Spoiler: Dany's Small Council

[got_fanatic12]

12 hours ago, HoodedCrow said:

Gosh, some people have no sense of proportion with the crazy idea of women in control, and who have love relationships with men who actually like spirited women. We could have a separate sig for Red State for women hating, with psychological services available.

I am a woman and a feminist and I simply hate Dany.  She comes off entitled and bitchy.  No one owes her any crown.  It could have to do with Emilia Clarke's acting choices and the show's writing and directing choices.  Also, the North/ Starks/ Jon all lose if Dany wins and I am a big fan of the Starks.

And all Dany's "love" relationships with men are with them as her servants, not equals (Jorah and Daario).  (And we can add Jon to this apparently.)

[Damsel in Distress]

I am a woman and a feminist and I simply LOVE Dany.  She is by far my favorite character.  Dany is the main hero in this story.  She is responsible for the freedom that many millions of people now have at Slaver's Bay (now rightly called the "Bay of Dragons).  That is more good than anyone in history has ever done.  She put an end to the sadistic practice of slavery.  She's a winner and deserves to rule.

I hate Jon Snow and the Starks.  The Starks are rebels.  The lands of the north belong to the rest of Westeros.  They had no right to elect a "king,"

[got_fanatic12]

14 minutes ago, Damsel in Distress said:

I am a woman and a feminist and I simply LOVE Dany.  She is by far my favorite character.  Dany is the main hero in this story.  She is responsible for the freedom that many millions of people now have at Slaver's Bay (now rightly called the "Bay of Dragons).  That is more good than anyone in history has ever done.  She put an end to the sadistic practice of slavery.  She's a winner and deserves to rule.

I hate Jon Snow and the Starks.  The Starks are rebels.  The lands of the north belong to the rest of Westeros.  They had no right to elect a "king,"

This is like saying that George Washington and the American revolutionaries had no right to rebel against the British.  Of course the Starks and the North have a right to be independent.  Westeros is not The Targaryens personal property.

And it amuses me that Dany fans always bring up her ending slavery.  I think that using dragons and armies to force another country to kneel to her and set herself up as the absolute ruler/ tyrant suggests that she is not a freedom loving liberal.

[Fexyr]

 

9 hours ago, divica said:

 

Again, keeping 100K wildlings away with 100 men while being attacked on 2 fronts is probably the greatest military feat we have seen in the show! Nothing comes even close.

Don't forget the giants and mammoths. 

No planning would ever work, can we really judge Jon? 

12 hours ago, Here's Looking At You, Kid said:

 

Okay, let's look at the so-called king-in-the-north.  Jon bungled every battle he's ever been in.  Stannis had to bail his ass out during the battle for the Wall.  Petyr Baelish and Robin Arryn had to bail his impulsive ass during the battle of the bastards.   Dany should lead Westeros if they are to survive through the long night.

Again, 100k vs 100.Do you expect him to win that without help? 

What should Jon do when his little brother is alive and running in a f* straight line? xD

And Sansa should've told Jon about LF. 

7 minutes ago, got_fanatic12 said:

This is like saying that George Washington and the American revolutionaries had no right to rebel against the British.  Of course the Starks and the North have a right to be independent.  Westeros is not The Targaryens personal property.

Thank you

[Nowy Tends]

52 minutes ago, Damsel in Distress said:

 The Starks are rebels.  The lands of the north belong to the rest of Westeros.  They had no right to elect a "king,"

Total nonsense. And since when being a rebel is a bad thing?

[El Guapo]

4 hours ago, got_fanatic12 said:

I am a woman and a feminist and I simply hate Dany.  She comes off entitled and bitchy.  No one owes her any crown.  It could have to do with Emilia Clarke's acting choices and the show's writing and directing choices.  Also, the North/ Starks/ Jon all lose if Dany wins and I am a big fan of the Starks.

And all Dany's "love" relationships with men are with them as her servants, not equals (Jorah and Daario).  (And we can add Jon to this apparently.)

People really need to stop with this entitled nonsense. Westeros is a feudalistic society which is pretty much based on entitlement. It is not a meritocracy, nor a republic or a democracy.  If you are the eldest male or the last surviving child of a king or Lord than you are entitled to inherit their lands and titles. That is how this society functions. Her views of reclaiming her father's throne are no different than Sansa wanting to reclaim Winterfell, the Blackfish reclaiming Riverrun, Tyrion demanding Casterly Rock from Tywin, Stanis wanting to claim the Iron Throne, Yara wanting to reclaim the Salt throne, etc, etc.

