Dothraki Army - Incompetent Huns

[Aldarion]

1 hour ago, Hmmm said:

In the movie version, a simple drawbridge at the end of the ramp to the Hornburg should have made it massively more difficult to take the keep. The Uruk Hai might not have been able to begin their assault until after several weeks. 

I do not recall if Tolkien describes the defenses of Helm's Deep in detail in the books. But I do think it is a bit strange that Saruman's army could begin the assault less than a day after arriving outside the castle. 

Agreed. As for the book, I believe that the ramp may have been an earthwork. At least it originally was supposed to be:

https://tolkiengateway.net/w/images/a/a9/J.R.R._Tolkien_-_Helm's_Deep_and_the_Hornburg.jpg

I am however unsure if, and if so how much, Tolkien's concept changed between the drawing and the final text.

3 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

Now with all this in mind the dothraki lack of armour seems even dafter. They lack the armour to charge into infantry (even ones softened up by volleys) without heavy heavy casulties and even if they stay back and mix up arrow/bow types  they risk loads of friendly fire deaths !!! 

 

Yep, pretty much. Dothraki can only win a war against deer!

[astarkchoice]

3 hours ago, Aldarion said:

 

Yep, pretty much. Dothraki can only win a war against deer!

They can i suppose still  win vs most armies the issue is minus armour theyd need to be able to swallow horrific casulties and/or be amazingly skilled individuals and coordinated like a flock of birds to compensate for the lack of protection.

 

They did take many cities and fortresses in essos but theres 3 big issues in their favour there 

1)siegecraft is handwaved away by grmm like most fantasy writers  as something dull when its actualy facinating hence the clanker lords have made and operated trebuchets  and trench lines and danys slaves turned boats into siege weapons (yunkais bed slaves must all have carpentry as a hobby!) 

 

2) beat  99 khalassars and it only takes one to be well led and/or  lucky  once and your city is gone forver

 

3) the slow bleed: unlike real nomads the dothraki despise farmlands and all settlements wrecking them all back to grassland again...this means for any city anything outside heavy walls is destroyed one by one bleeding a state of its revenue and food.

[Angel Eyes]

I remember watching The Last Samurai (the one with Tom Cruise not Lance Henriksen) and started thinking about how a force like the Dothraki, a culture based on the art of war for centuries but with few resources, could fare against a better-equipped foe. In the first battle, the Japanese soldiers, under Algren's command, are ill-trained and prone to panic, even with Algren and Gant. During this battle there don't seem to be any officers aside from Colonel Bagley (who's at the rear), General Hasegawa, Algren, Gant, and an unnamed junior officer who shows up later. Bagley sees the Samurai as savages, but Algren counters that their focus for the last thousand years has been war. The Samurai, led by Katsumoto, take advantage of a fog bank and attack the troops in a forest, which limits their ability to shoot straight. And the soldiers are afraid of the Samurai, who'd once held power of life and death over them. Cue near-immediate rout with most of the (very few) Samurai casualties personally inflicted by Algren and Gant (who is killed), while Hasegawa commits seppuku.

In the final battle, Bagley, now directly subordinate to the Emperor's advisor Omura on the battlefield, with better-trained troops, more time to prepare, and more firepower, is wise to how the Samurai operate and starts off with a howitzer barrage. The Samurai, now advised by Algren, retreat and Bagley is hesitant, but Omura, who is a)overconfident, b) has no experience, and c) dismissive of the Samurai, overrules him and orders the bulk of the army to attack... which plays right into the Samurai's hands as the troops, now in range of arrow fire, get trapped by flammable mines. Cue a brutal melee. However this time there's enough soldiers that the Samurai are ground down to only a few dozen. Katsumoto, who knew defeat was inevitable, orders a suicidal charge that breaks through the infantry lines; Algren kills Bagley, but the charge is silenced by Gatling guns. Katsumoto commits seppuku with Algren's help.

However, Katsumoto never actually meant to win, but to teach his pupil the Emperor that the values that Katsumoto held dear had a place in Japanese society. In contrast, Omura's inexperience in battle (he is a businessman) and general dismissive behavior towards the Samurai made the battle closer than it should have been, and played right into Katsumoto's hands.

While the tactics themselves are somewhat suspect, it's in line with the storytelling and characters. On the other hand, would the Dothraki be smart enough to use such means to their advantage?

