Stannis' Skill as a commander of men.

[Fearsedge]

it was never a suicide attack. maybe overconfident, but maybe not. still sounds a lot like what Stannis ended up doing to Mance, and Stannis with much larger numbers.

“Mance Rayder knows he must battle the Watch,”Thoren had declared,

“but he will never look for us so far north. If we ride up the Milkwater, we can take him unawares and cut his host to ribbons before he knows we are on him.”

“The numbers would be greatly against us,”

Ser Ottyn had objected.

“Craster said he was gathering a great host. Many thousands. Without Qhorin, we are only two hundred.”

“Send two hundred wolves against ten thousand sheep, ser, and see what happens,”saidSmallwood confidently.

“There are goats among these sheep, Thoren,”warned Jarman Buckwell.

“Aye, and maybe afew lions. Rattleshirt, Harma the Dogshead, Alfyn Crowkiller”

“Iknow them as well as you do, Buckwell,” Thoren Smallwood snapped back.

“And I mean to have their heads, every one. These are wildlings. No soldiers. A few hundred heroes, drunk most like, amidst a great horde of women, children, and thralls. We will sweep over them and send them howling back to their hovels.”

They had argued for many hours, and reached no agreement.

So we should not be impressed by this, because Thoren Smallwood thought it would be easy? Boasting that something can easily be done is not the same as achieving it. In this case, Smallwood is boasting before it is known how vast this host is, and the fact that they have mammoths and giants. He also speaks of taking them unaware. I just don't think the hypothetical situation he was thinking of is comparable to the real situation Stannis dealt with. Smallwood is saying that a couple hundred Brothers of the Night's Watch could kill "a few hundred heroes, drunk most like" amongst a bunch of women and children. The host was something like 20,000 fighting men among a horde of 100,000. That's really quite different.

[Nyrhex]

Had stannis not split his force into three separate columns, he would have lost. One big column would have been overwhelmed, and then once the mammoths arrived broken. How many commanders in westeros would split their forces like this, and how many would have just charged in, confident in smashing the wildling savages with one hammer blow?

Stannis did a fair bit more then just splitting his forces in three columns.

1. Horns - The Wildling formation is facing the Wall. An attack from the rear will mean the Wildlings can simply turn around and his rear attack is facing a full battle formation. The horns from the east give the Wildlings a heads-up, but they also force the Wildlings to break ranks, and turn their entire battle formation 90 degrees, exposing thier flank to Stannis's three columns of horse from the north, thier front will be engaged, and thier right flank will be away from action, and in range of archers from the Wall, all the while they are in disarray .

2. Eastwatch Men - The Eastwatch men attack on the edge of the Wildling camp, sending wildlings to flight, starting to get the wildling people to fleeing. Now it's only from this side of the battle, but soon it will turn into a rout. The Watchmen fien a retreat, incouraging the wildlings who flew to meet them to break ranks and scatter as they persue thier old foes.

3. Trumpets - Psychological effect. The Wildlings are not used to trumpets, and do not know what to expect. This is both a sign for the horsemen (around 800, as Massey tells us), and incourages the building of fear and sends people to rout.

4. Fire Arrows - While the three columns of horsemen attack the elephants, Mance's best weapons (no one has experiance with fighting them, great strength, "mini forts" on the battlefied), archers from the treeline start shooting fire arrows at the camp. The trumpets, heavy horse, and now fire arrows, send the free folk to rout, and it also has an effect during the battle - Three chariots (part of Harma's group IIRC) crash after a dog cart gets in the way while fleeing.

5. Reserves - Unlike what was suggested at the FotFM, Stannis did not gamble all on a single cavalry shock atttack. He sent three columns, then used the archers that were shooting fire arrows and all who still had a mount and sent everything and charged himself to create a continues wave of steel coming. Both to creat the apearance of a never-ending wave of cavalry coming, and to keep the pressure on the wildling's army, so not to give them a second to breath and reorgenise.