How does Dany winning mean the starks lose? If anything things would just return to what they were at the beginning of the story.

[Denam_Pavel]

56 minutes ago, Damsel in Distress said:

I am a woman and a feminist and I simply LOVE Dany.  She is by far my favorite character.  Dany is the main hero in this story.  She is responsible for the freedom that many millions of people now have at Slaver's Bay (now rightly called the "Bay of Dragons).  That is more good than anyone in history has ever done.  She put an end to the sadistic practice of slavery.  She's a winner and deserves to rule.

I hate Jon Snow and the Starks.  The Starks are rebels.  The lands of the north belong to the rest of Westeros.  They had no right to elect a "king,"

Aegon and Robert didn't free any slaves. Why should other kingdoms cease because they said so? However it came about, Jon Snow was brought back into the world and came south from the wall where sovereignties end to a Westeros where the Kingdom of the North was a thing, he did not declare it such. He's not Robb.

[SeanF]

On 27/07/2017 at 11:32 AM, Ser Walter of AShwood said:

Hmm, that's quite a long march, highly organized medieval armies marched 15 to 18 miles per day. From Duskendale to Casterly Rock is probably 600+ miles, so it would take an army at least 33 days to travel to Casterly rock over land. And that would be without any interruption or skirmishes along the way.

The route over water might be longer (since you have to pass under Dorne) and is possibly up to 2400 miles. A ship travels at about 6 Mph, but can do this 24/7. So a ship would take half the time a march over land would take. Not to mention that an army that has marched for 600+ miles would be exhausted, while an army going by ship should be properly rested (except for some who get seasick)

_{(distances are guestimated, based on a 300 mile long wall)}

A sea voyage, in the face of a hostile fleet, and risking bad weather, would be far more dangerous than a campaign on land.  And, supplying an army that's travelling by sea is much harder than supplying an army that's marching overland.

[SeanF]

12 hours ago, OldGimletEye said:

I thought show Tyrion's plan was to sail the Unsullied around Westeros to take Casterly Rock, which is ridiculous.

Show Tyrion's entire plan is ridiculous. It seems to me Dany and Co.'s strategic problem is fairly straightforward. Lure Cersei's forces out and destroy them. All this takin that city and this place is with all these forces not in support of each other seems kind of stupid. But then again I'm kind of a fan of march divided, fight united. Sure threaten places to get Cersei to commit her forces. But, get her forces to committ. It's not like Dany wouldn't have overwhelming firepower or anything.

Actually, I think investing Kings Landing, and bottling up Cersei's army inside it would be a fair strategy.  Food wiould begin running short, even if Euron could bring in some supplies, and one could always offer the defenders a full pardon, in return for handing over Cersei and Jaime dead or alive. The allies should just use enough of their soldiers to prevent reinforcements coming from the Westerlands.  Once Kings Landing falls, Casterly Rock will surrender anyway.

[OldGimletEye]

On 7/28/2017 at 10:02 AM, SeanF said:

Actually, I think investing Kings Landing, and bottling up Cersei's army inside it would be a fair strategy.  Food wiould begin running short, even if Euron could bring in some supplies, and one could always offer the defenders a full pardon, in return for handing over Cersei and Jaime dead or alive. The allies should just use enough of their soldiers to prevent reinforcements coming from the Westerlands.  Once Kings Landing falls, Casterly Rock will surrender anyway.

If the bulk of Cersei's army were in KL, then maybe CR would surrender. But, I am not sure that is the case. If KL falls, it doesn't follow, that Cersei surrenders. Not so long as she can put an army into the field. And it's not certain to me that Cersei would just hole up her entire army in KL if her communications with CR were threatened.

Maybe I think differently, but for me, the idea of "if I take the enemies capital I win.." is kind of nonsense. The real object in my mind is the enemy army or the ability of the enemy to put said armies in the field.

[SeanF]

10 hours ago, OldGimletEye said:

1. Why send Yara's fleet to Dorne. Why not have the Dornish link up with the Tyrells in the Reach. And then reduce any supporters Cersei has in the Reach. The show kind of treats naval transport as not being risky. But, with medieval tech, it's kind of risky. So why take it, if you don't have to.