Edited February 22 by Angel Eyes

[Aldarion]

1 hour ago, Angel Eyes said:

I remember watching The Last Samurai (the one with Tom Cruise not Lance Henriksen) and started thinking about how a force like the Dothraki, a culture based on the art of war for centuries but with few resources, could fare against a better-equipped foe. In the first battle, the Japanese soldiers, under Algren's command, are ill-trained and prone to panic, even with Algren and Gant. During this battle there don't seem to be any officers aside from Colonel Bagley (who's at the rear), General Hasegawa, Algren, Gant, and an unnamed junior officer who shows up later. Bagley The Samurai, led by Katsumoto, take advantage of a fog bank and attack the troops in a forest, which limits their ability to shoot straight. And the soldiers are afraid of the Samurai, who'd once held power of life and death over them. Cue near-immediate rout with most of the (very few) Samurai casualties personally inflicted by Algren and Gant (who is killed).

In the final battle, Bagley, now directly subordinate to the Emperor's advisor Omura on the battlefield, with more time to prepare and more firepower, is wise to how the Samurai operate and starts off with a howitzer barrage. The Samurai, now advised by Algren, retreat and Bagley is hesitant, but Omura, who is a)overconfident, and b)dismissive of the Samurai, overrules him and orders the bulk of the army to attack... which plays right into the Samurai's hands as the troops are now in range of arrow fire, get trapped by flammable mines. Cue a brutal melee. However this time there's enough soldiers that the Samurai are ground down to only a few dozen. Katsumoto, who knew defeat was inevitable, orders a suicidal charge that breaks through the infantry lines; Algren kills Bagley, but the charge is silenced by Gatling guns.

However, Katsumoto never actually meant to win, but to teach his pupil the Emperor that the values that Katsumoto held dear had a place in Japanese society. In contrast, Omura's inexperience in battle (he is a businessman) and general dismissive behavior towards the Samurai made the battle closer than it should have been, and played right into Katsumoto's hands.

While the tactics themselves are somewhat suspect, it's in line with the storytelling and characters. On the other hand, would the Dothraki be smart enough to use such means to their advantage?

Agreed with pretty much everything you described... and as to your final question, I think answer is a pretty much resounding "NON". Dothraki are not a soldier society, they are a warrior society... and have shown a very clear resistance to utilizing tactics and equipment which they see as dishonorable. Basically, in the situation above, Dothraki have all of the disadvantages of Samurai combined with Omura's inexperience and overconfident attitude.

[SeanF]

19 hours ago, Aldarion said:

Agreed with pretty much everything you described... and as to your final question, I think answer is a pretty much resounding "NON". Dothraki are not a soldier society, they are a warrior society... and have shown a very clear resistance to utilizing tactics and equipment which they see as dishonorable. Basically, in the situation above, Dothraki have all of the disadvantages of Samurai combined with Omura's inexperience and overconfident attitude.

I think that the whole business by which some non-Western cultures adapted very successfully to Western ways of war and others did not is fascinating.

The Japanese did so very successfully.  The Sikhs almost did so very successfully (and the British victory in the Sikh Wars was a very near-run thing.  Had the British lost, we might now talk about the Sikh Raj).  The Ottomans and Chinese acquired the technology but did not make use of it successfully.

Then, you get peoples who were able effectively to combine Western technology effectively with their own ways of fighting, like American Indians and the Maori.  They only lost due to facing overwhelming numbers of Europeans.

[astarkchoice]

57 minutes ago, SeanF said:

I think that the whole business by which some non-Western cultures adapted very successfully to Western ways of war and others did not is fascinating.

The Japanese did so very successfully.  The Sikhs almost did so very successfully (and the British victory in the Sikh Wars was a very near-run thing.  Had the British lost, we might now talk about the Sikh Raj).  The Ottomans and Chinese acquired the technology but did not make use of it successfully.

Then, you get peoples who were able effectively to combine Western technology effectively with their own ways of fighting, like American Indians and the Maori.  They only lost due to facing overwhelming numbers of Europeans.

Good points

 

The ultimate example would be rome.....any time they met a weapon or tactic that was better than theirs they adopted it!

[Aldarion]

1 hour ago, SeanF said:

I think that the whole business by which some non-Western cultures adapted very successfully to Western ways of war and others did not is fascinating.

The Japanese did so very successfully.  The Sikhs almost did so very successfully (and the British victory in the Sikh Wars was a very near-run thing.  Had the British lost, we might now talk about the Sikh Raj).  The Ottomans and Chinese acquired the technology but did not make use of it successfully.

Then, you get peoples who were able effectively to combine Western technology effectively with their own ways of fighting, like American Indians and the Maori.  They only lost due to facing overwhelming numbers of Europeans.

Agreed. I'd say it has to do with social structures and culture - way of war is far more than just technology and science, it also includes culture, mentality, psychology... some cultures were simply unable to utilize Western developments in warfare due to a radically different context.

[astarkchoice]

Yeah in defence of jorahs statements on the dothraki. I dont think he was in love with dany at that stage (itd be damned quick) .

