How do y'all think the Unsullied and Dothraki will perform in Westeros?

[astarkchoice]

9 minutes ago, Terrorthatflapsinthenight9 said:

I wouldn't be so sure about the Unsullied having better skills in 1v1, they are trained mostly to fight as an single corp, far less for battles where they have to fight individually and against foes that are stronger and better protected than them. 

Also their robot like obedience is more of a handicap than an advantage in such situations, as the capacity to think for yourself and take initiatives in unexpected situations is a vital quality in moments where things don't go according to plan.

No we are specificaly told each one becomes a master of the sword,shield and 3 spears and the slaver selling them specificaly says that while.many may be stronger or faster and a few   will match them skillwise ...so yeah they are individualy highly skilled  somehow despite having 0 test to endure such training

 

Unless they are told to " hold until i give the order"   or some  other stupidly phrased command that gets them killed  they should be fine. Modern troops are also stripped of their individuality to a lesser extent , the fact they are obedient and stripped of their old.personal lives doesnt stop them using initiative 

Their training seems to be both comicaly demanding physicaly as well as at times mentaly challenging so they can adapt, if anything knowing absolutely nothing but military tactics  and are stripped of fear means they should have 0 hesitation taking the correct actions quickly  under pressure.

In fact theyd also be useless as household guards despite their martial skills and obedience if they cant think for themselves, selemys pov highlights this as someone who for years must  always be 2 steps ahead of any threat to his primary/king

[Craving Peaches]

1 hour ago, Aldarion said:

Maybe he means Daenerys' army + Golden Company?

Probably means Unsullied + Dothraki...

[astarkchoice]

1 hour ago, Craving Peaches said:

Probably means Unsullied + Dothraki...

To be fair the show and books may prove very different 

If she is taken to vaes dothrak she may simply find old items or scrolls relating to how to properly control her beasts!  And/or have drogon burn the cultural centre of the dothraki to the ground thus possibly end their culture forever!!!

[Aldarion]

2 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

No it clearly say each one becomes a master of the sword , shield and 3 spears training from dawn to dusk ..they probably drill religiously as units too but no " others may be larger or faster but few will.equal their skill.with sword ,shield or spear"  so yeah they will at least be exceptionally skilled fighters whonsomehow also have modern athlete like stamina despite no testosterone!

 

Uh, I doubt that. Fighting within the phalanx is specifically what the Unsullied train for. In fact, when Daenerys' Unsullied start being killed in the Meereen, Ser Barristan points out that... yes, Unsullied are indeed kinda useless outside the phalanx.

So all that religious drilling will be of very little use should they come across a heavy cavalry unit, dismounted men-at-arms or competent pikemen, seeing how all these would be far superior tactically on a very fundamental level.

2 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

Side note spartans allowed themselves to fall behind in tactics and numbers of actual spartans. Their troopers were super elite by any standard but  a society that doesnt allow change or much freedom of thought is doomed to stagnate and thus fade as a military power too

 

No, they never were "super elite". More accurate term would be "slightly better than average".

https://acoup.blog/2019/09/20/collections-this-isnt-sparta-part-vi-spartan-battle/

Roman adsidui or Byzantine stratiotes would have easily beaten equal-sized Spartan force in a head-on clash. Spartans were better than other Greek hoplite armies, but even then advantage wasn't great. Definitely not to the point they could take on and win against the far superior armies which came after them.

2 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

The unsullied are trained to be obedient and stripped of individuality as people yes  ( to a lesser extend so are all modern troops) but that doesnt mean they cant use intiative as troops far from it  , in fact their training seems to involve both brutality and needing to use their own thinking.....every single day they must respond to a new name and keep up with a new task or be culled, they must climb mountains at night (a lot of personal judgement would need to be exercised there) they must steal a child from a mother (requiring a touch of sneakyness) and despite how brutal the training is they  must keep a puppy alive and well to be strangled in one year. They instantly selected grey worm as leader so they clearly can think for themselves

 

Actually, it means precisely that. Roman soldiers were disciplined, but they were not stripped of individuality, and individual aggression was prized and rewarded. Just look at the number of rewards a Roman soldier could receive for displaying valor in combat.

Unsullied being obedient and stripped of individuality does mean that they will be incapable of taking individual initative and fighting as individuals, which is something that is absolutely necessary for any non-phalanx combat. Which means that they will be completely useless in any terrain where they cannot deploy in a tight formation.

Of course, Daenerys' Unsullied are regaining their individuality... but if she is to make use of that, she has to train them to use it. So far, I have seen no effort to do so.

"Brutality" and "needing to use their own thinking" are actually the opposites. And again, Unsullied training is based on Spartan training... and Spartans were decisively inferior to Macedonians and Romans in terms of armies. Or even just in terms of "heavy infantry". And everything else you noted? Responding to new name every single day is done precisely to rob them of any sense of individuality. Climbing mountains at night is a very good way of getting yourself killed - I am not sure Martin understands how dark it gets outside in places with no sources of light. Stealing a child from a mother is good for a thief, not for a soldier, and stinks of Spartan training.

All and all, I see nothing that would suggest they are some sort of elite troops even by standards of ancient armies, let alone late medieval armies Westeros fields.

2 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

Yeah but the golden company technicaly  arent a targ force they are blackfyre

 

 

Cavalry wise they are light but elephants can def make up.for that if used right, their smell alone upsets horses

But yeah too small a force overall hence varys causing chaos and possible 'friends in the reach' as back up ......on top.of all the loyal dragon men in the crownlsnds we learn of in briennes pov

Agreed.

[astarkchoice]

2 hours ago, Aldarion said:

Uh, I doubt that. Fighting within the phalanx is specifically what the Unsullied train for. In fact, when Daenerys' Unsullied start being killed in the Meereen, Ser Barristan points out that... yes, Unsullied are indeed kinda useless outside the phalanx.

So all that religious drilling will be of very little use should they come across a heavy cavalry unit, dismounted men-at-arms or competent pikemen, seeing how all these would be far superior tactically on a very fundamental level.

No, they never were "super elite". More accurate term would be "slightly better than average".

https://acoup.blog/2019/09/20/collections-this-isnt-sparta-part-vi-spartan-battle/

Roman adsidui or Byzantine stratiotes would have easily beaten equal-sized Spartan force in a head-on clash. Spartans were better than other Greek hoplite armies, but even then advantage wasn't great. Definitely not to the point they could take on and win against the far superior armies which came after them.

Actually, it means precisely that. Roman soldiers were disciplined, but they were not stripped of individuality, and individual aggression was prized and rewarded. Just look at the number of rewards a Roman soldier could receive for displaying valor in combat.

Unsullied being obedient and stripped of individuality does mean that they will be incapable of taking individual initative and fighting as individuals, which is something that is absolutely necessary for any non-phalanx combat. Which means that they will be completely useless in any terrain where they cannot deploy in a tight formation.

Of course, Daenerys' Unsullied are regaining their individuality... but if she is to make use of that, she has to train them to use it. So far, I have seen no effort to do so.

