Stormking902 Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 D and D butchered dragons to the point they are laughable ........ Huge fail IMO. Imagine Aegon taking Harrenhal with these dragons hahaha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wagshell Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 I have to agree. Everyone in history easily beaten by dragons. Arrows just bounce off them. Nobody until Qyburn, in all of those years and battles thought to say "You know, we could just make a bigger crossbow, that'll probably do it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Pirtle Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 It did leave me wondering why everyone on Dragonstone was debating whether or not Dany should burn King's Landing instead of whether or not Dany could burn King's Landing, given that her remaining dragon would have to face what are apparently a whole lot of really capable dragon-slaying ballistas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kajjo Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 17 minutes ago, Stormking902 said: D and D butchered dragons to the point they are laughable ........ Huge fail IMO. They made the dragons too weak, yes. I agree. 2 minutes ago, Wagshell said: Nobody until Qyburn, in all of those years and battles thought to say "You know, we could just make a bigger crossbow, that'll probably do it." Well, yes, sort of. Qyburn invented a new weapon. It is not completely nonsense but a little bit far-fetched. 2 minutes ago, Wagshell said: Everyone in history easily beaten by dragons. Yes, it somehow doesn't fit how easily Rhaegal was brought down here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannyk65 Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 Just now, Anthony Pirtle said: It did leave me wondering why everyone on Dragonstone was debating whether or not Dany should burn King's Landing instead of whether or not Dany could burn King's Landing, given that her remaining dragon would have to face what are apparently a whole lot of really capable dragon-slaying ballistas. Just fly in straight down from high above the ballistas-of-doom...one of two things can happen: They can't shoot vertically and get burned. They can shoot vertically and the bolts fly straight up and then down and destroy the ballistas-of-doom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elanmorin Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 1 minute ago, Wagshell said: I have to agree. Everyone in history easily beaten by dragons. Arrows just bounce off them. Nobody until Qyburn, in all of those years and battles thought to say "You know, we could just make a bigger crossbow, that'll probably do it." Actually untrue: Dorne was able to kill a dragon using a scorpion (lucky shot) and this caused them to stave off the Targaryen's invasion for example. The problem with what happened in #08-04 is not that those ballistas were able to kill a dragon, the problem is a fleet was able to sneak up on him and his brother and hit him while in the air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Pirtle Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 Just now, dannyk65 said: Just fly in straight down from high above the ballistas-of-doom...one of two things can happen: They can't shoot vertically and get burned. They can shoot vertically and the bolts fly straight up and then down and destroy the ballistas-of-doom. I would never vouch for the cleverness of Cersei Lannister as a strategist, but I have to assume all the ballistas of doom aren't located in a single space. If Drogon were to fly down on one of them, wouldn't the one, say, 150 feet away, just shoot him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elanmorin Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 Just now, Anthony Pirtle said: I would never vouch for the cleverness of Cersei Lannister as a strategist, but I have to assume all the ballistas of doom aren't located in a single space. If Drogon were to fly down on one of them, wouldn't the one, say, 150 feet away, just shoot him? Wait for night time. Profit... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannyk65 Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 1 minute ago, Anthony Pirtle said: I would never vouch for the cleverness of Cersei Lannister as a strategist, but I have to assume all the ballistas of doom aren't located in a single space. If Drogon were to fly down on one of them, wouldn't the one, say, 150 feet away, just shoot him? Fair point. Would even the odds at night though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Pirtle Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 1 minute ago, elanmorin said: Wait for night time. Profit... That's an excellent idea, if he's all alone and doesn't start breathing fire, but that wouldn't help Dany take King's Landing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannyk65 Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 1 minute ago, elanmorin said: Wait for night time. Profit... You magnificent bastard! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Gareth Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 4 minutes ago, dannyk65 said: Just fly in straight down from high above the ballistas-of-doom...one of two things can happen: They can't shoot vertically and get burned. They can shoot vertically and the bolts fly straight up and then down and destroy the ballistas-of-doom. Sooner or later the Dragon has to pull up at which time it is in the ballista sights again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannyk65 Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 Just now, Ser Gareth said: Sooner or later the Dragon has to pull up at which time it is in the ballista sights again. Did the ballista-of-doom even have sights? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Gareth Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 Just now, dannyk65 said: Did the ballista-of-doom even have sights? It's an expression. In their aim was probably a better way for me to put it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quillon Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 Aren't Dany's dragons too young despite characters in the show saying: "3 full grown dragons!", so they are more vulnerable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elanmorin Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 4 minutes ago, Anthony Pirtle said: That's an excellent idea, if he's all alone and doesn't start breathing fire, but that wouldn't help Dany take King's Landing. That doesn't help Dany keep King's Landing in one piece. The moment those ballistas lose accuracy in the dark is the moment Dany uses Drogon to burn them and breach the walls. But the point the people leading the show are trying to make is Dany is so enraged she ends up razing King's Landing and is a saviour no more, turning into a destroyer instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wagshell Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 A new weapon? It's really just a bigger crossbow. No newer technology really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannyk65 Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 2 minutes ago, Ser Gareth said: It's an expression. In their aim was probably a better way for me to put it. No way, dude! Iron sights are a thing and would help the shooter greatly but the show is skipping mundane details for more cock talk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Gareth Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 1 minute ago, dannyk65 said: No way, dude! Iron sights are a thing and would help the shooter greatly but the show is skipping mundane details for more cock talk I don't really see why the Roman's would have required sights, as I don't think they'd be shooting at flying objects? I may be wrong and can't be arsed to research to be honest. I always thought they were used more in siege warfare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannyk65 Posted May 6, 2019 Share Posted May 6, 2019 1 minute ago, Ser Gareth said: I don't really see why the Roman's would have required sights, as I don't think they'd be shooting at flying objects? I may be wrong and can't be arsed to research to be honest. I always thought they were used more in siege warfare. It's pretty funny to me because it just seems as likely shooting down a helicopter with a handgun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.