 

He says the dothraki bows outrange westerosi ones but this is seemingly contradicted by jon connington. Now jorah has seen westerosi bows in action as  he grew up using  them, seen them in 2 wars and has probably seen them again in exile so whats the story.

Now jon does describe the big yew westerosi bows have better range BUT theres various types of longbow and jon is probably saying his westerosi archers  are all standard equipped   with  the very biggest and best type (as one would expect of the gold company) therefore jorah means they outrange  on adverage and  jon means a specific type of longbow! Grmm contradiction sorted!!!

As for dothraki weapory we see the arkh can penetratw chainmail with jorah vs the bloodrider thus whatever the arkh is it has gotta be a much much  heavier than a sabre with a heavy head like a.machette or axe  but still able to be wielded at speed!  that said we see in the grmm.approved artwork in the wikis they also carry spears thus while known for arkhs and recurve bows they must also wielld spears too (it be damn strange if they had uniform weapons)

Now jorah tells dany they could win in westeros but hes of course talking about an absolute best case scenario ie wide open battlefield with a good commander. IF the  westerosi foot form up in an open field  and the dothraki can effectively high  arc fire while at full gallop and the arrows raining down are the heavier mongol type similar to an english longbow.

 

but overall im.assuming either  hes aware of the  plan (or has been told some variation) to suplement them with  the likes of the  golden company, dorne , the reach , whatever other loyalists there are such as large parts of the crownlands and of course whatever extra merc muscle ilyrio can buy (we can assume the 3 boatloads  of very rare goods he gave to dany was a considerable sum even for him but not all of his fortune!)

OR hes being kind...his running through best of the best case scenarios is  his way pf making dany wake up to the fact viserys cant lead anything and the common people dont care, hes trying to ease her into the fact the dothraki life is her life now..dreams of going home to reclaim the throne have to be stamped out and hes just being diplomatic about it.

Edited February 21 by astarkchoice

[Universal Sword Donor]

3 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

Yeah in defence of jorahs statements on the dothraki. I dont think he was in love with dany at that stage (itd be damned quick) .

I do think he was in love with her or in love with the idea of her because she reminded him of his first wife, Lynesse. 

3 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

He says the dothraki bows outrange westerosi ones but this is seemingly contradicted by jon connington. Now jorah has seen westerosi bows in action as  he grew up using  them, seen them in 2 wars and has probably seen them again in exile so whats the story.

Now jon does describe the big yew westerosi bows have better range BUT theres various types of longbow and jon is probably saying his westerosi archers  are all standard equipped   with  the very biggest and best type (as one would expect of the gold company) therefore jorah means they outrange  on adverage and  jon means a specific type of longbow! Grmm contradiction sorted!!!

As for dothraki weapory we see the arkh can penetratw chainmail with jorah vs the bloodrider thus whatever the arkh is it has gotta be a much much  heavier than a sabre with a heavy head like a.machette or axe  but still able to be wielded at speed!  that said we see in the grmm.approved artwork in the wikis they also carry spears thus while known for arkhs and recurve bows they must also wielld spears too (it be damn strange if they had uniform weapons)

We also see a Dothraki using a longsword in the FFG artwork. As we haven't seen either weapon wielded by a Dothraki across multiple Khalasars or multiple continents, it would be a stretch to consider them common weapons. We do see arakhs and recurve bows and whips through the series.

3 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

OR hes being kind...his running through best of the best case scenarios is  his way pf making dany wake up to the fact viserys cant lead anything and the common people dont care, hes trying to ease her into the fact the dothraki life is her life now..dreams of going home to reclaim the throne have to be stamped out and hes just being diplomatic about it.

This is the play for me. It could happen but have some patience.

[astarkchoice]

1 hour ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

I do think he was in love with her or in love with the idea of her because she reminded him of his first wife, Lynesse. 

-We also see a Dothraki using a longsword in the FFG artwork. As we haven't seen either weapon wielded by a Dothraki across multiple Khalasars or multiple continents, it would be a stretch to consider them common weapons. We do see arakhs and recurve bows and whips through the series.

-This is the play for me. It could happen but have some patience.

- hmm maybe over time as he grew closer , she seems to have been his daily companion innthe months travelling to that market id say he probably fell in that long period

-to be fair we hsve yet to see that many of the bar danys husband and her bloodriders and danys meagre entourage..we are told many  some dothraki dress up and mingle in free cities but have yet to see it outside 2 sellswords

 

-yeah i feel this was jorahs idea at the time, that he helping her  resign to never ever going home. Shed be a gift to give visterys an army .... probably not his own as the savages are afraid of the sea but drogo was like 2 battles from control of all the dothraki thus a major part of the slave trade! Everytime his vast khalassar passes anywhere hed pick up slaves by the thousand thus very quickly have enough booty to buy his annoying brother in law maybe a mix of  say 20-30k sellswords/slave troops/unsullied bodyguards and sellsails so he could get the silverhaired whinger out of his hair!!!