"Brutality" and "needing to use their own thinking" are actually the opposites. And again, Unsullied training is based on Spartan training... and Spartans were decisively inferior to Macedonians and Romans in terms of armies. Or even just in terms of "heavy infantry". And everything else you noted? Responding to new name every single day is done precisely to rob them of any sense of individuality. Climbing mountains at night is a very good way of getting yourself killed - I am not sure Martin understands how dark it gets outside in places with no sources of light. Stealing a child from a mother is good for a thief, not for a soldier, and stinks of Spartan training.

All and all, I see nothing that would suggest they are some sort of elite troops even by standards of ancient armies, let alone late medieval armies Westeros fields.

Agreed.

No unit in history would neglect personal training and again the source specificaly says they ' master ' these weapons.

They get killed in mereen yes as its an insurgency......thats like saying u.s marines are inferior to the insurgents who killed them , also it doesnt help that dany put potentialy thousands of trained gladiators on the unemployment line to assist the resistance!

For example we know as well the new ghis legions (diet unsullied) can form anti cavalry squares too so it stands to reason the real deal can too

By that standard we might as well add napolenic era or ww1 units while you are at it. Its a poor opinion piece man the spartans were the finest troops alive for some time..the fact they were eventualy.left behind by history just as the macedonians and legions were doesnt alter an era of dominance 

 

They are stripped of individuality and brainwashed to be utterly.obedient ....doesnt mean they cant use initiative as troops at all. Modern ellite units train until they can move as one  doesnt mean they cant think as individuals  .....shit modern child soilders are taken at birth and drugged up to utterly forget their individual lives and be utterly commited to their commanders orders no matter how cruel and  yet scarily they  reportedly still can adapt and ambush as well as adult fighters!!

The night climbing is stupid agreed but  isnt surviable without both excellent stamina as well as constant individual decision making.....good decisons get you up the mountain bad ones get you down real fast, the child stealing like any theft requires initiative and having to decide and act fast when an opertunity presents itself

And they are hired as bodyguard forces so MUST be able to think for themselves to be effective ,practice their own hidden religion and again select grey worm quite rapidly hinting plenty.of secret individual thinking and communication within their ranks that we dont get to see.

In fact to hammer it home we see another utterly obedient essos warrior whos cult force him to give up most of his individuality and freedom to choose to the point where they marry their own axe...hotah!  A dude we specificaly see a pov acting on his own initative (spectacularly well) BUT also is utterly obedient....shit the main differences in his cult  from birth training are just he gets to keep his bits , the weapons and he gets to grow a beard!!

 

 

[Aldarion]

18 minutes ago, astarkchoice said:

No unit in history would neglect personal training and again the source specificaly says they ' master ' these weapons.

 

And? There is still a difference between a soldier who trains with something as a primary weapon versus a soldier who uses it as a sidearm.

19 minutes ago, astarkchoice said:

They get killed in mereen yes as its an insurgency......thats like saying u.s marines are inferior to the insurgents who killed them , also it doesnt help that dany put potentialy thousands of trained gladiators on the unemployment line to assist the resistance!

 

Point isn't that they get killed. Point is that Ser Barristan has specifically pointed out that the Unsullied are trained to fight in the formation and are a poor choice for anything else.

20 minutes ago, astarkchoice said:

For example we know as well the new ghis legions (diet unsullied) can form anti cavalry squares too so it stands to reason the real deal can too

 

We will see how Martin will handle that, but historically, squares formed by spear and shield infantry are profoundly useless against the heavy lance cavalry on the model of Westerosi knights. 

As a matter of fact, Napoleonic heavy cavalry, using nothing but sabres, was capable of penetrating into and destroying musket-and-bayonet infantry squares. Whether they actually succeeded at that seemed to depend more on terrain than anything else. Byzantine cataphracts used maces and their own horses' armor to literally break spear shafts of the opposing infantry, and Byzantines themselves assumed that heavy cavalry would be capable of penetrating into infantry square on a fairly regular basis - so they made their own infantry squares double-faced.

Unsullied, considering their equipment, would be hard pressed to hold back ancient cataphracts. Their ability to defend against the charge by Westerosi knights should be assumed as nonexistent until proven otherwise.

30 minutes ago, astarkchoice said:

By that standard we might as well add napolenic era or ww1 units while you are at it. Its a poor opinion piece man the spartans were the finest troops alive for some time..the fact they were eventualy.left behind by history just as the macedonians and legions were doesnt alter an era of dominance 

 

Spartans were nowhere near the finest troops alive. They were better than average Greek hoplite and did have a period where they might have been the best, thanks to their superior command and control compared to other hoplite phalanxes. But even then, Thebans and Macedonians were far better once they appeared. And the Spartans definitely never had the kind of unquestioned military dominance of the sort that Romans, Ottomans or even Hungarians had.

During the Spartan heyday? Persian army was actually better overall, but terrain in Greece played to strengths of the Greek hoplite way of warfare. And even within the Greece proper, it seems it was actually Argos and not Sparta that was famed for its hoplites. In fact, we have a preserved assessment:

https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/39383/9781905670819.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Quote

The best of all land is the Pelasgian plain, Best are the horses of Thessaly, the women of Sparta, And the men who drink the water of beautiful Arethousa. But better still than these are the men who live between Tiryns and Arkadia of the many sheep, The linen-corsleted Argives, the goads of war. But you, Megarians, are neither third nor fourth Nor twelfth, nor of any place or account at all

As you can see, Argives are the gods of war, while Sparta is famed for its women.

Granted, question is when exactly that poem was recorded. Still, it was that old liar Herodotus who created Spartan reputation. And then Spartans tried to live up to it, not always successfully.

And all of this is just about hoplites. But hoplite phalanx was actually a more complex military system, and depended on light infantry to defend itself against the enemy light infantry. Sparta was deficient in light infantry, and thus largely depended on its allies to win wars.

To sum up: Spartans may have been slightly better than other Greek poleis, but they never had a period of unquestioned military dominance that Romans and some other military superpowers had.

And do not forget the fact that when you have heavy infantry unsupported by missile infantry - which the Unsullied in this scenario are, as Dothraki are horse archers - then generally, there is no need for a head-on clash. To be clear, Westerosi pikemen will obliterate the Unsullied in a head-on contest, as will the Westerosi heavy cavalry - but they don't need to. They can just have their archers shoot the Unsullied apart.

58 minutes ago, astarkchoice said:

They are stripped of individuality and brainwashed to be utterly.obedient ....doesnt mean they cant use initiative as troops at all. Modern ellite units train until they can move as one  doesnt mean they cant think as individuals  .....shit modern child soilders are taken at birth and drugged up to utterly forget their individual lives and be utterly commited to their commanders orders no matter how cruel and  yet scarily they  reportedly still can adapt and ambush as well as adult fighters!!

 

Actually, that is precisely what it means. When you strip soldiers of individuality and brainwash them to be utterly obedient, they lose the ability for critical and imaginative thinking. That is what happened to the Spartans and the Japanese both, which resulted in massive failures.