2. If the Dornish and the Tyrell Army link up in the Reach, that would cut off Cersei from the Westerlands. That might be quite alarming to her.

3. Why send the Unsullied around Westeros to Casterly Rock, where they will be unsupported. That really is a big problem. The Unsullied might be good infantry, but they would be operating without any type of missle or calvary troops. Plus, they would be trying to pull off a seige with no supporting forces in the area. It seems to me their asses would be kind of hangin' in the wind there.That's assuming of course they don't all drown in some kind of naval disaster.

4. When about 8,000 - 10,000 troops have to disembark from the sea and the roll up to Casterly Rock, I'd hardley call that taking CR with "subterfuge". Somebody is going to notice that.

5. It would be just simpler to have the Unsullied with the Tyrell forces and the Dornish forces in the Reach. If Cersei doesn't do anything while she is being cut off from the Westerlands and whatever supporters she has in the Reach, okay fine, then take KL. It should be fairly easy, then.

6. Also if Dany and Tyrion were smart (but everyone is kind of dumb in GOT) it seems to me they would have tried to make some diplomatic overtures with the Vale. I mean they should both know the Vale has no love for either the Lannisters or Targaryens. But, you know, Dany could do something like, "You know, I know my dad was a flamin' idiot. And I promise I won't be a flamin' idiot too. And I don't expect you to follow flamin' idiots. Go with me, and you'll get better deal than what you would get with crazy old Cersei". That might have gotten a few thousand more troops.

I think that a lot of TV and film producers would do well to take advice from people like you, who have actually served in the armed forces.  Strategies and tactics would then make a lot more sense.

We wouldn't see battles where two disciplined armies advance towards each other, before the soldiers inexplicably break formation and begin duelling each other individually;  or armoured knights get brought down by warrior princesses aiming kung-fu kicks;  or planes get shot out of the sky by someone wielding a bow and arrow.

[SeanF]

10 hours ago, OldGimletEye said:

1. Why send Yara's fleet to Dorne. Why not have the Dornish link up with the Tyrells in the Reach. And then reduce any supporters Cersei has in the Reach. The show kind of treats naval transport as not being risky. But, with medieval tech, it's kind of risky. So why take it, if you don't have to.

2. If the Dornish and the Tyrell Army link up in the Reach, that would cut off Cersei from the Westerlands. That might be quite alarming to her.

3. Why send the Unsullied around Westeros to Casterly Rock, where they will be unsupported. That really is a big problem. The Unsullied might be good infantry, but they would be operating without any type of missle or calvary troops. Plus, they would be trying to pull off a seige with no supporting forces in the area. It seems to me their asses would be kind of hangin' in the wind there.That's assuming of course they don't all drown in some kind of naval disaster.

4. When about 8,000 - 10,000 troops have to disembark from the sea and the roll up to Casterly Rock, I'd hardley call that taking CR with "subterfuge". Somebody is going to notice that.

5. It would be just simpler to have the Unsullied with the Tyrell forces and the Dornish forces in the Reach. If Cersei doesn't do anything while she is being cut off from the Westerlands and whatever supporters she has in the Reach, okay fine, then take KL. It should be fairly easy, then.

6. Also if Dany and Tyrion were smart (but everyone is kind of dumb in GOT) it seems to me they would have tried to make some diplomatic overtures with the Vale. I mean they should both know the Vale has no love for either the Lannisters or Targaryens. But, you know, Dany could do something like, "You know, I know my dad was a flamin' idiot. And I promise I won't be a flamin' idiot too. And I don't expect you to follow flamin' idiots. Go with me, and you'll get better deal than what you would get with crazy old Cersei". That might have gotten a few thousand more troops.

I think that a lot of TV and film producers would do well to take advice from people like you, who have actually served in the armed forces.  Strategies and tactics would then make a lot more sense.

We wouldn't see battles where two disciplined armies advance towards each other, before the soldiers inexplicably break formation and begin duelling each other individually;  or armoured knights get brought down by warrior princesses aiming kung-fu kicks;  or planes get shot out of the sky by someone wielding a bow and arrow.