[Aldarion]

8 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

As for dothraki weapory we see the arkh can penetratw chainmail with jorah vs the bloodrider thus whatever the arkh is it has gotta be a much much  heavier than a sabre with a heavy head like a.machette or axe  but still able to be wielded at speed!  that said we see in the grmm.approved artwork in the wikis they also carry spears thus while known for arkhs and recurve bows they must also wielld spears too (it be damn strange if they had uniform weapons)

 

Unlikely. First, you cannot have such a heavy sword that can still be wielded at speed. Second, much more likely explanation is that Jorah's mail was defective... we in fact see mail defeat several arakh strikes before finally getting cut through.

8 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

Now jorah tells dany they could win in westeros but hes of course talking about an absolute best case scenario ie wide open battlefield with a good commander. IF the  westerosi foot form up in an open field  and the dothraki can effectively high  arc fire while at full gallop and the arrows raining down are the heavier mongol type similar to an english longbow.

 

Mongols got defeated by a combination of crossbowmen, spearmen and heavy cavalry. Also, heavy Mongol bows were used dismounted - they had one lighter type of bow for mounted use and second heavier type of bow which was specifically for dismounted use, because horseback bow simply didn't have the range to counter foot archers.

Dothraki never display anything approaching this type of flexibility.

8 hours ago, astarkchoice said:

OR hes being kind...his running through best of the best case scenarios is  his way pf making dany wake up to the fact viserys cant lead anything and the common people dont care, hes trying to ease her into the fact the dothraki life is her life now..dreams of going home to reclaim the throne have to be stamped out and hes just being diplomatic about it.

I think he just fell in "love" with Daenerys real quick and wasn't thinking straight.

[SeanF]

We should not over-analyse this.

Back in the day, there was a tendency to glamourise certain “martial races” like Sikhs, Māori, Gurkhas, Pashtuns, Spartans, some American Indian tribes,  as almost invincible warriors, because they grew up in very harsh conditions, unlike supposedly decadent, settled peoples.

Conan survives crucifixion, while telling the enemy he inflicts the same fate upon, that he’ll perish because he’s civilised and weak.

The Fremen and Sardaukar trounce everyone they’re fighting, because their living conditions are so harsh.

These are badass systems that produce badasses.  It’s an ancient trope that harsh conditions produce tough men.  Good conditions produce decadents.

In reality, logistics are not everything, but they are almost everything.  But, that’s not the tale that’s being told.

Now, I love logistics, but that’s a minority sport.

 

Edited February 21 by SeanF

[astarkchoice]

14 hours ago, Aldarion said:

-Unlikely. First, you cannot have such a heavy sword that can still be wielded at speed. Second, much more likely explanation is that Jorah's mail was defective... we in fact see mail defeat several arakh strikes before finally getting cut through.

-Mongols got defeated by a combination of crossbowmen, spearmen and heavy cavalry. Also, heavy Mongol bows were used dismounted - they had one lighter type of bow for mounted use and second heavier type of bow which was specifically for dismounted use, because horseback bow simply didn't have the range to counter foot archers.

Dothraki never display anything approaching this type of flexibility.

-I think he just fell in "love" with Daenerys real quick and wasn't thinking straight.

-its unlikely but possible it just means once again grmm is asking us to add amazingly skilled and physicaly strong swordsmen to amazing fearless horse riderss with legolas level archery to make his nomad horsemen 'work' 9.....quite the multitaskers apparently! 

Bur no vs jorah the bloodrider . Jorah tried to parry and hes outmatched, the guys arkh eventualy  slips past and hits him in the mail (1) then again in the gauntlet ( strike 2....could be aiming for joint above the gauntlet where flesh might show OR just hitting hand ard enough to try hurt/slap sword free) , jorah goes stumbling back and qotho leaps to attack and jorahs face is  sliced open(strike 3) then the mail again opening it (4) and finaly after slme stupid villian like mocking  his arkh slips past jorahs  sword again and hits the open mail(5)  from strike 4  and embeds luckily/unluckily depending on perspective in his hipbone!! So 5 strikes landing home in total and 3 to mail, so 2-3 shots needed to open it.

 

-  they had a huge variety of bows+ arrowtypes (and interestingly were  into experimenting wih different fletching) , recurve bows go  from light turkish ones  the crusaders met all the way up to  huge manchu ones with various dismounted and horseback variety. The mongol ones could actualy  match longbow for range on horseback and of course had heavier bows punching around as hard as the longbow  some for mounted + dismounted use ....theres wide variety .  I suppose skill and tactics factor in too though  theres an interesting part in the excellent  book' fall of rhe roman empire' by peter heather where he recounts historians where confused  why the huns subjugated tribes with heavy cavalry cataphtrct style.riders and other nearby  horse archer cultures had failed until they found the hun bows to be of heavier drawweight than rivals AND contempory sources hinted they  could sometimes  ride much much  closer than other dared before loosing arrows!

