Jump to content

Balon Greyjoy, the worst strategist ever?


LordOldNick

Recommended Posts

Asha and Balon were not after short term profit but long term gains. The West Coast of the North was their aim and they got it. Robb and his military is locked out of the North while declaring independence rules out help from the Iron Throne.

To say it was not sustainable ignores that House Hoare once ruled the Northern East coast or that the area of White Harbor was once conquered by pirates from the Stepstones.

But for how long, a few years, not generations, at least that's how the Wiki seems to describe it. so no long term sustainable plan. And the pirates of the Stepstones did not fair too well in the winter, then Brandon 'Ice Eyes' Stark delt with them. The North annexing the Neck was a long term sustainable plan since they are still apart of the North, and haven't tried to revolt. Holding a sliver of an area only to lose it a few years later isn't a long term solution. The Ironborn had long term sucess in the Riverlands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strategically it was much better to attack the North rather than the Westerlands my friend

The Westerlands are smallenr but more dense in population. The Ironborn are not huge in number themselves. The Westerlads would be able to mobilise much quicker to repel the invasion.

Why would Balon attack a nation with a fleet? That just makes his job harder.

They were able to take Moat Caitlyn which allowed them to hold the North from the Northern forces in the south

It was a war of conquest not of gold. The wanted the coastal provinces which is where they are their strongest. The North has quite a coast. Eventually Balom would have lost the North due to the RR. However hr had no chance of attacking the Westerlands.

Balon's plans may have worked if he struck a deal with the Lannisters allowing him to keep the lands he conquered.

The Westerlands already mobilised, twice. They're stretched thin enough that Robb is able to inflict serious damage on them in ACoK, Tywin's army is stuck in the Riverlands and Stafford's is routed, the Westerlands are a sitting duck if Balon wanted to plunder, and a much better target at that due to their wealth.

However, you're right, what he wanted was to conquer, and the North is technically a better target for that but only in that it'll take longer for him to lose it. That's the point; conquest isn't a viable strategy for Balon anywhere in Westeros because he can't ever hope to hang on to his gains. Yes, the larger Northern army is trapped South of the Neck, but that merely postpones the inevitable, they're not the only fighting men in the North, as we've already seen.

Look at the North, Last Hearth, Widow's Watch, the Dreadfort and White Harbour are all on the East coast and thus not easy targets for the Iron Fleet and all home to some of the more powerful Northern lords. And none of them is going to want to collude with the Ironborn. Without some kind of ace up his sleeve (dragons, for instance) then the only way that Balon could have kept control of the North with his limited manpower would be if he had a few such lords on side, and he has neither any reason to suspect that they'll side with him, nor does he make any effort to get them to join him (as Tywin did). Now, add to this the fact that whoever ends up on the IT will inevitably attack Balon where he lives when they reannexe the Iron Islands and he won't be able to defend himself because he's squandered all of his manpower trying to subjugate half a continent rather than building up his defenses.

Because he chose to try and conquer he's doomed himself to fight a land war against land powers with his limited troops who are best at sea. Anybody who deliberately chooses a strategy that puts them at such a huge disadvantage is clearly not much of a military mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's been a while since i read ACOK, and I might be wrong, but I doubt that Balon realistically expected to permanently conquer the North. Or if he did, I don't think he'd try and hold it against the Lannisters and Tyrells. Asha certainly didn't give the impression that they were there to stay. But I might be wrong.

I'm not sure what else there is to say, but I'll repeat that allying with Robb would have been stupid. Balon knew how dangerous it was to go against Tywin Lannister. Considering that he subsequently went on to defeat both Robb and Stannis, I'd say he was right.

by claiming a crown he went against tywin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually kind of get where Balon's coming from on your first point. He didn't want to risk going up against a superior enemy, and he acknowledged Tywin as such.



What's truly absurd though is that he didn't side with the Lannisters after realizing this, and he didn't stay neutral either. He seceded from Joffrey's regime anyway and started pillaging under the name of King Balon Greyjoy. That's kind of stupid.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually kind of get where Balon's coming from on your first point. He didn't want to risk going up against a superior enemy, and he acknowledged Tywin as such.

What's truly absurd though is that he didn't side with the Lannisters after realizing this, and he didn't stay neutral either. He seceded from Joffrey's regime anyway and started pillaging under the name of King Balon Greyjoy. That's kind of stupid.

exactly the north is a fine target if he stayed with the IT but the fact he pissed off the it by declaring him self king

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were problems with allying with any of the factions from the Ironborn point of view. I agree with those that say he should have either attacked the North or declared independence. Doing both is a little bit contradictory. Attacking the North after offering an alliance to the Lannisters, in exchange for a grant of land and a marriage, would be a good move. None of this independence business. If a Crown is what Balon really wanted, he should have seen the value in attacking the Throne and helping his fellow secessionist


Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact Robb wanted to return knowing Rodrick was in the field is all the proof you need the ironborn invasion could only be dealt with by the main army, otherwise there was no reason to return.

