westerlands was a good move, there doesn`t seem to be any evidence that Rob instructed Roose to take Harrenhal. It looks like Bolton did that on his own initiative. Also, while everyone (including Rob and the Blackfish) is quick to jump down Edmure Tully`s throat for blocking Tywin`s progress into Rob`s trap, that was entirely Rob`s fault for not informing Edmure of his overall plan. This was a very easily avoidable mistake, to. If your plan is to draw your enemy across a river and then trap and destroy him, the commander you have in the position to block the crossing should definitely know what`s going on, so he doesn`t, you know, fuck up your plan.

   Rob was brave, audacious, and clever, but he was very reckless, and also very lucky. If his foot had been routed at the Green Fork, (risking the annihilation of more than half his army) or if he himself had been killed storming the Crag (A castle without a substantial garrison or high ranking hostages, and so strategically useless) his career could have ended even more quickly than it did. In this, he was very similar to George Armstrong Custer. Custer`s career lasted a lot longer than Jon Stark`s, but his reckless daring finally got the better of him.

Robb is over rated!