 

So asuming the dothraki have a decent heavy type of mounted bow jorah likely means a  charging cavalry massed arc/ballistic shot  (his rain of arrows) followed where possible by more  aimed shots as the cavalry mass charges full pelt at infantry and closes ......it is  possible the infantry break from fear (unlikely in westeros battle hardended men) or the dothraki cause enough gaps from the arrow hail  to surge into and break then drive them.off  BUT again if sucessfull that would still be costly as hell minus armour and with spears either rare or non existant with these daft savages

All that said we havent seen anything like either lf those cultures from the dothraki..yet 

 Overall  Technicaly for them to work  theyd need to ride like centaurs, shoot like legolas , be strong and skilled enough to wield heavy swords at speed and be as unafraid of death as modern jihadis! 

 

-im thinking he was softening the blow for what was seeming at the time  like the more likely path shed take ... ie you arent ever going home to westeros or even back pentos!

Edited February 22 by astarkchoice

[Aldarion]

1 hour ago, astarkchoice said:

-its unlikely but possible it just means once again grmm is asking us to add amazingly skilled and physicaly strong swordsmen to amazing fearless horse riderss with legolas level archery to make his nomad horsemen 'work' 9.....quite the multitaskers apparently! 

Bur no vs jorah the bloodrider . Jorah tried to parry and hes outmatched, the guys arkh eventualy  slips past and hits him in the mail (1) then again in the gauntlet ( strike 2....could be aiming for joint above the gauntlet where flesh might show OR just hitting hand ard enough to try hurt/slap sword free) , jorah goes stumbling back and qotho leaps to attack and jorahs face is  sliced open(strike 3) then the mail again opening it (4) and finaly after slme stupid villian like mocking  his arkh slips past jorahs  sword again and hits the open mail(5)  from strike 4  and embeds luckily/unluckily depending on perspective in his hipbone!! So 5 strikes landing home in total and 3 to mail, so 2-3 shots needed to open it.

No, you don't need 2-3 shots to "open mail". One strong blow may cut through low-quality mail... or you can have many blows at the same place that do nothing. In-universe, we see mail defeat arrows, which is not something mail is actually that good at.

And yes, Jorah was outmatched... but still won because he was in armor. Which just goes to show how mentally deficient Dothraki as a culture are.

1 hour ago, astarkchoice said:

-  they had a huge variety of bows+ arrowtypes (and interestingly were  into experimenting wih different fletching) , recurve bows go  from light turkish ones  the crusaders met all the way up to  huge manchu ones with various dismounted and horseback variety. The mongol ones could actualy  match longbow for range on horseback and of course had heavier bows punching around as hard as the longbow  some for mounted + dismounted use ....theres wide variety .  I suppose skill and tactics factor in too though  theres an interesting part in the excellent  book' fall of rhe roman empire' by peter heather where he recounts historians where confused  why the huns subjugated tribes with heavy cavalry cataphtrct style.riders and other nearby  horse archer cultures had failed until they found the hun bows to be of heavier drawweight than rivals AND contempory sources hinted they  could sometimes  ride much much  closer than other dared before loosing arrows!

 

So asuming the dothraki have a decent heavy type of mounted bow jorah likely means a  charging cavalry massed arc/ballistic shot  (his rain of arrows) followed where possible by more  aimed shots as the cavalry mass charges full pelt at infantry and closes ......it is  possible the infantry break from fear (unlikely in westeros battle hardended men) or the dothraki cause enough gaps from the arrow hail  to surge into and break then drive them.off  BUT again if sucessfull that would still be costly as hell minus armour and with spears either rare or non existant with these daft savages

All that said we havent seen anything like either lf those cultures from the dothraki..yet 

 Overall  Technicaly for them to work  theyd need to ride like centaurs, shoot like legolas , be strong and skilled enough to wield heavy swords at speed and be as unafraid of death as modern jihadis! 

Horse archer can never shoot as powerful a bow or as far as a foot archer can - even assuming the bows are equal. It is simple physics - foot archer stands on ground, which not only makes him more accurate but also means he can fully utilize his muscles in drawing the bow. Horse archer can only utilize his upper body, limiting how much power he can impart to bow.

Huns also had heavy cavalry... neither they nor Mongols were "unarmored steppe nomads". But yeah - Dothraki can win against infantry so long as said infantry is without armor, shields, and not very well trained. Which to be fair, last element seems to be typical of middle Essos - except for the Free Cities, only actually trained force we see there are the Unsullied.

