Robb Could Have Won

[Lord Reaver]

And even if they make it to the North, the North just needs to employ a similar strategy to Russia; trade land for time. And this invasion would be happening at the beginning of Winter.

No, they cannot. Consult any map of westeros, and you'll see that pretty much every single stronghold in the north, bar WF and Last Hearth, is accessible by sea. That means transporting anything, be it soldiers, food etc. is considerably easier.

Also, it means that BBE's oxcart math, while interesting, is fairly irrelevant.

[The Fallen]

No, they cannot. Consult any map of westeros, and you'll see that pretty much every single stronghold in the north, bar WF and Last Hearth, is accessible by sea. That means transporting anything, be it soldiers, food etc. is considerably easier.

Also, it means that BBE's oxcart math, while interesting, is fairly irrelevant.

Well, unless ships can sail on land what does it matter?

A real-life example would be Robert the Bruce and the Scots, who left their castles and hid in the interior of Scotland, which is way smaller than the North. So I don't see why it couldn't work in the North.

Also, I'm no military expert, but it doesn't seem like a good strategy to invest all the castles in the North. The northmen can just leave a garrison strong enough to hold out for months, while the cream of the army engages in hit and run attacks and WMarshall's favorite, guerrilla warfare.

[Sir Lee knot]

Robb didn't actually need to march back to the North. If I remember, GRRM said that the North could've fielded up to 40k troops, but it would've taken a lot longer and would've put a strain on supply lines. So the North could've taken on the Greyjoys (especially after the Greyjoy Succession Crisis).

Robb, post Blackwater Bay, was in a relatively strong position. He had 14000 troops under Roose Bolton at Harrenhal, he had ~6000 cavalry after the Battle of Oxcross in the Westerlands, and the Riverlanders had ~11000 troops under Edmure holding Riverrun. The Tyrell-Lannister host was incredibly large, which would mean slower movement than a smaller force.

Robb should have:

1. Ordered Manderly or Glover (or even the Crannogmen) to raise hosts and cleanse the North of the Ironborn then strengthen defences at Moat Cailin.

2. Move Roose Bolton from Harrenhal (leave maybe 1000 men at Harrenhal) further north-west, so that if the Tyrells-Lannister's split their forces, they would still have to fight across a river) [Edmure defeated Tywin's attempted crossings despite being outnumbered 2-1]. That would be a massive drain on morale and manpower from the Great Western Alliance.

3. Raised Riverlander levies (the Riverlands is the second most populous of the Seven Kingdoms, so how they could not raise more troops is beyond me) at Riverrun and moved them into the Westerlands to seize the Golden Tooth, Sarsfield and Deep Den (essentially turning the terrain against Tywin's advances while constricting the gold flow from the West).

4. STORMED LANNISPORT! The Lannisters were battered, and Lannisport was their ancestral home as well as their main financial centre. Taking it could have given him a fleet, gold and silver, food, and a base to cut off supplies from entering the Rock.

5. Wait until the Reachman Fleet left Blackwater Bay and then used Manderlys' fleet (which nobody knows about) to slip down the Blackwater and smash King's Landing. Taking the King and the Capital would have forced Tywin into negotiating or at least caused the Tyrell-forces to split up again to attempt to retake the city and save Margaery.

Alternatively, he could have put more pressure on the Vale to enter the war on his side (House Royce was already calling for them to enter the war on Stark-side) which could have strengthened his supply lines, resulted in greater naval strength, allowed him to shift the Northern foot westwards from Harrenhal and provided him with 20k-30k levies.

:thumbsup: :cheers: :agree:

Yeah, basically just have Manderly rally the rest of the northern forces to throw out the IronBorn and Wildlings. Then have him send that army down to Kingslanding via navy and take it by surprise. Meanwhile Robb continues pillaging the West's gold to draw forces over there while Manderly is sailing to Kingslanding.

[belladeuil]