Modern elite units are not brainwashed to be utterly obedient. Frankly, if you think they are, then you don't know what you are talking about. In fact, not only are modern soldiers not brainwashed to be utterly obedient - quite the opposite, they are encouraged to think with their heads and take individual initiative when required.

I dislike Wikipedia, but:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission-type_tactics

https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/how-germans-defined-auftragstaktik-what-mission-command-and-not

https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Portals/7/Hot-Spots/docs/MC/MR-Sep-Oct-2002-Widder.pdf

https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/Military-Review/English-Edition-Archives/July-August-2022/Herrera/

1 hour ago, astarkchoice said:

The night climbing is stupid agreed but  isnt surviable without both excellent stamina as well as constant individual decision making.....good decisons get you up the mountain bad ones get you down real fast, the child stealing like any theft requires initiative and having to decide and act fast when an opertunity presents itself

 

And that is only useful in survival situations unless their training reinforces it.

1 hour ago, astarkchoice said:

And they are hired as bodyguard forces so MUST be able to think for themselves to be effective ,practice their own hidden religion and again select grey worm quite rapidly hinting plenty.of secret individual thinking and communication within their ranks that we dont get to see.

 

They are hired as a status symbol because they are so expensive. We simply do not know how effective the Unsullied really are as bodyguards.

[astarkchoice]

25 minutes ago, Aldarion said:

And? There is still a difference between a soldier who trains with something as a primary weapon versus a soldier who uses it as a sidearm.

Point isn't that they get killed. Point is that Ser Barristan has specifically pointed out that the Unsullied are trained to fight in the formation and are a poor choice for anything else.

We will see how Martin will handle that, but historically, squares formed by spear and shield infantry are profoundly useless against the heavy lance cavalry on the model of Westerosi knights. 

As a matter of fact, Napoleonic heavy cavalry, using nothing but sabres, was capable of penetrating into and destroying musket-and-bayonet infantry squares. Whether they actually succeeded at that seemed to depend more on terrain than anything else. Byzantine cataphracts used maces and their own horses' armor to literally break spear shafts of the opposing infantry, and Byzantines themselves assumed that heavy cavalry would be capable of penetrating into infantry square on a fairly regular basis - so they made their own infantry squares double-faced.

Unsullied, considering their equipment, would be hard pressed to hold back ancient cataphracts. Their ability to defend against the charge by Westerosi knights should be assumed as nonexistent until proven otherwise.

Spartans were nowhere near the finest troops alive. They were better than average Greek hoplite and did have a period where they might have been the best, thanks to their superior command and control compared to other hoplite phalanxes. But even then, Thebans and Macedonians were far better once they appeared. And the Spartans definitely never had the kind of unquestioned military dominance of the sort that Romans, Ottomans or even Hungarians had.

During the Spartan heyday? Persian army was actually better overall, but terrain in Greece played to strengths of the Greek hoplite way of warfare. And even within the Greece proper, it seems it was actually Argos and not Sparta that was famed for its hoplites. In fact, we have a preserved assessment:

https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/39383/9781905670819.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

As you can see, Argives are the gods of war, while Sparta is famed for its women.

Granted, question is when exactly that poem was recorded. Still, it was that old liar Herodotus who created Spartan reputation. And then Spartans tried to live up to it, not always successfully.

And all of this is just about hoplites. But hoplite phalanx was actually a more complex military system, and depended on light infantry to defend itself against the enemy light infantry. Sparta was deficient in light infantry, and thus largely depended on its allies to win wars.

To sum up: Spartans may have been slightly better than other Greek poleis, but they never had a period of unquestioned military dominance that Romans and some other military superpowers had.

And do not forget the fact that when you have heavy infantry unsupported by missile infantry - which the Unsullied in this scenario are, as Dothraki are horse archers - then generally, there is no need for a head-on clash. To be clear, Westerosi pikemen will obliterate the Unsullied in a head-on contest, as will the Westerosi heavy cavalry - but they don't need to. They can just have their archers shoot the Unsullied apart.

Actually, that is precisely what it means. When you strip soldiers of individuality and brainwash them to be utterly obedient, they lose the ability for critical and imaginative thinking. That is what happened to the Spartans and the Japanese both, which resulted in massive failures.

Modern elite units are not brainwashed to be utterly obedient. Frankly, if you think they are, then you don't know what you are talking about. In fact, not only are modern soldiers not brainwashed to be utterly obedient - quite the opposite, they are encouraged to think with their heads and take individual initiative when required.

I dislike Wikipedia, but:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission-type_tactics

https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/how-germans-defined-auftragstaktik-what-mission-command-and-not

https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Portals/7/Hot-Spots/docs/MC/MR-Sep-Oct-2002-Widder.pdf

https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/Military-Review/English-Edition-Archives/July-August-2022/Herrera/

And that is only useful in survival situations unless their training reinforces it.

They are hired as a status symbol because they are so expensive. We simply do not know how effective the Unsullied really are as bodyguards.

They master spears , shields and sword as their primary (spear)and sword sidearm...the point is they master them  as individual warriors as well as.drilling as units

His exact words are they arent trained to ''unravel secrets and ask questions'' this is an insurgency and requires detective work , again this is clearly martins comparison to nam ,iraq or afghanistan. It doesnt mean the unsullied cant fight as individuals  its just as outsiders raised without social skills they arent gonna be able to fight a shadow war, which again to.be fair even modern warriors struggle with.

Lance and cavalry can break sheild and spear walls yes  but its costly even when sucessful , the new ghis legions we see do hold off cavalry so unsullied can too ....which is to be expected anyway as sellsword heavy cavalry already  exists in the region.

Spartans were the finest warriors of their day for decades (persian elites famously werent even as good as even medium sized greek state hoplites ) hence why they broke  their neighbours like argos over and over in open battle ,thebes used mixed units and new tactics to end the 40 or so year  spartan domiance  (and even  then they hand picked 300 or so warriors  to make into full time warriors to counter the strength and skill advantage of the spartans at the very frontlines ie they created 300 or so spartans of their own!!) the later macedonian phalanx was even more of  mixed unit but as individuals only alexanders companion cavalry or his elite silver shields would possibly match peak era spartans.

 

Erm no extensive brainwashing doesnt make warriors lack initative  check any war in the middle east for decades unfortunatly fanatics stripped.of all individuality and free will can still be very inventive ..... and many generals of the  spartans in the pelopenessian war showed great creativity

 

No i said modern elite troops are drilled until they can move as one living unit but can still think as individuals 

 

The mountain climbing will.require initative though aa will stealing someones kid under them and the fact we know they orgainsed their own leadership and their own religious rites indicates they communicate and think for themselved a lot.more than we see

 

People.who need bodyguards dont hire status symbols man they hire bodyguards! If your life is at risk and you are wealthy then only the best will.do and any additional useless bodies around just reduces the chances the real.bodyguards can save u

[Aldarion]

6 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

They master spears , shields and sword as their primary (spear)and sword sidearm...the point is they master them  as individual warriors as well as.drilling as units

 

Do they? Because I do not recall any comment about that. In fact, when Kraznys talks about the Unsullied, he specifically says this:

Quote

“They are chosen young, for size and speed and strength,” the slave told her. “They begin their
training at five. Every day they train from dawn to dusk, until they have mastered the
shortsword, the shield, and the three spears. The training is most rigorous, Your Grace. Only one
boy in three survives it. This is well known. Among the Unsullied it is said that on the day they
win their spiked cap, the worst is done with, for no duty that will ever fall to them could be as
hard as their training.”
(...)