[Universal Sword Donor]

1 hour ago, Aldarion said:

No, you don't need 2-3 shots to "open mail". One strong blow may cut through low-quality mail... or you can have many blows at the same place that do nothing. In-universe, we see mail defeat arrows, which is not something mail is actually that good at.

Medieval mail with a padded jack / aketon was great at stopping arrows. There are muslim and crusader accounts of men walking around with 20+ arrows in their armor fighting because they didn't know they'd been hit. Read more about the 3rd crusades march south to Jerusalem under Richard I -- battle of arsuf -- for more info. 

[astarkchoice]

2 hours ago, Aldarion said:

-No, you don't need 2-3 shots to "open mail". One strong blow may cut through low-quality mail... or you can have many blows at the same place that do nothing. In-universe, we see mail defeat arrows, which is not something mail is actually that good at.

And yes, Jorah was outmatched... but still won because he was in armor. Which just goes to show how mentally deficient Dothraki as a culture are.

-Horse archer can never shoot as powerful a bow or as far as a foot archer can - even assuming the bows are equal. It is simple physics - foot archer stands on ground, which not only makes him more accurate but also means he can fully utilize his muscles in drawing the bow. Horse archer can only utilize his upper body, limiting how much power he can impart to bow.

-Huns also had heavy cavalry... neither they nor Mongols were "unarmored steppe nomads". But yeah - Dothraki can win against infantry so long as said infantry is without armor, shields, and not very well trained. Which to be fair, last element seems to be typical of middle Essos - except for the Free Cities, only actually trained force we see there are the Unsullied.

-well it doesn say if the 1st shot on jorahs mail is the same place as the 2nd one. The face shot was an obvious target , the gauntlet could be aiming at exposed write or more likely an attemlt to slam into the hand hard enough to hurt or knock his sword free.  The fact dany says the  bloodrider leaps' to hit jorahs face then follows with a shot to the hip sounds like a lovely high low combo! 

Id say more jorahs armour didnt win it  his hipbone won a fight he was basicaly beaten in.

-assuming the bows are equal yes but remember the recurve is p4p more powerful due to how its made, the trade off  being that its wayy harder to make and is wayy wayy more high maintance (reacts poorly to moisture , can come apart easily with  hard whallop) ..the longbow by contrast is easy to make, maintain and you get reach and power ..its an ak47 vs m16 really.

Foot archers can be more accurate and more importanly can re-road faster but are very static vs horse archers...both have their advantages and weaknesses.

-they did force other tribes  known for heavy cavalyy into their army but essentialty they themselevs where initaly largely horse archers when they started expanding, what  the book covers is what set them apart from others we now know  was their heavier bows and risker tactics(shooting closer)  allowed them to penetrate peoples armed similar to  as  what wed call caphrachts whereas other  nearby tribes that  similarly focused on horse archers lost to these heavy cav  time and again!

 

Middle essos (ghiscari) seem.to have relapsed military wise (bar the new ghis legions and the small islands that produce niche merc slingers + crossbowmen)  like a creature minus any natural predators  really. That said we dont know what the dothraki of old were smarter at siegecraft etc too....or just kept at it, as they can be beat back 99 times it just takes one loss and a city is gone forever!

 

Overall talk of huns and mongols is off the mark anyway  the dothraki are much closer to these guys. 

 

 

Edited February 22 by astarkchoice

[astarkchoice]

18 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

Medieval mail with a padded jack / aketon was great at stopping arrows. There are muslim and crusader accounts of men walking around with 20+ arrows in their armor fighting because they didn't know they'd been hit. Read more about the 3rd crusades march south to Jerusalem under Richard I -- battle of arsuf -- for more info. 

Theres varying types of arrows though the crusaders faced a lot of arrows from turkish tribe style recurve bows, fast reload and grear range + accuracy  but limited power.

By contrast we know other horse bound recurve  bows punched through roman shield and pinned hands to them and punched through far enough to hit faces, hun bows as we covered had more punch so could bother the catphract style enemies and mail.of the romans and mongols had all kinds of bows  many on par or greater than longbows! 

 

Probably the best vid on armour vs arrows iv seen

 

[Aldarion]

1 hour ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

Medieval mail with a padded jack / aketon was great at stopping arrows. There are muslim and crusader accounts of men walking around with 20+ arrows in their armor fighting because they didn't know they'd been hit. Read more about the 3rd crusades march south to Jerusalem under Richard I -- battle of arsuf -- for more info. 

I am aware of that. What I am talking about here are the few scenes - most notably the Battle of the Green Fork - where arrows are described as rattling off the armor, armor in question being mail.

Crusaders in these accounts are described walking around with arrows in them, making it clear that arrows had penetrated mail and then gotten stuck in the padding underneath.