[got_fanatic12]

1 hour ago, El Guapo said:

People really need to stop with this entitled nonsense. Westeros is a feudalistic society which is pretty much based on entitlement. It is not a meritocracy, nor a republic or a democracy.  If you are the eldest male or the last surviving child of a king or Lord than you are entitled to inherit their lands and titles. That is how this society functions. Her views of reclaiming her father's throne are no different than Sansa wanting to reclaim Winterfell, the Blackfish reclaiming Riverrun, Tyrion demanding Casterly Rock from Tywin, Stanis wanting to claim the Iron Throne, Yara wanting to reclaim the Salt throne, etc, etc.

How does Dany winning mean the starks lose? If anything things would just return to what they were at the beginning of the story.

Which turned out pretty badly for the Starks.  Remember that the North rebelled because Ned Stark was executed.

[Cas Stark]

5 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

If the bulk of Cersei's army were in KL, then maybe CR would surrender. But, I am not sure that is the case. If KL falls, it doesn't follow, that Cersei surrenders. Not so long as she can put an army into the field. And it's not certain to me that Cersei would just hole up her entire army in KL if her communications with CR were threatened.

Maybe I think differently, but for me, the idea of "if I take the enemies capital I win.." is kind of nonsense. The real object in my mind is the enemy army or the ability of the enemy to put said armies in the field.

In this case though, it would make sense, because out of the 7 kingdoms, there are not too many armies left or areas that are actually under the control of the IT.  Of course in a logical world the Tyrell army would never side with Cersei, so all she would have for an 'army' is whatever is left of Lannister forces that have been fighting in KL and the riverlands for years.  

[Denam_Pavel]

23 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

If the bulk of Cersei's army were in KL, then maybe CR would surrender. But, I am not sure that is the case. If KL falls, it doesn't follow, that Cersei surrenders. Not so long as she can put an army into the field. And it's not certain to me that Cersei would just hole up her entire army in KL if her communications with CR were threatened.

Maybe I think differently, but for me, the idea of "if I take the enemies capital I win.." is kind of nonsense. The real object in my mind is the enemy army or the ability of the enemy to put said armies in the field.

So, your assumption is Cersei is doing the exact opposite of what she wanted to do last time KL was under threat, when the decision was up to Tywin and he refused to send forces to protect KL initially either and they only barely survived Stannis?

[OldGimletEye]

On 7/28/2017 at 10:19 AM, Cas Stark said:

In this case though, it would make sense, because out of the 7 kingdoms, there are not too many armies left or areas that are actually under the control of the IT.  Of course in a logical world the Tyrell army would never side with Cersei, so all she would have for an 'army' is whatever is left of Lannister forces that have been fighting in KL and the riverlands for years.  

I don't know. While I think the idea of Cersei being able to put up much resistance is kind of nonsense at this point, it seems to me that the show wants us to believe that Cersei still is a formidable force - that she has at least some chance of prevailing. So, okay, I mean I think that's a bit of nonsense at this juncture, but I'll roll with it.

Obviously, you couldn't predict precisely what Cersei would do. But, sieges tend to be long affairs. I'd rather destroy her forces in one quick and decisive battle out in the open. If Cersei decides to move her forces out into the field to protect her lines of comm with CR, then great, hammer her forces in one decisive engagement or in a series of decisive engagements.But if it looks like she intends to hole up her entire army in CR, which I'd doubt, okay then move against KL.

[OldGimletEye]

On 7/28/2017 at 10:34 AM, Denam_Pavel said:

So, your assumption is Cersei is doing the exact opposite of what she wanted to do last time KL was under threat, when the decision was up to Tywin and he refused to send forces to protect KL initially either and they only barely survived Stannis?

Actually, I'm not making strong assumptions here. I think you have chance here to see what Cersei does first before committing yourself to attacking KL.

[divica]

10 hours ago, WolfOfWinter said:

I wonder if fewer people would believe Dany's going mad if the character was played by a better actress? There's no warmth or humanity to Clarke's portrayal of Daenerys; she's just 50% smug, 25% arrogant and 25% entitled. Even when faced by a sellsword who's snuck into the room while she's bathing, or chained by the Dothraki with the threat of rape or enslavement hanging over her, there's no fear or worry or doubt. She's fully confident in her own awesomeness. That's boring. 

Great description of daenerys. I couldn t agree more. 