The Mammoths are encircled and taken down with the giants, Mance gets crushed under the steel sea that is washing him and his men, Harma's chariot attack is destroyed with Harma's head already on a pike, and the battle formation that is still left is faced with Stannis' entire force, which is advancing from one group to another, south towards the Wall. Stannis is using 100% of his numbers, while only facing and taking out one part of the enemy at a time, thus creats a domino effect on the remaining wildling fighters, who keep seeing the men before them crushed and fleeing, and behind them a never-ending steel sea.

anyway,I'd just like to add that i was always intrigued by stands' victory at fair isle's shore (i think he trapped them against the shore since their ships were faster longships and his were mostly drummonds .as in he cut off their wind rout and smashed them against the rocks when he had the wind) just some speculation i have nothing but a strategic mind to back this

It's likely he used the narrow pass to lure them after a small part of the navy, then used it to block one end, while bringing the rest of his force from the other. Once the Ironborn took the bait, they were in a narrow pass with war galleys on both routes of escape ramming them, and with no room to manuever and exercise thier superior numbers (all hands can fight once they board, instead of the galley's few marines), it was as good as done. Stannis most likely prevented them the use of thier superior numbers of fighting men, and used his war galleys' main weapons - the ram - to effect.

Had the Ironborn not been stuck with no room to manuever, it would probably play like this:

Thier ships are as fast as the war galleys, so they have good chances of outmanuvering the freshly built Royal Navy filled with green boys, raked thier oars, then boarded them and turned it into a "land battle at sea".

it was never a suicide attack. maybe overconfident, but maybe not. still sounds a lot like what Stannis ended up doing to Mance, and Stannis with much larger numbers.

Smallwood is underestimating the opposition. He thinks that it's only a few hundred fighters, and the rest women and children (and that they are 200 aganist 10,000, not against 100,000). It's ~20,000 fighting men. They would have all died there if they went with a surprise attack when they don't even know the size and composition of the enemy. Stannis' plan above is a tad different then 200 rangers attacking wildlings, when all they can hope for is that enough of them live long enough to find Mance and kill him. The fact that only Smallwood suggest, while they can't agree on a course of action in the end tells us that he is the only one who thinks it's possible. He is wrong, and the next time he thinks he can take out something that is over his legue, it's going to be a wight bear. It does'nt end well for Smallwood. He was brave, but over-estimated himself.

[newwb]

great post. stannis is indeed a top rate commander.

in regards to stannis vs tywin, they seem like mirror images of each other in a way. tywin is a brilliant strategist but theres no evidence to suggest hes a very good tactician. in fact tywin's mo seems to be to avoid decisive confrontation unless he is assured of victory. on the other hand strategy seems to be stannis' weakness. you pointed out his blunder leading into blackwater, but also remember that his strategy for winning the loyalty of the northern lords was shaped by jon.

[chris999]

Stannis is the man, and my favorite character the last few books.

Good thread. I am going to be pissed if GRRM gives him a dishonorable death.

[Thelastactionhero]

Oh lol yeah, Cant believe I forgot about that, whoops. :D

And speaking of battles in the north, I didn't want to include this in the op(as it hasn't happened yet), but I think its likely and is worth a mention. I think Stannis is going to pull something very similar to a historic battle at winterfell in the next book.

Ever heard of alexander nevsky and the battle of ice?

"Bolton has blundered," the king declared. "All he had to do was sit inside his castle whilst we starved. Instead he has sent some portion of his strength forth to give us battle. His knights will be horsed, ours must fight afoot. His men will be well nourished, ours go into battle with empty bellies. It makes no matter. Ser Stupid, Lord Too-Fat, the Bastard, let them come. We hold the ground, and that I mean to turn to our advantage."

Yes, well this is pretty obvious, but allow me to spell it out. In dance there is alot of foreshadowing for this.

1.Stannis and his men are on a lake, the lake is being drilled with numerous holes to fish from, one of the northmen comments on how the lake is fished out and full of holes.

2.Stannis comments on how his men will be fighting on foot.

3.He remarks on how he holds the ground.

4.The man in charge of the freys is an idiot, made even more stupid by his anger and frustration.

5. The actual battle in real life is even called the battle of ice!

ETA: so yeah, not included because we shouldn't count our count our chicks before they hatch, but yeah, im confident that's how it will play out.

This was an excellent read man. I actually didn't realize that there were a lot of people talking shit on his capabilities as a commander, especially when you consider this history, and the fact that nearly everyone who despises him, including Varys, concedes that his is an incredible general. Keeping my fingers crossed that the Battle of the Ice plays out like we hope it will, echoing what happened with Nevsky. It makes sense, especially when you consider the fact that George has echoed historical battles and events in other plot points. The Red Wedding pays homage to the Black Dinner, for instance.

[Pod The Impaler]

Stannis doesn't strike me as a brilliant commander in battle, but a very determined and capable one, not likely to make big mistakes. Robb Stark won his battles with bold moves, feints, great marches and lightning raids, etc. and was personally very close with his men; he had a heroic personality.