“Tell her that these have been standing here for a day and a night, with no food nor water. Tell her that
they will stand until they drop if I should command it, and when nine hundred and ninety-nine
have collapsed to die upon the bricks, the last will stand there still, and never move until his own
death claims him. Such is their courage. Tell her that.”

(...)

“Inform the savages that we call this obedience. Others may be stronger or
quicker or larger than the Unsullied. Some few may even equal their skill with sword and spear
and shield. But nowhere between the seas will you ever find any more obedient.”
(...)

“A eunuch who is cut young will never have the brute strength of one of your Westerosi
knights, this is true,” said Kraznys mo Nakloz when the question was put to him. “A bull is
strong as well, but bulls die every day in the fighting pits. A girl of nine killed one not three days
past in Jothiel’s Pit. The Unsullied have something better than strength, tell her. They have
discipline. We fight in the fashion of the Old Empire, yes. They are the lockstep legions of Old
Ghis come again, absolutely obedient, absolutely loyal, and utterly without fear.”

"Lockstep legions" means specifically they fight in the phalanx. And the fact that only one boy in three survives the training means that the entire training programme is not that well designed, so why trust slaver's claims? In fact, there are good reasons not to. A lot of what he says is later proven false, after Daenerys buys them. He says this:

Quote

Not so our Unsullied. They are wed to their swords in a way that your Sworn Brothers cannot hope to match. No woman can ever tempt them, nor any man.

Yet Stalwart Shield is killed precisely because he was tempted:

Quote

"Even those who lack a man's parts may still have a man's heart, Your Grace," said Grey Worm. "This one has been told that your servant Stalwart Shield sometimes gave coin to the women of the brothels to lie with him and hold him."

Even those who lack a man's parts may still have a man's heart.

So much like the Stalwart Shield cracked, the Unsullied discipline is also beginning to crack. Stalwart Shield's murder is a plot device to show that the Unsullied are not, or at least no longer are, all they were cracked up to be. We also know Daenerys is introducing new Unsullied into the ranks to replace the losses caused by the Pale Mare and Sons of Harpy. The Unsullied are already cracking.

There is also the fact that Daenerys has never used them in an actual pitched battle. Barristan is apparently about to do that, but so I guess we may see how they perform there.

And lastly, we in fact do know how exactly the Unsullied perform against a Westerosi-style army. This is apparently from A World of Ice and Fire app:

Quote

Shortly after being created in 211 AC, the Golden Company sacked Qohor, after the city refused to honor the contract it had made with the company.

This event established the reputation of the sellword company.

That event happened well after the Unsullied became the city guard of Qohor.

7 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

His exact words are they arent trained to ''unravel secrets and ask questions'' this is an insurgency and requires detective work , again this is clearly martins comparison to nam ,iraq or afghanistan. It doesnt mean the unsullied cant fight as individuals  its just as outsiders raised without social skills they arent gonna be able to fight a shadow war, which again to.be fair even modern warriors struggle with.

 

Point.

7 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

Lance and cavalry can break sheild and spear walls yes  but its costly even when sucessful , the new ghis legions we see do hold off cavalry so unsullied can too ....which is to be expected anyway as sellsword heavy cavalry already  exists in the region.

 

When and what cavalry? If you are refering to Ser Barristan's cavalry, that is hardly heavy Westerosi cavalry. In fact, most of them weren't cavalrymen to begin with. And we do not know much about actual Essosi cavalry and their tactics.

Also, I have read through what excerpts of The Winds of Winter I could find, and was not able to find anything about the Ghiscari legions holding off cavalry.

If you can provide a quote, that would be helpful.

8 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

Spartans were the finest warriors of their day for decades (persian elites famously werent even as good as even medium sized greek state hoplites ) hence why they broke  their neighbours like argos over and over in open battle ,thebes used mixed units and new tactics to end the 40 or so year  spartan domiance  (and even  then they hand picked 300 or so warriors  to make into full time warriors to counter the strength and skill advantage of the spartans at the very frontlines ie they created 300 or so spartans of their own!!) the later macedonian phalanx was even more of  mixed unit but as individuals only alexanders companion cavalry or his elite silver shields would possibly match peak era spartans.

 

Spartans may have been the best of the Greek hoplites of that time, but even if we assume that to be true - they lost hoplite battles to Athens and other poleis fairly frequently - that is not exactly a shining recommendation. Something like medieval pikemen would easily beat a Greek hoplite army, Spartans or no Spartans.

In fact, looking at Spartan battles I could find:

• 684 BC - Sparta vs Messenia (Battle of Deres) - indecisive
• 682 BC - Sparta vs Messenia + Arcadia (Battle of the Great Foss), pre-hoplite battle - Spartan victory, battle won by bribing Arcadians to leave the battle
• 669 BC - Sparta vs Argos (Battle of Hysiae), first hoplite battle - Argive victory, Spartans did not use phalanx
• 550 BC - Sparta vs Arcadia (Battle of the Fetters), hoplite battle - Arcadian victory
• 546 BC - Sparta vs Argos (300 Champions), hoplite battle - indecisive
• 494 BC - Sparta vs Argos (Battle of Sepeia), ambush - Spartan victory
• 479 BC - Greeks vs Persians (Battle of Plataea), pitched battle - Greek victory
• 457 BC - Sparta vs Athens (Battle of Tanagra), pitched battle - Spartan victory
• 429 BC - Sparta vs Plataea (Siege of Plataea), siege - Spartan victory
• 426 BC - Sparta, Ambricia vs Athens and allies (Battle of Olpae), hoplite battle - Athenian victory
• 425 BC - Sparta vs Athens (Battle of Sphacteria), pitched battle - Athenian victory
• 424 BC - Sparta vs Athens (Capture of Amphipolis), hoplite battle - Spartan victory; no Spartiates present - mercenaries and helots only
• 423 BC - Sparta and Macedon vs Illyrians and Lyncestians (Battle of Lyncestis) - Illyrian victory, pitched battle (4 000 Illyrians vs 3 000 Greeks)
• 422 BC - Sparta vs Athens (Second Battle of Amphipolis), hoplite battle - Spartan victory; ambush, no pitched battle (2300 Sparta vs 1500 Athens)
• 418 BC - Sparta and allies vs Argos and Athens and allies (Battle of Mantinea), hoplite battle - Spartan victory, Argives and Arcadians fled before contact
• 417 BC - Sparta vs Argos and Hysiae (Battle of Hysiae), siege - Spartan victory, Spartans failed to take Argos but captured Hysiae
• 417 BC - Sparta vs Argos and Athens (Battle of Orneae), assault - Athenian victory, Orneae taken by storm
• 404 BC - Sparta and Athenian oligarchs vs Athenian democrats (Battle of Munychia), hoplite battle - Athenian victory, pitched battle
• 404 BC - Sparta and Athenian oligarchs vs Athenian democrats (Battle of Phyle), hoplite battle - Athenian victory, ambush
• 403 BC - Sparta vs Athenian exiles (Battle of Piraeus), hoplite battle - Spartan victory
• 395 BC - Sparta vs Thebes (Battle of Haliartus), hoplite battle - Theban victory; battle fought against a relief army
• 394 BC - Sparta vs Theba and Argos (Battle of Coronea), hoplite battle - Spartan victory, pitched battle (15 000 Sparta vs 20 000 allied)
• 394 BC - Sparta, Peloponnesian League vs Argos, Athens, Corinth, Thebes (Battle of Nemea) - Spartan victory, pitched battle (18 000 Sparta vs 24 000 allied)
• 391 BC - Sparta vs Athens (Battle of Lechaeum) - Athenian victory, pitched battle (Spartan hoplites vs Athenian peltasts)
• 385 BC - Sparta vs Mantinea (Siege of Mantinea) - Spartan victory, siege
• 375 BC - Sparta vs Thebes (Battle of Tegyra) - Theban victory, pitched battle (500 Thebans vs 1 000+ Spartans)
• 371 BC - Sparta vs Thebes (Battle of Leuctra) - Theban victory, pitched battle (8 500 Thebans vs 12 000 Spartans)
• 362 BC - Sparta and allies vs Thebes and allies (Battle of Mantinea) - Theban victory, pitched battle
• 331 BC - Sparta vs Macedon (Battle of Megalopolis) - Macedonian victory, pitched battle (22 000 Sparta vs 40 000 Macedon)
• 272 BC - Sparta, Argean + Messenian reinforcements and Macedon vs Epirus (Siege of Sparta) - Spartan victory, siege
• 227 BC - Sparta vs Achaean League (Battle of Mount Lycaeum) - Spartan victory, ambush
• 226 BC - Sparta vs Achaean League (Battle of Dyme), hoplite battle - Spartan victory, pitched battle
• 224 BC - Sparta vs Macedon - no contest, Macedonian victory by default
• 222 BC - Sparta vs Macedon and Allies (Battle of Sellasia), hoplite battle - Allied victory, pitched battle (21 000 Spartan vs 29 000 Macedon), Antigonus captures Sparta
• 207 BC - Sparta vs Achaean League (Battle of Mantinea) - Achaean victory, pitched battle
• 195 BC - Sparta vs Allies (Siege of Gythium), siege - Allied victory, Spartans surrendered - no pitched battle

Now, I will ignore the few battles I noted where Spartans were only a minor part rather than leaders of their coalition (which is to say, Plataea against Persians etc.).

So, looking only at field battles, we have 11 Spartan victories, 15 Spartan defeats, 2 draws

Looking only at pitched battles, we have 8 Spartan victories, 15 Spartan defeats, 2 draws

Looking only at pitched battles outside alliances, we have 4 Spartan victories, 8 Spartan defeats, 2 draws

So, uh, where exactly is this alleged Spartan winning record? I thought the "finest warriors of their day" should have performed better than this?

Fact is, Spartans were nothing more than possibly slightly-better-than-average hoplite phalanx. They do seem to have been able to carry out more complex maneuvers than your Athenian or Argive phalanx, but compared to e.g. Macedonian phalanx, Roman legions or indeed just about any medieval army, they were completely outclassed.

Stop reading propaganda and look at actual history, please.

9 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

Erm no extensive brainwashing doesnt make warriors lack initative  check any war in the middle east for decades unfortunatly fanatics stripped.of all individuality and free will can still be very inventive ..... and many generals of the  spartans in the pelopenessian war showed great creativity

 

These are ideological fanatics. Also, using Middle East as an example of military excellence is... well, you just shot your own argument with a bazooka:

https://ciaotest.cc.columbia.edu/olj/meria/meria00_den01.html

9 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

No i said modern elite troops are drilled until they can move as one living unit but can still think as individuals 

 

And in that they are completely unlike the Unsullied, whose lack of free will is a damn selling point.

9 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

The mountain climbing will.require initative though aa will stealing someones kid under them and the fact we know they orgainsed their own leadership and their own religious rites indicates they communicate and think for themselved a lot.more than we see

 

That hardly means they are capable of battlefield initiative. That is something that has to be part of military culture.

9 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

People.who need bodyguards dont hire status symbols man they hire bodyguards! If your life is at risk and you are wealthy then only the best will.do and any additional useless bodies around just reduces the chances the real.bodyguards can save u

Uh, that is so wrong. Unsullied are hired as status symbol because they are so expensive. And we see they go out of shape while guarding people, so Unsullied bodyguards cannot be all that effective.

[astarkchoice]

3 hours ago, Aldarion said:

Do they? Because I do not recall any comment about that. In fact, when Kraznys talks about the Unsullied, he specifically says this:

"Lockstep legions" means specifically they fight in the phalanx. And the fact that only one boy in three survives the training means that the entire training programme is not that well designed, so why trust slaver's claims? In fact, there are good reasons not to. A lot of what he says is later proven false, after Daenerys buys them. He says this:

Yet Stalwart Shield is killed precisely because he was tempted:

Even those who lack a man's parts may still have a man's heart.

So much like the Stalwart Shield cracked, the Unsullied discipline is also beginning to crack. Stalwart Shield's murder is a plot device to show that the Unsullied are not, or at least no longer are, all they were cracked up to be. We also know Daenerys is introducing new Unsullied into the ranks to replace the losses caused by the Pale Mare and Sons of Harpy. The Unsullied are already cracking.

There is also the fact that Daenerys has never used them in an actual pitched battle. Barristan is apparently about to do that, but so I guess we may see how they perform there.

And lastly, we in fact do know how exactly the Unsullied perform against a Westerosi-style army. This is apparently from A World of Ice and Fire app:

That event happened well after the Unsullied became the city guard of Qohor.

Point.

When and what cavalry? If you are refering to Ser Barristan's cavalry, that is hardly heavy Westerosi cavalry. In fact, most of them weren't cavalrymen to begin with. And we do not know much about actual Essosi cavalry and their tactics.

Also, I have read through what excerpts of The Winds of Winter I could find, and was not able to find anything about the Ghiscari legions holding off cavalry.

If you can provide a quote, that would be helpful.

Spartans may have been the best of the Greek hoplites of that time, but even if we assume that to be true - they lost hoplite battles to Athens and other poleis fairly frequently - that is not exactly a shining recommendation. Something like medieval pikemen would easily beat a Greek hoplite army, Spartans or no Spartans.