Robb Stark may have had a chance if he accepted only the fealty of the Northmen and went back north of Moat Cailin, leaving the Riverlands to its own devices. There three claimants to the Iron Throne and none of them would accept the independence of the North, much less of the Riverlands also. Robb Stark is waging a war of vengeance against the Lannisters but by becoming King in the North and claiming the independence of the Riverlands and the North, Robb Stark is making himself an enemy of the Baratheon brothers as well. Robb Stark was on the defensive but so was Edmure Tully and the Riverlands was all but conquered by the Lannisters before Robb Stark joined the war. How could Robb Stark just pick the Lannisters and the Tyrells to pieces when firstly, their army outnumber his about three to one, and secondly, the Ironborn has invaded the North? Gregor Clegane, Addam Marbrand, Daven Lannister, Tywin Lannister, Randyll Tarly and Mathis Rowan seem to be capable commanders. Think on Robb Stark victories for a moment. He won at Whispering Wood because he caught Jaime Lannister off guard. When he won at the Camps, he was defeating an army whose leader had already been captured. When he won at Oxcross, the Lannister army was deep in Lannister territory and were commanded by Stafford Lannister, 'Uncle Dolt'. Robb Stark is excellent in the field but so are some of the Lannister-Tyrell commanders. It is unlikely Robb Stark has the resources to bloody the Lannisters until they sue for peace, especially when he has to face the Ironborn at Moat Cailin and the Wildings to the North. More likely, in his absence, the Riverlords will be bloodied by the Lannisters until they sue for peace.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Also, I'm no military expert, but it doesn't seem like a good strategy to invest all the castles in the North. The northmen can just leave a garrison strong enough to hold out for months, while the cream of the army engages in hit and run attacks and WMarshall's favorite, guerrilla warfare.

If I were planning an attack on the North, I wouldn't try investing all the castles. Instead, I'd focus on Bear Island and Deepwood Motte on one hand, and White Harbour on the other. The former are close to the sea (easy to reinforce, maritime climate means mild weather and access to food), and the latter is the commercial hub of the North. Take both, and not only is the North's economy strangled, but the Northmen would be reduced to running back and forth across a continent.

No navy is a pain, ain't it?

[The Wolves]

The North has a navy now.

[the conquering bastard 25]

Wood, while important, is not enough to build a fleet. England built a huge fleet of wooden ships while having very little forests left. At the same time, Russia, a nation full of forests, had a tiny fleet by comparion.

Russia is also primarly land locked! What's the point of a huge navy and your a land locked country? The north on the other hand is the exact opposite one can't look at the map of westeros without noticing that the North has 2 huge fucking coasts! The fact that they don't have a navy is ludercious. They have the largest coast lines in the kingdom and the biggest forest. Their navy should dwarf the Redwynes(an island), Isles, Dragonstone and the Lannister fleet. As none of these places has access to the type of trees that the North does. Also, while these fleets are landing in the North, as its the size of Russia, Robb could do like Stalin let them get to a certain point and then burn it all. That's what I'd do. Tywin saying he wanted the Trident afire from Harrenhal to somewhere else in the Trident reminded me of Stalin's reaction of Hitler.

[Lord Reaver]

Well, unless ships can sail on land what does it matter?

It matters because suddenly the land travel distance is reduced to a fraction of what it was. Really, are you being willfully obtuse?

A real-life example would be Robert the Bruce and the Scots, who left their castles and hid in the interior of Scotland, which is way smaller than the North. So I don't see why it couldn't work in the North.

Actually, Robert fled to Ireland. He also had a powerful ally in France, with whom England was simultaneously embroiled in the hundred years' war. The situations could not be more different.

Also, I'm no military expert, but it doesn't seem like a good strategy to invest all the castles in the North. The northmen can just leave a garrison strong enough to hold out for months, while the cream of the army engages in hit and run attacks and WMarshall's favorite, guerrilla warfare.

Who said anything about investing all the castles at once ? The forces of the IT have enough men and engineers to take the castles one by one and by storm.

Also wage guerilla warfare where, against whom ? The point is the coastal strongholds (basically all of them bar WF) would simply have a huge besieging army o utside, one at a time. Guerilla tactics aren't really all that effective against that.

[Lord Reaver]

. Also, while these fleets are landing in the North, as its the size of Russia, Robb could do like Stalin let them get to a certain point and then burn it all. That's what I'd do. Tywin saying he wanted the Trident afire from Harrenhal to somewhere else in the Trident reminded me of Stalin's reaction of Hitler.

No, he could not. Ironically, you pointed out why yourself. Being landlocked has it's advantages as well as drawbacks, and that is one of those. It would be significantly easier to resupply forces in the north via the sea than it is in Russia.

[the conquering bastard 25]

Yet, ships are blown off course, they sink, are damaged. Replenishing by sea is a lot harder and impractical then one might think. Burn the coasts, make it impossible for them to land their ships. Or let them advance. Don't stop them, get them to a certain point and burn everything behind them. Their only option is to press on in hostile territory. They would be stuck with a burned wasteland at their back and hostile forces to their fronts. Part of the reason that Hitler lost in Russia was because you can't fight a two sided war. With forces behind you and ready to cut off your retreat to your now burned fleet and an angry pissed off north to your front it's not going to be a good day for Stannis or any other force that is coming up to mess with the north.

Their coastline is one of their biggest strengths. I don't think the Andalos only got their asses handed to them when they were trying to defeat the North at moat catlin.

[Lord Reaver]

Yet, ships are blown off course, they sink, are damaged. Replenishing by sea is a lot harder and impractical then one might think. Burn the coasts, make it impossible for them to land their ships.

