If you were the king of Westeros !!!

[Vaegon the dragonless]

29 minutes ago, astarkchoice said:

200 warships the rest are the merchent fleet, they arent built for combat nor did their crews sign up for that, the longships by contrast are all warships ..fast manuverable and with strong prows and rams possibly the larger ones  built with scorpions or catapaults etc filled with experienced marine raiders  ...you cant just put a bunch of troops(esp those whove never been at sea before ie 99% of most medieval.troops)  on a  transport and call it a warship itd slow down the main  warship fleet anyway! Its end up a slow mess all bunched together and needing constant protection by the actual warships...theyd do more  wayyy harm than good esp if fireships get amomg them or in any kind of  a strong breeze.  The  non marine troops on board would get in the actual sailors way., overall theres a reason its never been tried in history..warships engage warships and when the seas are safe then you can let transports cross over with men safely!

Yes most of the Redwyne fleet is a merchant fleet, but that was the norm during the middle age, at Arnemuiden and latter at Sluys both fleets were mainly composed of merchant ships enrolled and filled with men at arms, so the whole thing of putting a bunch of men on a merchant ships using this as a warships as been used in real life and seems to be also the norm in Westeros, sure if you have specialised ships, it is better to use them for the combat but merchant ships are not completely useless and have been in fact used affectively. And there is no such thing as specialised marines, a marine is simply a foot-soldier on a ship, specialisation only happened latter in history. Also merchant ships are not that slow, sure some are slower then war ships, but with out cargo I dont expect a trading galley to be slower then a longship, in fact I would say it might be faster. So Yes using merchant ships, as been done, can be effective and would be done, why would there numbers be even mentioned when talking about the Redwyne fleet if they cant be used to some extend in war.

Also about the longships, I am repeating myself, but they are not warships, they dont have ram or scorpion or catapults, they are fast yes, they have experienced crews that know how to fight yes. But they dont seem to be that much sturdier then other ships we see, in fact Aeron remembers how easely is ship was cut i half by the Fury (Sure it is a ship a lot stronger then is own but still I dont remember that happening at any other moment in the story) and it dint seem to even slow down. So Im sorry but no the longships both in real life and in Planetos are not warships, they can and have been used in war, even effectively but they are not designed and build for war, they are versatile ships and very useful but not a warship.

44 minutes ago, astarkchoice said:

The ironborn longships have been boarding and killing transports for as long as theyve existed but The iron fleet is the elite designed to counter the largest ships of the ' greenlanders' we know they are slughtly smaller but big enough to be a counter to them

The Iron fleet is suppose to counter the "greenlanders" warships yes, but they dont have a good track record against them, and they are not just slightly smaller, their are slightly smaller then the smaller ships in the war fleets of Westeros, they are heavely outclassed by the stronger ships of the westerosi ships. And will yes the ironborn have been capable of boarding and defeating transports, but there decline since before the arrival in power of the Hoares shows to me that they are not really a threat, since they lost island and lands again and again until they manage to reform a bit and take the Riverlands.

 

1 hour ago, astarkchoice said:

Overall im not saying westeros cant win at sea (esp as it has before) but that the cost of potentialy losing is huge  , not just in the clossal cost of ship rebuilding and reavers hitting those same harbours est, of foriegn powers smelling weakness and taking say the stepstones...the big issue is your risking a loss in a kingdom held together basicly by string and   kiddy glue!!!!  Minus dragons the north is virtualy impossible to take from the south, dorne is a goddamn nightmare to retake, the vale almsot as bad, the reach cannot be subdued without the strength of at least 2 other regions tag teaming it, the westerlands wealth is dangerously unbalanced and finaly every region has some semi unbrrakable castle!!!

And I disagree that it would cost that much, and I would even argue that it would unite the rest of the realm against a common foe, it historically worked both in real life and in the series, the Greyjoy rebellion and Dornish wars seem to me that those wars have done a lot to unite Westeros under the Targaryen, and like a said in my original plan, I would make it so that the ironborn are pushed to revolt, thuse not being the aggressor. And like a said I expect the cost to be not as expensive as you, I think we can agree to disagree at least on that point, so the collapse of the rest of the realm should not happen, especially since I could even use the faith difference.