In fact, looking at Spartan battles I could find:

• 684 BC - Sparta vs Messenia (Battle of Deres) - indecisive
• 682 BC - Sparta vs Messenia + Arcadia (Battle of the Great Foss), pre-hoplite battle - Spartan victory, battle won by bribing Arcadians to leave the battle
• 669 BC - Sparta vs Argos (Battle of Hysiae), first hoplite battle - Argive victory, Spartans did not use phalanx
• 550 BC - Sparta vs Arcadia (Battle of the Fetters), hoplite battle - Arcadian victory
• 546 BC - Sparta vs Argos (300 Champions), hoplite battle - indecisive
• 494 BC - Sparta vs Argos (Battle of Sepeia), ambush - Spartan victory
• 479 BC - Greeks vs Persians (Battle of Plataea), pitched battle - Greek victory
• 457 BC - Sparta vs Athens (Battle of Tanagra), pitched battle - Spartan victory
• 429 BC - Sparta vs Plataea (Siege of Plataea), siege - Spartan victory
• 426 BC - Sparta, Ambricia vs Athens and allies (Battle of Olpae), hoplite battle - Athenian victory
• 425 BC - Sparta vs Athens (Battle of Sphacteria), pitched battle - Athenian victory
• 424 BC - Sparta vs Athens (Capture of Amphipolis), hoplite battle - Spartan victory; no Spartiates present - mercenaries and helots only
• 423 BC - Sparta and Macedon vs Illyrians and Lyncestians (Battle of Lyncestis) - Illyrian victory, pitched battle (4 000 Illyrians vs 3 000 Greeks)
• 422 BC - Sparta vs Athens (Second Battle of Amphipolis), hoplite battle - Spartan victory; ambush, no pitched battle (2300 Sparta vs 1500 Athens)
• 418 BC - Sparta and allies vs Argos and Athens and allies (Battle of Mantinea), hoplite battle - Spartan victory, Argives and Arcadians fled before contact
• 417 BC - Sparta vs Argos and Hysiae (Battle of Hysiae), siege - Spartan victory, Spartans failed to take Argos but captured Hysiae
• 417 BC - Sparta vs Argos and Athens (Battle of Orneae), assault - Athenian victory, Orneae taken by storm
• 404 BC - Sparta and Athenian oligarchs vs Athenian democrats (Battle of Munychia), hoplite battle - Athenian victory, pitched battle
• 404 BC - Sparta and Athenian oligarchs vs Athenian democrats (Battle of Phyle), hoplite battle - Athenian victory, ambush
• 403 BC - Sparta vs Athenian exiles (Battle of Piraeus), hoplite battle - Spartan victory
• 395 BC - Sparta vs Thebes (Battle of Haliartus), hoplite battle - Theban victory; battle fought against a relief army
• 394 BC - Sparta vs Theba and Argos (Battle of Coronea), hoplite battle - Spartan victory, pitched battle (15 000 Sparta vs 20 000 allied)
• 394 BC - Sparta, Peloponnesian League vs Argos, Athens, Corinth, Thebes (Battle of Nemea) - Spartan victory, pitched battle (18 000 Sparta vs 24 000 allied)
• 391 BC - Sparta vs Athens (Battle of Lechaeum) - Athenian victory, pitched battle (Spartan hoplites vs Athenian peltasts)
• 385 BC - Sparta vs Mantinea (Siege of Mantinea) - Spartan victory, siege
• 375 BC - Sparta vs Thebes (Battle of Tegyra) - Theban victory, pitched battle (500 Thebans vs 1 000+ Spartans)
• 371 BC - Sparta vs Thebes (Battle of Leuctra) - Theban victory, pitched battle (8 500 Thebans vs 12 000 Spartans)
• 362 BC - Sparta and allies vs Thebes and allies (Battle of Mantinea) - Theban victory, pitched battle
• 331 BC - Sparta vs Macedon (Battle of Megalopolis) - Macedonian victory, pitched battle (22 000 Sparta vs 40 000 Macedon)
• 272 BC - Sparta, Argean + Messenian reinforcements and Macedon vs Epirus (Siege of Sparta) - Spartan victory, siege
• 227 BC - Sparta vs Achaean League (Battle of Mount Lycaeum) - Spartan victory, ambush
• 226 BC - Sparta vs Achaean League (Battle of Dyme), hoplite battle - Spartan victory, pitched battle
• 224 BC - Sparta vs Macedon - no contest, Macedonian victory by default
• 222 BC - Sparta vs Macedon and Allies (Battle of Sellasia), hoplite battle - Allied victory, pitched battle (21 000 Spartan vs 29 000 Macedon), Antigonus captures Sparta
• 207 BC - Sparta vs Achaean League (Battle of Mantinea) - Achaean victory, pitched battle
• 195 BC - Sparta vs Allies (Siege of Gythium), siege - Allied victory, Spartans surrendered - no pitched battle

Now, I will ignore the few battles I noted where Spartans were only a minor part rather than leaders of their coalition (which is to say, Plataea against Persians etc.).

So, looking only at field battles, we have 11 Spartan victories, 15 Spartan defeats, 2 draws

Looking only at pitched battles, we have 8 Spartan victories, 15 Spartan defeats, 2 draws

Looking only at pitched battles outside alliances, we have 4 Spartan victories, 8 Spartan defeats, 2 draws

So, uh, where exactly is this alleged Spartan winning record? I thought the "finest warriors of their day" should have performed better than this?

Fact is, Spartans were nothing more than possibly slightly-better-than-average hoplite phalanx. They do seem to have been able to carry out more complex maneuvers than your Athenian or Argive phalanx, but compared to e.g. Macedonian phalanx, Roman legions or indeed just about any medieval army, they were completely outclassed.

Stop reading propaganda and look at actual history, please.

These are ideological fanatics. Also, using Middle East as an example of military excellence is... well, you just shot your own argument with a bazooka:

https://ciaotest.cc.columbia.edu/olj/meria/meria00_den01.html

And in that they are completely unlike the Unsullied, whose lack of free will is a damn selling point.

That hardly means they are capable of battlefield initiative. That is something that has to be part of military culture.

Uh, that is so wrong. Unsullied are hired as status symbol because they are so expensive. And we see they go out of shape while guarding people, so Unsullied bodyguards cannot be all that effective.

Literaly says in his first paragraph they master spears shield and short sword..il take.jt at this point youv'e conceded that they are trained to fight with their weapons as individuals as well as in a phalanx like literaly every military unit in all of history was! No troops in all of history were ever trained to fight in such a way as being helpless as individuals 

They will.never be tempted as in sex......im utterly shocked that part has to be spelled out you man! They are eunuchs ..but as individuals they apparently  need comfort (hugging or as we hear bodyguards they take to food) so  no individual thinking yet we clearly see they can  act as individual

Qohor? Shocker 3k foot  lost  vs 10k with cavalry ,archerd and frigging elephants!

Barristan one talks of the yunkai sellsword cavalry (armed same as westerosi remember) and the unsullied would need time to form up to defend a charge (if barristan says they can defend westerosi style cavalry but only when formed up il take his pov as gospel) and his 2nd clearly describes the ghiscari legions forming up to.meet the stormcrows cavalry with spears  one man kneeling spear up , 2nd standing and  3rd spear over the shoulders of 1st 2 to create a bog standard anti cavalry spear block.