Stannis is more aloof from his men but just as willing to take on hardship, and is absolutely relentless; his common men respect him for this at least. His personality is determined and principled (taken to an extreme of course) and he's not the sort to win friends easily; but he also does not play head-games with people, or behave falsely. Overall, I'd say you're not going to see Stannis make too many boldly unconventional moves (his journey to the wall was as much of a dice-roll as he'd ever make), but if you get into a war with him, his iron discipline and overall grasp of warfare mean his opponents cannot be slack about anything.

If Stannis has a weakness it is this - "human resources" his subordinate commanders are often useless. Braggarts, yes-men, fanatics, etc. - these are the Lords who support him, and many are the sort to switch sides and fail to match his tough standards.

Oddly enough, the best subordinates he has are the ones he seems to disregard the value of at first - Davos would not have led him so easily to disaster at King's Landing. Mance Rayder - his foe - would be his best asset against the Others. Jon Snow seems to be a natural leader with principles (so of course they clash). Crude and common, the Northmen he picks up are far better allies than all his King's and Queen's men. (Even Asha Greyjoy seems to be worth 10 of his knights and knights, if he could get past her being a Greyjoy and a woman and see that.)

[Ramsay Gimp]

Stannis is one of the most formidable battle commanders in ASOIAF, no question. Especially In the current landscape, with his brother Robert, Lord Tywin, and Robb Stark dead

[Pod The Impaler]

Smallwood is underestimating the opposition. He thinks that it's only a few hundred fighters, and the rest women and children (and that they are 200 aganist 10,000, not against 100,000). It's ~20,000 fighting men. They would have all died there if they went with a surprise attack when they don't even know the size and composition of the enemy. Stannis' plan above is a tad different then 200 rangers attacking wildlings, when all they can hope for is that enough of them live long enough to find Mance and kill him. The fact that only Smallwood suggest, while they can't agree on a course of action in the end tells us that he is the only one who thinks it's possible. He is wrong, and the next time he thinks he can take out something that is over his legue, it's going to be a wight bear. It does'nt end well for Smallwood. He was brave, but over-estimated himself.

It's not about Smallwood - it's about the Old bear, and he was right on the core principle here. The true Wildling "army" was much smaller - its solid core was Mance Rayder and his best chieftains, plus their personal retinues. The Watch's force was a light force - its advantage was speed and discipline, but it could not mount any combined-arms type of attack against Mance. What the Watch was talking about executing was a decapitating attack, right at Mance himself. All the men of the Watch would likely die, but if they killed Mance a few key chieftains, and some of their better warriors, then what was left of the 20000 would not be able to storm the wall. Losing Mance they would lose not just the commander who knew the wall best, but also the man who united the wildling tribes and gave them a single purpose. Without him they would lose cohesion, purpose, and discipline - they would still be a huge host, but not one which could breach the wall and invade the realm.

So really the observation the Old Bear and Stannis made about Stannis' force was the same. The Old Bear could not hope to defeat that army, only fatally sabotage it. Stannis' force was very different, and much more capable of waging a true battle.

[Four-Eyed Crow]

Meh. For all that, he's still just the kinslaying little brother of the Usurper. After his usefulness is exhausted, he will bend the knee or die at the feet of King Jon Targaryen, the first of his name etc. He'll wish he'd been nicer to him when he was just LC of the NW at that point. Tactical effectiveness and a knack for good timing are nothing in the face of the walking people skill disaster hurricane that is Stannis Baratheon.

[E-Ro]

Meh. For all that, he's still just the kinslaying little brother of the Usurper. After his usefulness is exhausted, he will bend the knee or die at the feet of King Jon Targaryen, the first of his name etc. He'll wish he'd been nicer to him when he was just LC of the NW at that point. Tactical effectiveness and a knack for good timing are nothing in the face of the walking people skill disaster hurricane that is Stannis Baratheon.

LMFAO! Yeah, whatever helps you sleep at night brah brah. seriously so much is wrong with this post I don't even know where to start, you do realize there is more to this story then just jon right? Also, remember what happened to jon at the end of book 5? Yeah, my hopes aren't up for him sitting any throne, much less even going south of the neck.

Stannis doesn't strike me as a brilliant commander in battle, but a very determined and capable one, not likely to make big mistakes. Robb Stark won his battles with bold moves, feints, great marches and lightning raids, etc. and was personally very close with his men; he had a heroic personality.