1 hour ago, astarkchoice said:

-well it doesn say if the 1st shot on jorahs mail is the same place as the 2nd one. The face shot was an obvious target , the gauntlet could be aiming at exposed write or more likely an attemlt to slam into the hand hard enough to hurt or knock his sword free.  The fact dany says the  bloodrider leaps' to hit jorahs face then follows with a shot to the hip sounds like a lovely high low combo! 

Id say more jorahs armour didnt win it  his hipbone won a fight he was basicaly beaten in.

This is the scene:

Quote

Qotho danced backward, arakh whirling around his head in a shining blur, flickering out like
lightning as the knight came on in a rush. Ser Jorah parried as best he could, but the slashes came
so fast that it seemed to Dany that Qotho had four arakhs and as many arms. She heard the
crunch of sword on mail, saw sparks fly as the long curved blade glanced off a gauntlet.
Suddenly it was Mormont stumbling backward, and Qotho leaping to the attack. The left side of
the knight’s face ran red with blood, and a cut to the hip opened a gash in his mail and left him
limping. Qotho screamed taunts at him, calling him a craven, a milk man, a eunuch in an iron
suit. “You die now!” he promised, arakh shivering through the red twilight. Inside Dany’s womb,
her son kicked wildly. The curved blade slipped past the straight one and bit deep into the
knight’s hip where the mail gaped open.

Consider the bolded part closely. It is rather strongly implied (though not stated outright) that Qotho had landed multiple strikes on mail before he finally got past Jorah's guard and cut him across the face - I very much doubt he was wildly slashing at the air. Why mail failed at hip is not clear, but it is clear that had Jorah not had mail, he will have died long before Qotho's arakh could have gotten stuck anywhere.

And Qotho is a bloodrider, Mormont is just an average knight - and probably not a very good one either. So the scene really shows the value of armor.

1 hour ago, astarkchoice said:

-assuming the bows are equal yes but remember the recurve is p4p more powerful due to how its made, the trade off  being that its wayy harder to make and is wayy wayy more high maintance (reacts poorly to moisture , can come apart easily with  hard whallop) ..the longbow by contrast is easy to make, maintain and you get reach and power ..its an ak47 vs m16 really.

Foot archers can be more accurate and more importanly can re-road faster but are very static vs horse archers...both have their advantages and weaknesses.

Composite recurve bow is more powerful for a given size and draw weight. But a cavalry bow will have to be less powerful than an infantry bow simply due to mechanics of shooting from the saddle. Greater efficiency of a recurve composite will go some way to solving that issue, but it is not a magic wand.

Horse archers' main strength is in mobility - scouting, raiding and such. But in open field battle, horse archers without support are basically useless.

1 hour ago, astarkchoice said:

-they did force other tribes  known for heavy cavalyy into their army but essentialty they themselevs where initaly largely horse archers when they started expanding, what  the book covers is what set them apart from others we now know  was their heavier bows and risker tactics(shooting closer)  allowed them to penetrate peoples armed similar to  as  what wed call caphrachts whereas other  nearby tribes that  similarly focused on horse archers lost to these heavy cav  time and again!

 

Middle essos (ghiscari) seem.to have relapsed military wise (bar the new ghis legions and the small islands that produce niche merc slingers + crossbowmen)  like a creature minus any natural predators  really. That said we dont know what the dothraki of old were smarter at siegecraft etc too....or just kept at it, as they can be beat back 99 times it just takes one loss and a city is gone forever!

I suspect it was rather the reverse... that they first introduced heavy cavalry, and then introduction of said heavy cavalry allowed them to conquer other horse archer tribes. But one way or another, when they were encountered by Europeans, both Huns and Mongols had heavy cavalry. With Huns, this heavy cavalry was not particularly numerous... basically only nobles fought as armored cavalry. But Mongols had 40% heavy cavalry by number, and it was key to their victories - particularly against peoples such as Cumans who relied heavily on lightly armored horse archer cavalry.

We cannot say what old Dothraki were like, but either they will have been far more competent than the current-day Dothraki, or else their enemies basically destroyed themselves.

1 hour ago, astarkchoice said:

Overall talk of huns and mongols is off the mark anyway  the dothraki are much closer to these guys. 

 

Oh, I am aware. Thing is, people who push for Dothraki being highly effective against Westerosi armies always base their arguments on Mongols... and George Martin did mention Comanche, Huns and Mongols as an inspiration.

But Dothraki are 99% Comanche with nearly no Hun or Mongol to be seen. And even the Comanche ought to feel insulted by being compared to the Dothraki, considering they did use armor when possible. In fact, Comanche even had horse armor, though it was used only briefly as period of time between introduction of horses and introduction of guns was not very long:

https://www.colorado.edu/today/2004/03/29/rock-art-depicting-comanches-horses-clad-leather-armor-discovered-colorado-cu-researcher

[Universal Sword Donor]

43 minutes ago, Aldarion said:

I am aware of that. What I am talking about here are the few scenes - most notably the Battle of the Green Fork - where arrows are described as rattling off the armor, armor in question being mail.