 

Il.assume.you downloaded that somewhere(wiki?)  or its someones opinion piece ..even at a glance it has battles from when thebes rested control of greece from sparta(which we covered was more to do with tactics and combined arms..the spartans were still unquestionablw the best trained hoplites and individual fighters on earth its just hoplite warfare had moved on without them..thebes  had specificaly thought of ways to beat them despite only  specificaly having 300 troops p4p as good!!!!   ), and then macedon(who revolutionised hoplite warfare again leaving all greece behind). You have athens vs athens oilgarchs (munychia) battle listed as spartan loss , battle of pyle which was an ambush, ornae was argos exiles vs athens no spartans as sparta had withdrawn,lechaem was hoplites vs light missle troops which il sorta  give u but highlights more the loss of primacy of the hopite than anything ,  ..il.assume.most of this is the same mess.

The spartans from around 500 to 375 bc.where unquestionably the finest trained force on earth, literaly where we get the phrase spartan training  from and  some.of the only.full.time soilders in greece..the fact that they fell behind with their particular phalanx formation and lack.of combined arms ( of course social/economic b.s decisions on top of wars  ,harshness of training reduced the number of actual.spartans too).doesnt alter a century+ of being the gold standard in elite forces!..... just as macedon losing to rome or rome losing to its former allies/enemies  doesnt diminish  their glory days either

 

Again your reaching there i never said military excellence i said initative, fanatics usaly cant shoot for shit BUT nor can they disobey some mullah giving them.orders(ie they are like the unsullied in that they obey without question) but they CAN take individual initive and adapt+ surpise  ..that any veteran will attest to

 

Again utter Obedence doesnt strip away the ability to think independently , cults and fanatics are filled with utterly obedient people.who.can still.use their own initative ,the unsullieds training literaly forced them to think for themselves or join the 1/3 who dont make it nor would they work as a bodyguard unit if they cant adapt

Nor could they select their own leaders so quick of they had no individual.thought nor handle their own secret religious rites

 

Yes they get fat which we see in real.life(pick any chubby looking sucessful.combat athelte, actual celeb bodyguards or your local club bouncers ) and in the book ( belwas? Remeber him) doesnt hinder their function and shows as individuals they can think and have vices etc.

 

In summary as we.are.going back and forth here and You are really reaching here if you think troops trained from birth to master their individual weapons will be helpless out of formation ,pointing to an insurgency doesnt help as both real life troops and danys own brazen beasts cant help stop the shadow war. 

I dont think wel agree on this so peace out 

[Aldarion]

On 12/15/2022 at 12:20 PM, astarkchoice said:

Literaly says in his first paragraph they master spears shield and short sword..il take.jt at this point youv'e conceded that they are trained to fight with their weapons as individuals as well as in a phalanx like literaly every military unit in all of history was! No troops in all of history were ever trained to fight in such a way as being helpless as individuals 

 

Spear, shield and short swords are all weapons you are expected to use in a phalanx. Fact that they are trained to use them give us absolutely no indication on whether the Unsullied are or are not trained to fight outside the phalanx.

So no, I have conceded nothing. You just, I am afraid, are making stuff up.

Fact that Unsullied are castrated during prepubescence means precisely that they are indeed incapable of fighting against other infantry.

https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/84/12/4324/2864451

Quote

It is to the credit of the pioneering physician scientists involved that useful medical information was obtained about the long term effects of castration, under circumstances that must have been difficult, from the study of these now extinct groups of castrated men, and it is impressive that all their findings (osteoporosis, failure of closure of the epiphyses, reactive pituitary hyperplasia, shrinkage of the prostate, and development of gynecomastia) have been confirmed subsequently by studies of individuals or small groups of individuals with various forms of hypogonadism.

https://bigthink.com/articles/the-surprising-truth-about-modern-eunuchs/

Quote

“A castrated adult male will lose muscle but gain fat. He can expect hot flushes like those that women have at menopause. He will lose body hair, and his penis will shrink. Erections will be rare and weak, if they occur at all. He will be sterile,” describes Richard Wassersug of the Australian Research Center in Sex, Health, and Society. Wassersug is himself a eunuch.

Physical strength is not necessarily decisive in combat, but it is not irrelevant either... what is certain however is, you do not want your bones to break.

And sure, a Greek hoplite can fight out of formation... but he will suck at it, because both training and equipment required for individual combat is vastly different compared to that for combat in the phalanx. Spartans got destroyed by Athenian rowers acting as skirmishers on one occasion, for precisely that reason.

On 12/15/2022 at 12:20 PM, astarkchoice said:

They will.never be tempted as in sex......im utterly shocked that part has to be spelled out you man! They are eunuchs ..but as individuals they apparently  need comfort (hugging or as we hear bodyguards they take to food) so  no individual thinking yet we clearly see they can  act as individual

 

They cannot have sex, but they obviously can be tempted. Because that is precisely what has happened. Everything else is semantics.

On 12/15/2022 at 12:20 PM, astarkchoice said:

Qohor? Shocker 3k foot  lost  vs 10k with cavalry ,archerd and frigging elephants!

 

Considering Qohor is a fortified city, yes, it is a shocker. Unless they marched out, in which case their commanders are morons.

Also, we do not know how large the Golden Company was at the time. It may well have been far smaller than today. In fact, it almost certainly was.

On 12/15/2022 at 12:20 PM, astarkchoice said:

Barristan one talks of the yunkai sellsword cavalry (armed same as westerosi remember) and the unsullied would need time to form up to defend a charge (if barristan says they can defend westerosi style cavalry but only when formed up il take his pov as gospel) and his 2nd clearly describes the ghiscari legions forming up to.meet the stormcrows cavalry with spears  one man kneeling spear up , 2nd standing and  3rd spear over the shoulders of 1st 2 to create a bog standard anti cavalry spear block.

 

Of course they would form up to try and stop the cavalry charge! That does not mean they will actually succeed at stopping it.

Also, citation on Barristan. I'm interested in what is actually written there.

On 12/15/2022 at 12:20 PM, astarkchoice said:

Il.assume.you downloaded that somewhere(wiki?)  or its someones opinion piece ..even at a glance it has battles from when thebes rested control of greece from sparta(which we covered was more to do with tactics and combined arms..the spartans were still unquestionablw the best trained hoplites and individual fighters on earth its just hoplite warfare had moved on without them..thebes  had specificaly thought of ways to beat them despite only  specificaly having 300 troops p4p as good!!!!   ), and then macedon(who revolutionised hoplite warfare again leaving all greece behind). You have athens vs athens oilgarchs (munychia) battle listed as spartan loss , battle of pyle which was an ambush, ornae was argos exiles vs athens no spartans as sparta had withdrawn,lechaem was hoplites vs light missle troops which il sorta  give u but highlights more the loss of primacy of the hopite than anything ,  ..il.assume.most of this is the same mess.