Stannis is more aloof from his men but just as willing to take on hardship, and is absolutely relentless; his common men respect him for this at least. His personality is determined and principled (taken to an extreme of course) and he's not the sort to win friends easily; but he also does not play head-games with people, or behave falsely. Overall, I'd say you're not going to see Stannis make too many boldly unconventional moves (his journey to the wall was as much of a dice-roll as he'd ever make), but if you get into a war with him, his iron discipline and overall grasp of warfare mean his opponents cannot be slack about anything.

The bolded is what makes him brilliant.

Robb was great at surprise attacks with a cavalry only force, but he seems to just forget about his infantry after he gives it to roose, and never attempts to make any use of them.

[E-Ro]

It's not about Smallwood - it's about the Old bear, and he was right on the core principle here. The true Wildling "army" was much smaller - its solid core was Mance Rayder and his best chieftains, plus their personal retinues. The Watch's force was a light force - its advantage was speed and discipline, but it could not mount any combined-arms type of attack against Mance. What the Watch was talking about executing was a decapitating attack, right at Mance himself. All the men of the Watch would likely die, but if they killed Mance a few key chieftains, and some of their better warriors, then what was left of the 20000 would not be able to storm the wall. Losing Mance they would lose not just the commander who knew the wall best, but also the man who united the wildling tribes and gave them a single purpose. Without him they would lose cohesion, purpose, and discipline - they would still be a huge host, but not one which could breach the wall and invade the realm.

I doubt anything like this, grand as it sounds, would have worked. Mance has orel, who has eyes in the sky and can see the watches moves. Even if we ignore that for a second, the watch has to cut paste mance and all his BEST men, and try to kill him? that is one hell of a gamble, the chances of success with that are far to slim to even bother trying it, especially when even if you win, your entire force is dead. If you fail, and don't kill mance(likely, his best men are around him, and you would have to kill him fast before even more wildlings show up) then you lost the war, and he is going to breach the wall.

[zaphodbrx]

Good OP. I enjoyed it.

The only black mark is the battle of blackwater, which, imo, is mostly for plot reasons. The handling of that battle was disastrously bad to say the least. I think I posted in another thread.

- He could have loaded his troops into ships and landed north of KL. Thus 1) avoiding the chain and wildfire trap and 2) putting a river between himself and the Tyrell army ( he'd still have to fight Tywin and the city garrison )

- Not had a retard in charge of the navy. Or actually scouting the chain and wildfire trap, or keeping tabs on the Tyrell army. Y u no spy?

- Made a better effort at getting ex-Renly infantry. Somehow all the commanders in westeros clearly care diddle about infantry ( eg. Robb/Roose ). I think that is because infantry men are basically peasants with pikes "red shirts" basically ( meribald type ) and nobles look down on them.

[The Drunkard]

Great thread. I think the trust Robert had in Stannis is quite interesting, because really, why would Robert entrust what is likely the most important part of the war to a guy that didn't have major naval experience? Turned out to be a good choice, but still.

When Winds comes out it will be interesting to see how the Winterfell battle and/or the battle of the ice stack up against his prior achievements. I expect to see something awesome.

[Jon Wolfwalker]

Stannis's biggest claim to fame as a commander is holding Storm's End which any child with a stubborn streak could do. Lord Robert Arryn could have done as much with his stubbornness.

His attack on the wildlings is almost the same. Almost anyone with a thousand mounted men could decimate an unaware foe who is focused on a single field of battle.

Stannis may be an able sea commander but his land skills are still in question. His test will be where he is now. He will most likely crack or break the ice of the lakes and when they try to flank him they will drown.

[Pod The Impaler]

Good OP. I enjoyed it.

The only black mark is the battle of blackwater, which, imo, is mostly for plot reasons. The handling of that battle was disastrously bad to say the least. I think I posted in another thread.

- He could have loaded his troops into ships and landed north of KL. Thus 1) avoiding the chain and wildfire trap and 2) putting a river between himself and the Tyrell army ( he'd still have to fight Tywin and the city garrison )

- Not had a retard in charge of the navy. Or actually scouting the chain and wildfire trap, or keeping tabs on the Tyrell army. Y u no spy?

- Made a better effort at getting ex-Renly infantry. Somehow all the commanders in westeros clearly care diddle about infantry ( eg. Robb/Roose ). I think that is because infantry men are basically peasants with pikes "red shirts" basically ( meribald type ) and nobles look down on them.

Lets not forget though that Tyrion was also a very skilled opponent. Send his Vale wildlings to blind Stannis by taking out his scouts. Sets up a wildfire bomb on the river and a chain to trap them in it. And so on.