And yet, traders keep going everywhere by ship. One would think it couldn't possibly be profitable the way you describe it. Fact is, ship travel is ridiculously more effective for trqnsporting goods than land travel at the technological level Westeros is at. You can try arguing against that if you will, but I suggest saving yourself the effort.

Burning the coasts won't really work. For one, the south, again, has engineers, that can rebuild them. For another, the IT has longships, that don't particularly need docks. They can land perfectly well on natural docking sites.

[The Marquis de Leech]

The North has a navy now.

The equivalent of a couple of tugboats and a second-hand dinghy. Manderley's ships are no match for the likes of the Iron Fleet or the Redwynes.

(We are, of course, getting into one of the great world building holes in the books. The North should actually have a powerful naval force, useful for fishing and trading in peacetime, and coastal defence in wartime. That no one has bothered to rebuild the fleet in the several thousand years since Bran the Burner breaks the willing suspension of disbelief).

[the conquering bastard 25]

And yet, traders keep going everywhere by ship. One would think it couldn't possibly be profitable the way you describe it. Fact is, ship travel is ridiculously more effective for trqnsporting goods than land travel at the technological level Westeros is at. You can try arguing against that if you will, but I suggest saving yourself the effort.

Burning the coasts won't really work. For one, the south, again, has engineers, that can rebuild them. For another, the IT has longships, that don't particularly need docks. They can land perfectly well on natural docking sites.

I'm not disputing that its faster and such.

What I am doing is saying that your are drastically oversimplifying the situation. The north is huge, whomever decides to attack the north is going to need the entire realm of ships to do as your speaking. Stannis doesn't have that type of naval might. The Ironborn had the North or large coastal portion of it yet I don't see Euron siding or making friends with Lannister, Stannis or King Renly. He's not built to play well with others. Highgarden might have the ships to do such, yet again they would be going up against Robb on his home turf, far from home, depending on their ships not being taken, fired, sank, or scattered to stay resupplied all the while they had Robb king of the surprise ambush ready to snatch fire and blood from their asses from daring to come beyond the Neck.

[Lord Reaver]

I think it should be fairly obvious I presuppose the IT will eventually rule everything but the north, eventually, and that this is what Robb will have to face.

[Bryden Tully]

I think it should be fairly obvious I presuppose the IT will eventually rule everything but the north, eventually, and that this is what Robb will have to face.

But it depends who's on the IT? At the end of ADWD the IT is in no position to do anything unless Aegon gets the Throne. Robb has a good 5-10 years before the IT can actually do anything

Robb Stark may have had a chance if he accepted only the fealty of the Northmen and went back north of Moat Cailin, leaving the Riverlands to its own devices. There three claimants to the Iron Throne and none of them would accept the independence of the North, much less of the Riverlands also. .

No,No,No.

I've said like 20 times Robb couldn't and wouldn't do that. His bannerman would of hanged him for being a craven if he simply hid behind Moat Cailin whilst his sisters were being held captive, Robb had defeated the Lannisters 3 times in the field-he had no reason to go north and lose all his momentum. Robb is driven by the Tully words 'family honour duty''.

Renly was open to the idea of Robb remaining as KITN

[paramount]

I think Robb was doomed when Winterfell was sacked by Ramsay and Rodrick Cassel's death outside Winterfell thereby killing the last true Stark loyalist in the North.

[Robb_Warged]

Side note to this thread: It amazes me how much discussion Robb's failed quest generates. Not that I'm complaining. He's my fav character

I think it should be fairly obvious I presuppose the IT will eventually rule everything but the north, eventually, and that this is what Robb will have to face.

Will or would have to face?

[TheSpymaster]

What chance could robb have stood against the lannisters and tyrells..??? The forces of lannisters and tyrells were pretty much stronger..and assuming freys boltons and karstarks are still with robb...they could only manage a mere 20k strength..!! The battle was lost when edmure held off tywin...

[Bright Blue Eyes]

I think it should be fairly obvious I presuppose the IT will eventually rule everything but the north, eventually, and that this is what Robb will have to face.

And that's the problem. The IT would need years and years to subdue the South. All the while the North (and the Riverlands) are a shining beacon of independence in the North, creating even more problems in the South.

What chance could robb have stood against the lannisters and tyrells..??? The forces of lannisters and tyrells were pretty much stronger..and assuming freys boltons and karstarks are still with robb...they could only manage a mere 20k strength..!! The battle was lost when edmure held off tywin...

The Lannisters already lost two thirds of their strength. On the other hand, even with their losses, the North+Riverlands could manage to raise 100,000 men given only a couple months respite - which they did get at least in the Riverlands.

[TheSpymaster]

Are you counting the vale...??