The spartans from around 500 to 375 bc.where unquestionably the finest trained force on earth, literaly where we get the phrase spartan training  from and  some.of the only.full.time soilders in greece..the fact that they fell behind with their particular phalanx formation and lack.of combined arms ( of course social/economic b.s decisions on top of wars  ,harshness of training reduced the number of actual.spartans too).doesnt alter a century+ of being the gold standard in elite forces!..... just as macedon losing to rome or rome losing to its former allies/enemies  doesnt diminish  their glory days either

I have not downloaded it anywhere, I put it together myself. Granted, it may be lacking some things.

Doesn't change that you are wrong.

First, when battles are from doesn't matter. Point is that Spartans were never unquestionably the best - not even if we limit ourselves to Greek armies during the classical antiquity. Right now, you are going "ohh Spartans were the best... if we ignore literally every other army that has ever existed". Well, of course they win if they are the only contestant!

Second, you are now arguing against yourself. You do understand that Westerosi training, equipment and tactics are some 2 000 years ahead of what the Unsullied are based on? That is like Thebes against Sparta on the tenth power. Unsullied are essentially hoplites at best - they may be good hoplites (unlikely), but even so, army that is a shittier version of a slightly-above-average army from 5th century BC won't stand a chance against the Westerosi armies that are fundamentally slightly shittier versions of real-world 15th century armies. If Spartans couldn't beat Thebans because latter were slightly more advanced in military development, Westerosi will walk all over the Unsullied.

Yes, you are correct - Macedon did revolutionize hoplite warfare. Yet even Macedonian phalanx is nowhere as capable as a late medieval army of the sort we see in Westeros. There were a dozen revolutions between 5th century BC hoplites and 15th century AD pikemen. How will, exactly, Unsullied face them?

In battle of Munychia, battle was between Athenian exiles and Athenian oligarchs, latter of whom were supported by the Spartan garrison. And I explicitly noted as much in the list. So there is no mistake there, you are just doing it again.

Same for battle of Pyle - I specifically noted it was an ambush and thus excluded it when counting just pitched battles.

I did everything I could to compensate for everything you have noted. It didn't help Spartans one iota:

Quote

So, looking only at field battles, we have 11 Spartan victories, 15 Spartan defeats, 2 draws

Looking only at pitched battles, we have 8 Spartan victories, 15 Spartan defeats, 2 draws

Looking only at pitched battles outside alliances, we have 4 Spartan victories, 8 Spartan defeats, 2 draws

In fact, if you exclude ambushes and similar, Spartans end up looking worse than they otherwise would have.

Spartans from 500 to 375 BC... yeah, no. Even looking at your "massaged" version, we get this:

Spartan victories:
5 battle (4 excluding Thebes)
2 ambushes
3 sieges
1 no contest

Spartan defeats:
6 battles (5 excluding Thebes)
1 ambush
1 siege

So they do better overall (11 victories to 8 losses), but in the open field battles they are again at disadvantage (5 victories to 6 losses). It is actually the very "un-Spartan" ambushes and sieges that allow them to go ahead!

And in pitched battles outside alliances, we get 2 Spartan victories and 3 defeats.

So again, where is this Spartan superiority, exactly? Because everything you have listed does not seem to have allowed them to create unquestionably superior (or even just superior) military!

They are just average.

On 12/15/2022 at 12:20 PM, astarkchoice said:

Again your reaching there i never said military excellence i said initative, fanatics usaly cant shoot for shit BUT nor can they disobey some mullah giving them.orders(ie they are like the unsullied in that they obey without question) but they CAN take individual initive and adapt+ surpise  ..that any veteran will attest to

 

I have already shown you that Arab regular armies do lack initiative. Unsullied are not fanatics, so if anyone is reaching here, it is you.

On 12/15/2022 at 12:20 PM, astarkchoice said:

Again utter Obedence doesnt strip away the ability to think independently , cults and fanatics are filled with utterly obedient people.who.can still.use their own initative ,the unsullieds training literaly forced them to think for themselves or join the 1/3 who dont make it nor would they work as a bodyguard unit if they cant adapt

Nor could they select their own leaders so quick of they had no individual.thought nor handle their own secret religious rites

And you are at it again.

Cults and fanatics are not filled with utterly obedient people. They are filled with... GASP!... religious fanatics. But obedience to religious creed is not the same as obedience to orders. Former is a set of morals, latter is a set of instructions.

Just because you can read a Bible doesn't mean you can put together a TV.

[SeanF]

@AldarionMostly, cavalry charging well-disciplined infantry in squares, or a line that can’t be outflanked, is a disaster … for the cavalry.

Ney proved that at Waterloo.

[Aldarion]

18 hours ago, SeanF said:

@AldarionMostly, cavalry charging well-disciplined infantry in squares, or a line that can’t be outflanked, is a disaster … for the cavalry.

Ney proved that at Waterloo.

Yes and no, and yesno and noyes, and gobleboldedoo.

When it comes to just cavalry vs just infantry, it all depends on various factors:

1) how disciplined infantry is

2) how disciplined cavalry is

3) what infantry is equipped with

4) what cavalry is equipped with

5) what kind of terrain they are fighting on

Byzantine military manuals literally include guide on how cataphracts can break infantry squares, as well as what infantry square should do should cavalry break into it (Byzantine infantry squares were hollow). Byzantine and Arab cataphracts were known to use their own horse's armor to physically break spear shafts of the defending infantry, forcing both sides to adopt much thicker pikes (menaulion). Ottomans used massess of cannon fodder as well as cannons linked with chain as an obstacle because their Janissary infantry - then the best in the world - was largely incapable of stopping heavy cavalry charge in the cavalry terrain.

In general, however:

1) if cavalry has longer weapons than infantry, cavalry wins

2) if infantry has longer weapons than cavalry, infantry wins

That is why pikes were used in the first place: they provided infantry with reach advantage over cavalry.

But Unsullied are spearmen, not pikemen. They do not have reach advantage over Westerosi lancer cavalry. Meaning, in any sort of a direct clash, Westerosi heavy cavalry will ride straight over them.

What Ney proved at the Waterloo is that he is a terrible commander. Nothing more, nothing less. Napoleonic infantry squares also had a massive advantage of using gunpowder weapons - in fact, several examples where cavalry did break infantry square were because... it was raining, and gunpowder was wet. In other words, it was firepower, not the bayonets, that was the key in stopping the cavalry charge.

Good example of what happens to a bayonet (or spear) square facing a cavalry without having gunpowder weapons is Battle of Garcia Fernandez:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_García_Hernández

Do note that Napoleonic cavalry used sabres as a rule - Dragoons definitely did. Meaning, even the longer reach was not always enough to save the infantry square from collapse under determined cavalry assault.

And of course, cavalry is rarely alone. Infantry in a square is usually (not always) immobile, and always immobile when it is under imminent threat of a cavalry attack. Which then means you can bring in archers to shoot it up. You don't need to cause casualties, but if a pike square is disordered, then it will be destroyed by heavy cavalry.