Renly was about to defeat Stannis, right?

[Señor de la Tormenta]

The fact that Stannis did actual battle plans, and that we are not informed of big desertions, major mutiny or switching sides, shows that he did had some chance. Unlist for the men and Lords he commands. Most of them unbelievers who expect nothing from an yet unproben Mellisandre.

As much as Renly says it would, it doesnt happen until he is dead.

[Lord Reaver]

Why is a shadowbaby a less honorable tactic than using a dragon to kill an entire army, or use a warg to take control of an animal and kill your opponent or find out information you wouldn't ordinarily have?

Strawman. Nobody was saying anything about dragons or warging. The comparison was quite obviously between using a shadowbaby to assassinate Renly, and defeating him in conventional combat.

[Minsc]

The fact that Stannis did actual battle plans, and that we are not informed of big desertions, major mutiny or switching sides, shows that he did had some chance. Unlist for the men and Lords he commands. Most of them unbelievers who expect nothing from an yet unproben Mellisandre.

Or it just means that a good chuck of them are idiots or they were waiting until right before the battle to desert/mutiny.

[Lord Reaver]

The fact that Stannis did actual battle plans, and that we are not informed of big desertions, major mutiny or switching sides, shows that he did had some chance. Unlist for the men and Lords he commands. Most of them unbelievers who expect nothing from an yet unproben Mellisandre.

As much as Renly says it would, it doesnt happen until he is dead.

Stannis' men are quite ridiculously loyal, actually. Even after he gets crushed at Blackwater, they still follow him in going north to the wall.

Them staying to fight a fairly hopeless battle against Renly isn't proof Stannis could win. It's just proof of the loyalty he inspired with his followers, of which we have numerous other examples.

[Talleyrand]

Stannis' men are quite ridiculously loyal, actually. Even after he gets crushed at Blackwater, they still follow him in going north to the wall.

Them staying to fight a fairly hopeless battle against Renly isn't proof Stannis could win. It's just proof of the loyalty he inspired with his followers, of which we have numerous other examples.

Exactly, and by the same logic Renly had a plan (because we saw it get made) and wasn't suffering desertion. And he had 20,000 men not desert so by top trumps rules he wins

[Batbob45]

Renly could beat Stannis in a Election but not one on one battle

[Lord Reaver]

Renly could beat Stannis in a Election but not one on one battle

What on earth makes you think they'd ever actually cross swords personally? In fact Renly fully expects his men to be the ones to reach Stannis, hence his orders to them to try and take him alive.

[Batbob45]

Renly tell his men not to decrate Stannis' corpse. He also said to bring him Stannis' sword.

[Lord Reaver]

Renly tell his men not to decrate Stannis' corpse. He also said to bring him Stannis' sword.

Ah, yes, well, a little more ruthless, then. Makes no difference to my point, however.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Renly tell his men not to decrate Stannis' corpse. He also said to bring him Stannis' sword.

I've always taken that as Renly assuming Stannis would never let himself be taken alive, not that Renly actually wants his men to kill Stannis.

[Talleyrand]

Renly could beat Stannis in a Election but not one on one battle

Why? Renly and Stannis are both large strong men with neither being noted for his particular strength (or lack there off) with weapons.

Renly at least might have beaten a couple of others at the Hands Tourney before being unhorsed by the Hound, if the victories are being told chronologically

[Victor227]

Considering that we have absolutely no textual evidence that between the walls of Storm's End and Renly's host was a hill made almost entirely of mud, with excellent overlook for Stannis' legendary English longbowmen to make use of while Renly's knights charged uphill, comparisons to Agincourt are pretty moot. The great knight-crushing victories are pretty much entirely terrain, terrain, terrain, and while Stannis had a bit of time to prepare the ground, the fact that he's constricted to a siege means that he doesn't have the chance to dance around the countryside looking for that perfect hill or perfect river where he can turn the odds around.