Stannis' mistakes were indeed having no spies inside KL (unless the Antler Men were the spies), appointing Imre Florent as his fleet commander instead of Davos, and let's not forget wasting too much time / effort on Cortnay Penrose.

[E-Ro]

Stannis's biggest claim to fame as a commander is holding Storm's End which any child with a stubborn streak could do. Lord Robert Arryn could have done as much with his stubbornness.

Yeah, anyone with a "stubborn streak" could hold a castle to the point of starvation and keep discipline in starving men. totally, this comment isn't coming from an ignorance on sieges or anything, its grounded in reality.

His attack on the wildlings is almost the same. Almost anyone with a thousand mounted men could decimate an unaware foe who is focused on a single field of battle.

I cant even sarcasm this part of the post, because wow. All I can say is, re read the posts in this thread. your claim that almost anyone could do this, is patently wrong. Had he not of taken the precautions he did,(listed in nyrexs posts) the battle would have been lost. The wildlings have a force of about 20k battle hardened warriors, giants, and mammoths. this victory is an accomplishment. I have seen people argue that its not a huge achievement(i disagree), but never have I ever seen anyone claim that almost anyone could do this. Congratulations broseph.

ETA:Looking back at this post, I cant even take it seriously, this has to be a joke. A very bad joke that isn't funny, but a joke nonetheless.

[Siddard Stark]

I'm not a Stannis hater but I would like to point out a few corrections in this post, I agree Stannis Is a brilliant battle commander but I would disagree tht he was the best. At kings landing he attacked the city with 20,000 plus swords tht mostly included armored knights and light cavalry. The city was only defended by 6800 gold cloaks and sell swords. When the lannister-tyrell army joined the strength of tyrells was 50,000 not 60,000 as Randall Tarly killed everyone who wanted to switch sides to Staniss, and strength of lannister army was less than 20,000-------------guys remember in a battle casualties are taken on both sides as tywin fought against Roose Bolton at the green fork and Ser Edmure Tully at the fords and he would have taken loses in both encounters. So if you round things up the strength of lannister Tyrell force was 70,000 not 100,000. The loss of Stannis was not due to him not knowing about the Tyrell-lannister force but brilliance of tyrion he had his mountain clansmen hunt Stannis's scouts and outriders in the Kingswood and thus creating a blind spot for Stannis which Tywin Lannister took full advantage of and then the thing with Renly's ghost played its part on Stannis's soldiers. Secondly we talk about the battle at the Wall again you are using wrong figures to exaggerate Stannis's brilliance. The Wildlings were 40,000 in number not 100,000 and amongst tht 40,000 most were women and children. Now talking about the battle at the wall, the wildling army was besieging castle black, when stannis sent scouts to draw out Mance's cavalry which worked effectively (Stannis had 1000 mounted Knights and 500 light cavalry and archers in reserve). Stannis launched 3 waves one against Darma's Cavalry which were perusing the scouts, second wave was against Tormund's spearmen and third was against the Giants mounted on Mammonths. While the reserves sent volleys of fire arrows at the wildling camps. The attacks against Darma and tormund were successful but the wave against the giants was defeated. Remember wildings cannot fight against armored knights, wildlings have little or no armour. Aftermath of battle was 1000 wildlings dead, with most of their leaders captured or killed and the host retreated in dis-array. Again i'm not a hater jst pointing out the facts. Plus I believe Robb Stark is more brilliant battle commander he didn't loose a battle and the force he commanded himself took minimum casualties. He was betrayed and died otherwise we would have seen more brilliance from him :)

[2fingers]

I honestly can't see how this can be disputed. Great job.

[Victor227]

Stannis doesn't strike me as a brilliant commander in battle, but a very determined and capable one, not likely to make big mistakes. Robb Stark won his battles with bold moves, feints, great marches and lightning raids, etc. and was personally very close with his men; he had a heroic personality.

Stannis is more aloof from his men but just as willing to take on hardship, and is absolutely relentless; his common men respect him for this at least. His personality is determined and principled (taken to an extreme of course) and he's not the sort to win friends easily; but he also does not play head-games with people, or behave falsely. Overall, I'd say you're not going to see Stannis make too many boldly unconventional moves (his journey to the wall was as much of a dice-roll as he'd ever make), but if you get into a war with him, his iron discipline and overall grasp of warfare mean his opponents cannot be slack about anything.

If Stannis has a weakness it is this - "human resources" his subordinate commanders are often useless. Braggarts, yes-men, fanatics, etc. - these are the Lords who support him, and many are the sort to switch sides and fail to match his tough standards.