 

1 hour ago, astarkchoice said:

Id say to cost of fighting a people to extinction may be high nor will all.your bannermen be happy they are taking on such costs and risks  fpr seemingly no gtlrest gain unless the ironborn where in open  rebellion, attempting genocide agaisnt  them may force a fanatical religious   resistance , overall when they arent in rebellion they seem to be a plus  for westeros if in trade , fast ships for carrying goods, bringing back rare plunder or trade goods from essos or further east or just revaing vs their fellow pirates thus keeping the stepstones westerosi property etc!

I agree that it would most likely make them go into religious fanatism mode, wich would also give me perfect justification, in for the rest of Westeros (Again never give me any power I would be horrible). And again I disagree with the suppose wealth they bring but I think we while have to agree to disagree on that point too.

1 hour ago, astarkchoice said:

Also the stoeny shore isnt empty we specificaly hear its filled with fishermen!

Between the northern fishermen fishing there and the ironborn that 'totaly dont sow' probably doing it too its probably well fished

I disagree about the Stony Shore being filled with fishermen, they're is quite a few villages but filled seem like a gross exageration, I would say it is under-populated. And yes those waters are fished, but not to the extent that they could be because who want to live somewhere were every 50 years or so see raiders come, rape all the women, killing almost everyone and take the children and women they fancy back as slaves. Yeah I would rather stick to the interior too.

[astarkchoice]

30 minutes ago, Vaegon the dragonless said:

Yes most of the Redwyne fleet is a merchant fleet, but that was the norm during the middle age, at Arnemuiden and latter at Sluys both fleets were mainly composed of merchant ships enrolled and filled with men at arms, so the whole thing of putting a bunch of men on a merchant ships using this as a warships as been used in real life and seems to be also the norm in Westeros, sure if you have specialised ships, it is better to use them for the combat but merchant ships are not completely useless and have been in fact used affectively. And there is no such thing as specialised marines, a marine is simply a foot-soldier on a ship, specialisation only happened latter in history. Also merchant ships are not that slow, sure some are slower then war ships, but with out cargo I dont expect a trading galley to be slower then a longship, in fact I would say it might be faster. So Yes using merchant ships, as been done, can be effective and would be done, why would there numbers be even mentioned when talking about the Redwyne fleet if they cant be used to some extend in war.

Also about the longships, I am repeating myself, but they are not warships, they dont have ram or scorpion or catapults, they are fast yes, they have experienced crews that know how to fight yes. But they dont seem to be that much sturdier then other ships we see, in fact Aeron remembers how easely is ship was cut i half by the Fury (Sure it is a ship a lot stronger then is own but still I dont remember that happening at any other moment in the story) and it dint seem to even slow down. So Im sorry but no the longships both in real life and in Planetos are not warships, they can and have been used in war, even effectively but they are not designed and build for war, they are versatile ships and very useful but not a warship.

The Iron fleet is suppose to counter the "greenlanders" warships yes, but they dont have a good track record against them, and they are not just slightly smaller, their are slightly smaller then the smaller ships in the war fleets of Westeros, they are heavely outclassed by the stronger ships of the westerosi ships. And will yes the ironborn have been capable of boarding and defeating transports, but there decline since before the arrival in power of the Hoares shows to me that they are not really a threat, since they lost island and lands again and again until they manage to reform a bit and take the Riverlands.

 

And I disagree that it would cost that much, and I would even argue that it would unite the rest of the realm against a common foe, it historically worked both in real life and in the series, the Greyjoy rebellion and Dornish wars seem to me that those wars have done a lot to unite Westeros under the Targaryen, and like a said in my original plan, I would make it so that the ironborn are pushed to revolt, thuse not being the aggressor. And like a said I expect the cost to be not as expensive as you, I think we can agree to disagree at least on that point, so the collapse of the rest of the realm should not happen, especially since I could even use the faith difference.