The biggest critique of the plan that's mentioned in text is that Randyll Tarly thought that attacking before the sun-up was a mistake as it gave Stannis a slight advantage in that. There's no talk of camp defenses, like say, an elaborate and well-dug in trench network that could literally be seen from the walls of the besieged Storm's End, and word of delivered unto Renly with relative ease.

Stannis came to Storm's End solely because he was assured a victory that wouldn't involve fighting at all. He didn't have the army for a fight. Almost half of his host was made up of sellswords of dubious loyalty, and men turn very quickly when an armored tide of horses is about to wash over him. He didn't have the men to take (and hold if he miraculously did take) King's Landing, and he didn't have the men to fight a battle in the field against any of the other pretenders. His only option was to take Mel's advice and try to win Renly's army by whatever means were necessary.

[CharlesW]

Most likely. With that kind of odds, R'hllor would have to show up in person and fight for Stannis for Stannis to have a chance at winning.

[Sir Lee knot]

rejoining this thread many pages later armed with more info about said topic.

I'd say the answer is that Renly would have won 7 out of 10 times.

- Renly came in with 20,000 cavalry men. Most of which being heavy horse.

- Stannis had 5,000 men, many of whom are sailors with swords and axes so not the more optimal Pikemen.

Stannis only wins if Renly makes some type of huge tactical mistake. The argument that Stannis would find a way is a silly one. It doesn't matter how smart or clever you are if one is put in an impossible situation. So since the chances that Renly and his commanders make some type of dire mistake are quite low then that is why I give the edge to Renly.

[Lord Reaver]

1/4x the men, worse equipped and not prepared at that, and you give Stannis 30% chance ? You're far too generous.

I'd say more like 5%, holding open the very narrow possibility that some fluke kills Renly mid battle, like an arrow or splint through his visor or his horse stumbles and kills him.

[GallowsKnight]

- Stannis had 5,000 men, many of whom are sailors with swords and axes so not the more optimal Pikemen.

That's incorrect. Stannis had 3000 feudal levies, which would have meant men at arms and pikes. Then 2000 myrish mercenaries of whatever quality gear Myrish Mercenaries have.

Then he has some huge number of sailors (maybe 20,000), but they're on the boats and wouldn't be involved in the land fighting as they'd have as you say no armour or pikes.

[Sir Lee knot]

That's incorrect. Stannis had 3000 feudal levies, which would have meant men at arms and pikes. Then 2000 myrish mercenaries of whatever quality gear Myrish Mercenaries have.

Then he has some huge number of sailors (maybe 20,000), but they're on the boats and wouldn't be involved in the land fighting as they'd have as you say no armour or pikes.

I should have clarified. By sailors I meant fighters, like guys who board other boats. But anyways, you did kinda correct me.

They would have Pikemen that is true but not all of them would have it. Judging by Tywin's army he only had a front line of pikemen but behind them were rows and rows of men armed with all manner a weapon. Sword, Axe, hammer, etc... Anyways, Stannis would still be at a pretty big disadvantage.

In history the only time we see people win when they are that outnumbered is when you have extreme factors like Alexander the Great tactics mixed with the Pike formation of Macedon or Agincourt where the ground was super muddy and the terrain favored the English heavily. But in this scenario Stannis has none of those extreme factors. He's a pretty experienced commander but nothing like Hannibal or Alexander. And he doesn't have any terrain or technological advantage either.

[illrede]

Everywhere Renly could contribute to the odds at Storms End, he contributed against himself. So its wierd. And an indication that trend would have continued if it had been allowed to.

[Minsc]

Everywhere Renly could contribute to the odds at Storms End, he contributed against himself. So its wierd. And an indication that trend would have continued if it had been allowed to.

What? How did he contribute against himself?

[illrede]

What? How did he contribute against himself?

Starting from having a 100,000 man host mustered at his current location and informed that Stannis was besieging Storms End, he reached the point where he had 20,000 men, all cavalry, that had to give battle immediately or starve, about to charge into a rising sun across a sodden field. He had total, complete control over every step that led to being in that position.