11 hours ago, OldGimletEye said:

1. Why send Yara's fleet to Dorne. Why not have the Dornish link up with the Tyrells in the Reach. And then reduce any supporters Cersei has in the Reach. The show kind of treats naval transport as not being risky. But, with medieval tech, it's kind of risky. So why take it, if you don't have to.

2. If the Dornish and the Tyrell Army link up in the Reach, that would cut off Cersei from the Westerlands. That might be quite alarming to her.

3. Why send the Unsullied around Westeros to Casterly Rock, where they will be unsupported. That really is a big problem. The Unsullied might be good infantry, but they would be operating without any type of missle or calvary troops. Plus, they would be trying to pull off a seige with no supporting forces in the area. It seems to me their asses would be kind of hangin' in the wind there.That's assuming of course they don't all drown in some kind of naval disaster.

4. When about 8,000 - 10,000 troops have to disembark from the sea and the roll up to Casterly Rock, I'd hardley call that taking CR with "subterfuge". Somebody is going to notice that.

5. It would be just simpler to have the Unsullied with the Tyrell forces and the Dornish forces in the Reach. If Cersei doesn't do anything while she is being cut off from the Westerlands and whatever supporters she has in the Reach, okay fine, then take KL. It should be fairly easy, then.

6. Also if Dany and Tyrion were smart (but everyone is kind of dumb in GOT) it seems to me they would have tried to make some diplomatic overtures with the Vale. I mean they should both know the Vale has no love for either the Lannisters or Targaryens. But, you know, Dany could do something like, "You know, I know my dad was a flamin' idiot. And I promise I won't be a flamin' idiot too. And I don't expect you to follow flamin' idiots. Go with me, and you'll get better deal than what you would get with crazy old Cersei". That might have gotten a few thousand more troops.

1 I don t think they consider the hipothesis that cersei has supporters in the reach. The plan was to unite all the reach and dornish forces in Kl. If you didn t see cersei with all those lords that have no reason to answer her call after she burned so many lords you wouldn t think of sending dornish soldiers to the reach.And both naval and land marches are risky for different reasons... 

2 doing a ciege to KL is even better.

3 they aren t doing a siege. They are going to use secret entrances and then hold CR against supposedly no one because the lannister army will be busy with KL. This way danny has a major victory by conquering the lannister ancestral house and cutting off cersei acess to gold.

4 the subterfuge is about using tunnels to take CR. Not about reaching there without anyone seeing...

5 again, no reason to assemble the armies in the reach because the reach is suposed to be loyal to danny. Beside cersei wouldn t be isolated. She could use boats to send her army wherever she wanted.

On the whole the plan isn t bad. They just didn t take into consideration that cersei wouldn t stay put waiting for the slaughter...

[divica]

43 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

If the bulk of Cersei's army were in KL, then maybe CR would surrender. But, I am not sure that is the case. If KL falls, it doesn't follow, that Cersei surrenders. Not so long as she can put an army into the field. And it's not certain to me that Cersei would just hole up her entire army in KL if her communications with CR were threatened.

Maybe I think differently, but for me, the idea of "if I take the enemies capital I win.." is kind of nonsense. The real object in my mind is the enemy army or the ability of the enemy to put said armies in the field.

What you are forgeting is that cersei wouldn t commit her army to a battle when she had much less soldiers. It makes more sense to defend KL. In addition, with acess to boats she isn t cut off from anywhere.

[OldGimletEye]

On 7/28/2017 at 10:47 AM, divica said:

snip

If I'm going to be convinced to send a good number of troops around Westeros in ships, particularly with Euron's fleet lurking around the area, I'd want a lot better than "wait, but there's a secret entrance!". That's pie-in-the-sky thinking. If that doesn't pan out, you might be facing a real disaster. Plan for the worst, hope for the best is generally a good rule of thumb.

If the Westerlands is a source of Cersei's power and might, then you'd think she'd worry about being cut off from it. And it so happens operating in the Reach somewhere puts you right between KL and CR. You're basically holding a central position between two enemy forces and you know that is a fairly good position to be in, even assuming that Tyrion would have no reason to think that there might be Cersei supporters in the Reach.

And, I'd consider naval movements to be riskier than land marches, particularly with Euron running around with his fleet, which I'd assume Tyrion would know about because of Yara.