Oddly enough, the best subordinates he has are the ones he seems to disregard the value of at first - Davos would not have led him so easily to disaster at King's Landing. Mance Rayder - his foe - would be his best asset against the Others. Jon Snow seems to be a natural leader with principles (so of course they clash). Crude and common, the Northmen he picks up are far better allies than all his King's and Queen's men. (Even Asha Greyjoy seems to be worth 10 of his knights and knights, if he could get past her being a Greyjoy and a woman and see that.)

I agree on this one. Stannis doesn't wage the sort war that leaders like Robb Stark and Robert Baratheon were known for, daring raids, midnight marches, bold feints. Everything about his approach both at King's Landing and in the North suggests that he's very methodical in his actions. That served him brilliantly against the Wildlings, but at the same time, the only reason he has a shot at Winterfell is because of internal dissent, and he had -no- way to predict that. He says himself that their entire march would have been for nothing, and they'd have starved and froze and broken if Roose's forces didn't take the field. Relying on mistakes you can't predict isn't the best for planning. Though it was a sort of bold move to begin with, marching in and praying for such.

When he's in the field with a plan, he has an excellent chance of carrying it out with that stiff, iron discipline of his. Likewise, he's a good leader to get men to grit their teeth. But at the same time? He's rightly critiqued in the books for not being so bold as his brother. I wouldn't argue it's a weakness. Honestly, if their 'bold strokes' failed, Robb Stark and Robert Baratheon would have been remembered as idiot commanders. Stannis is a more careful sort. Likewise, his personality sadly doesn't attract the same bold men that Robert and Robb drew, but at the same time, those he wins are forever assured of whom they're dealing with.

[E-Ro]

I'm not a Stannis hater but I would like to point out a few corrections in this post, I agree Stannis Is a brilliant battle commander but I would disagree tht he was the best. At kings landing he attacked the city with 20,000 plus swords tht mostly included armored knights and light cavalry. The city was only defended by 6800 gold cloaks and sell swords. When the lannister-tyrell army joined the strength of tyrells was 50,000 not 60,000 as Randall Tarly killed everyone who wanted to switch sides to Staniss, and strength of lannister army was less than 20,000-------------guys remember in a battle casualties are taken on both sides as tywin fought against Roose Bolton at the green fork and Ser Edmure Tully at the fords and he would have taken loses in both encounters. So if you round things up the strength of lannister Tyrell force was 70,000 not 100,000. The loss of Stannis was not due to him not knowing about the Tyrell-lannister force but brilliance of tyrion he had his mountain clansmen hunt Stannis's scouts and outriders in the Kingswood and thus creating a blind spot for Stannis which Tywin Lannister took full advantage of and then the thing with Renly's ghost played its part on Stannis's soldiers. Secondly we talk about the battle at the Wall again you are using wrong figures to exaggerate Stannis's brilliance. The Wildlings were 40,000 in number not 100,000 and amongst tht 40,000 most were women and children. Now talking about the battle at the wall, the wildling army was besieging castle black, when stannis sent scouts to draw out Mance's cavalry which worked effectively (Stannis had 1000 mounted Knights and 500 light cavalry and archers in reserve). Stannis launched 3 waves one against Darma's Cavalry which were perusing the scouts, second wave was against Tormund's spearmen and third was against the Giants mounted on Mammonths. While the reserves sent volleys of fire arrows at the wildling camps. The attacks against Darma and tormund were successful but the wave against the giants was defeated. Remember wildings cannot fight against armored knights, wildlings have little or no armour. Aftermath of battle was 1000 wildlings dead, with most of their leaders captured or killed and the host retreated in dis-array. Again i'm not a hater jst pointing out the facts. Plus I believe Robb Stark is more brilliant battle commander he didn't loose a battle and the force he commanded himself took minimum casualties. He was betrayed and died otherwise we would have seen more brilliance from him :)

Where are you getting that randyle killed 10 thousand men that wanted to join stannis? I don't remember anything like that, as I recall, he killed the florents that were sent by stannis.

I would also like to know where the 40k figure for the wildling host comes from, I could be wrong, but I remember mance having 100k wildlings in his horde. This is the whole population of beyond the wall.

As for robb, he won a few surprise attacks that accomplished nothing in the grand scheme of things. I wouldn't really call him brilliant, good sure, but brilliant? nah. Stannis has experience in all theaters of war. Naval, siege, and pitched.