Crusaders in these accounts are described walking around with arrows in them, making it clear that arrows had penetrated mail and then gotten stuck in the padding underneath.

 

It says rattling off the armor in the middle of a schilltrom, men on horse, and men in plate, and men in chainmail. Nothing to be taken from that when the opening volley a page before shows men in chainmail charging and going down under the Lannister arrow volleys.

[astarkchoice]

44 minutes ago, Aldarion said:

 

This is the scene:

1 Consider the bolded part closely. It is rather strongly implied (though not stated outright) that Qotho had landed multiple strikes on mail before he finally got past Jorah's guard and cut him across the face - I very much doubt he was wildly slashing at the air. Why mail failed at hip is not clear, but it is clear that had Jorah not had mail, he will have died long before Qotho's arakh could have gotten stuck anywhere.

2 And Qotho is a bloodrider, Mormont is just an average knight - and probably not a very good one either. So the scene really shows the value of armor.

3 Composite recurve bow is more powerful for a given size and draw weight. But a cavalry bow will have to be less powerful than an infantry bow simply due to mechanics of shooting from the saddle. Greater efficiency of a recurve composite will go some way to solving that issue, but it is not a magic wand.

Horse archers' main strength is in mobility - scouting, raiding and such. But in open field battle, horse archers without support are basically useless.

4I suspect it was rather the reverse... that they first introduced heavy cavalry, and then introduction of said heavy cavalry allowed them to conquer other horse archer tribes. But one way or another, when they were encountered by Europeans, both Huns and Mongols had heavy cavalry. With Huns, this heavy cavalry was not particularly numerous... basically only nobles fought as armored cavalry. But Mongols had 40% heavy cavalry by number, and it was key to their victories - particularly against peoples such as Cumans who relied heavily on lightly armored horse archer cavalry.

5 We cannot say what old Dothraki were like, but either they will have been far more competent than the current-day Dothraki, or else their enemies basically destroyed themselves.

6 Oh, I am aware. Thing is, people who push for Dothraki being highly effective against Westerosi armies always base their arguments on Mongols... and George Martin did mention Comanche, Huns and Mongols as an inspiration.

 But Dothraki are 99% Comanche with nearly no Hun or Mongol to be seen. And even the Comanche ought to feel insulted by being compared to the Dothraki, considering they did use armor when possible. In fact, Comanche even had horse armor, though it was used only briefly as period of time between introduction of horses and introduction of guns was not very long:

https://www.colorado.edu/today/2004/03/29/rock-art-depicting-comanches-horses-clad-leather-armor-discovered-colorado-cu-researcher

1 id disgaree there it strikes me more dany is specificaly describing the 1st time he connects in graphic detail, the noise and sparks image as the bloodrider begins  hits home as jorahs defence is passed.

Like any real fight or sparring  itl begin with some feints and movement to disguise the 1st real blow when it comes, life and death on the line so  thats expected. qotho spins the blade above his head and it describes jorah goes in on the offensive..for what it was worth.

2 come on now jorah is a pretty good knight..just not elite as his early showings at pkye and the tourney he won hinted he  could be but hes from a tougher than normal great  house and has spent  part of his life chasing any little border clash that could help him keep his golddigging harpy 1st wife!

3 theres plenty of variation of the draw weights bur recurve>>standard  ..and of course the advantage of being a horse archer is unlike regualr archers you can ride very close  to infantry (or a knight if you avoid their lance ) and loose. When you see grown  men who took it up in their 30s onwards bullseyeing tennisballs or loosing 3- 4 shots in a single gallop pass it boggles the mind the mind what cordinated  1000s of  them practiced from birth could do!

 

4 the book is a must read for that period and meticulously researched, they started as just anther largely horse archer tribe who co-opted heavy cavalry centric tribes into their ranks by victory and diplomacy where others had failed.... extra draw weight bows and loosing a few dozen  metres or so closer than their similar rivals gave them wins that others   couldnt achieve with weaker bows and more nervous (longer range)  shooting.

5 part of it is georges handwaving of siege warfare..which is a facinating subject.

 

 

6 well as iv said they COULD be its just it requires all the right conditions (open non muckyfield)  AND them to be super skillful   as individuals  AND have teamwork wayyyy  beyond the vastly superior nomads we discussed  AND be willing to eat heavy casulties to win!!! 

OR for  battle hardened westerosi infantry to suddenly become cowards and flee, men who have eaten  volleys of longbow arc/ballistic shots and stood!