 

I agree that it would most likely make them go into religious fanatism mode, wich would also give me perfect justification, in for the rest of Westeros (Again never give me any power I would be horrible). And again I disagree with the suppose wealth they bring but I think we while have to agree to disagree on that point too.

I disagree about the Stony Shore being filled with fishermen, they're is quite a few villages but filled seem like a gross exageration, I would say it is under-populated. And yes those waters are fished, but not to the extent that they could be because who want to live somewhere were every 50 years or so see raiders come, rape all the women, killing almost everyone and take the children and women they fancy back as slaves. Yeah I would rather stick to the interior too.

They will be slow to manuever , take up.space in the fleet (clumping together isnt smart) and designed to carry weight not take impacts . Theres no specialised marines yet no but most of the crew of the westerosi warships.are used to water whereas land based troops packed onto a transport  will need a few weeks if not months  to find their sea legs to be of use.

Nope they are warships and have been used in sea battles in both book and real.life and the ironfleet are simply bigger(x3)  than the regular kind. Its listed as one of the 3 most powerful fleets in westeros for a reason .  The shield island fleet of at least  50  warships squares off with 94 ironfleet ships and lose almost  the whole fleet (38) vs 6 ironfleet to give an example of how  well matched they are in close quarters!!! In real life the rus  vikings and othervikings  fought byzantine galleys at sea in their longboats , we know the volantis wargalleys are easy prey to the ieonfleet at mereen etc 

Wel agree to disagree here it feels like were starting to get into circles

In summary though  if the ironborn are insignificant then the sheer scale and risk of your plan (we clearly wont agree on the odds) isnt worth it, if they are worthwhile asset..one worth fighting to subject them.again then when they rebel then their worth keeping

 

[James Arryn]

I think maybe people don’t realize that most of the great Viking vs. Viking battles in history were sea battles. 

[astarkchoice]

27 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

I think maybe people don’t realize that most of the great Viking vs. Viking battles in history were sea battles. 

Yep plus  wildfire is based on the famous greek fire that byzantine  literaly used to fight off enemies like the rus vikings longships! 

[James Arryn]

12 minutes ago, astarkchoice said:

Yep plus  wildfire is based on the famous greek fire that byzantine  literaly used to fight off enemies like the rus vikings longships! 

Had a friend who specialized in ~ Viking period, and his complaint was that almost all interest/study/research/writing about the ‘Vikings’ takes place outside of Scandinavia. That is to say people are interested in what they did elsewhere, very little in what they did at home. 
 

To return to our point, when Vikings thought of war…as opposed to raiding/plundering, ie when they set out to resolve political disputes with each other through battle, their cultural emphasis was not about marching or riding off to battle, but setting sail to meet the enemy fleet. They even had large-scale naval battles with pre-arranged times and places, though of course those were often used to cheat. Land conflicts tended to be smaller, more like raids actually, often hall burnings. 

[astarkchoice]

43 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

Had a friend who specialized in ~ Viking period, and his complaint was that almost all interest/study/research/writing about the ‘Vikings’ takes place outside of Scandinavia. That is to say people are interested in what they did elsewhere, very little in what they did at home. 
 

To return to our point, when Vikings thought of war…as opposed to raiding/plundering, ie when they set out to resolve political disputes with each other through battle, their cultural emphasis was not about marching or riding off to battle, but setting sail to meet the enemy fleet. They even had large-scale naval battles with pre-arranged times and places, though of course those were often used to cheat. Land conflicts tended to be smaller, more like raids actually, often hall burnings. 

Theres so much wrong with the depections of them its nuts, they had strong legal systems , standing professional military forces ,where almost obsessively clean etc not the lawless smelly savages of hollywood

[Craving Peaches]

2 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

etc not the lawless smelly savages of hollywood

That reminds me of how the Scottish are portrayed in Braveheart. They are depicted as Pictish barbarians or something, like tribesmen, never mind that it was the 13th century and they had access to the same kinds of weapons and armour the English did and were a feudal kingdom not some barbaric tribe.