Rodrick, of course, didn't go to attack Vic at Moat Cailin, and didn't necessarily even know about that. He was dealing with a small group of raiders (poorly). So there is nothing to indicate he was thought capable of dealing with the whole invasion.

Robb wanting to return =/= Rodrick couldn't handle it himself. The only thing that stopped Rodrick was Ramsey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robb wanting to return =/= Rodrick couldn't handle it himself. The only thing that stopped Rodrick was Ramsey.

Yes, it does. Rodrick didn't have the manpower to eject the Ironborn from Deepwood Motte or Moat Cailin, or protect the whole Western shore

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it does. Rodrick didn't have the manpower to eject the Ironborn from Deepwood Motte or Moat Cailin, or protect the whole Western shore

Yes, he did, and the North still had as of ADwD nearly 10,000 men to call on outside of Rodriks forces in the Manderlys, the Umbers, the Clans, the Mormonts. The only thing that stopped him was Ramsey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, he did, and the North still had as of ADwD nearly 10,000 men to call on outside of Rodriks forces in the Manderlys, the Umbers, the Clans, the Mormonts. The only thing that stopped him was Ramsey.

Oh, so you're one of those who thinks the North can muster a 50,000 man army

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For all the hate on Balon. Its hilarious to know that he is the king who cared he most for his subjects. Ironborn 4 life.

Eeeehhhh... I don't exactly disagree, but I find it hard to agree.

As for Balon, he's an idiot, but not for attacking the North.. He's a fool because he declared independence, and there was no way whatsoever the Isles could stay independent. Balon should have stayed under the protection of the Iron Throne, and then attack the North, demanding the right to keep the lands he seized in exchange for loyalty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, he did, and the North still had as of ADwD nearly 10,000 men to call on outside of Rodriks forces in the Manderlys, the Umbers, the Clans, the Mormonts. The only thing that stopped him was Ramsey.

Why are you quarrelling with Robb Stark's own assessment of the North's strength? He thought he was needed to repel the invasion, with all the northern forces in the south. Doing so left his southern kingdom critically vulnerable but he decided to leave anyway. I think he's supposed to understand the North's capabilities.

Moreover, even if the north could have assembled 10,000 men in one place they weren't of the quality to defeat Victarion. Rodrick couldn't knock Dagmar out of action with ten times his numbers, or save Torrhen's Square.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are you quarrelling with Robb Stark's own assessment of the North's strength? He thought he was needed to repel the invasion, with all the northern forces in the south. Doing so left his southern kingdom critically vulnerable but he decided to leave anyway. I think he's supposed to understand the North's capabilities.

Moreover, even if the north could have assembled 10,000 men in one place they weren't of the quality to defeat Victarion. Rodrick couldn't knock Dagmar out of action with ten times his numbers, or save Torrhen's Square.

Dagmer ran from Rodrik once he arrived and then went and retook Torrhen's Square because Rodrik took all the men back with him to retake WInterfell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get this whole Robb had to return because there wasn't the strength in the North to resist without the main army. Robbs capital has been taken and his heir killed. This is why he has to return, not because there isn't sufficient numbers.

How many ironborn were in the North?! 10k at best. In reality these men should be beaten by a Northern army in battle due to a lack of knowledge of the terrain and a lack of cavalry of any kind. Can Rodrick raise 10k?! Well he's got over 2500 if Ramsay joins him and Theon will be either dead or a hostage. The Umbers have another 1000 or so, the Karstarks 300, Mormonts a few hundred, Mountain Clans at least 3000, Manderlys at least another 2-3000. And there's a whole load of other men that will fight against tyrants who rape their wives and defile their gods. So yes 10k is very doable. No they won't be as good one on one as Robbs men or Vics but they will have the advantage I named above. On any case they can defeat Asha and Dagmer easily and attempt to bottle Vic up. The possible hammer and anvil. Balon could not win. His strategy went against his goal, and was unattainable hence he was a fool

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get this whole Robb had to return because there wasn't the strength in the North to resist without the main army. Robbs capital has been taken and his heir killed. This is why he has to return, not because there isn't sufficient numbers.

How many ironborn were in the North?! 10k at best. In reality these men should be beaten by a Northern army in battle due to a lack of knowledge of the terrain and a lack of cavalry of any kind. Can Rodrick raise 10k?! Well he's got over 2500 if Ramsay joins him and Theon will be either dead or a hostage. The Umbers have another 1000 or so, the Karstarks 300, Mormonts a few hundred, Mountain Clans at least 3000, Manderlys at least another 2-3000. And there's a whole load of other men that will fight against tyrants who rape their wives and defile their gods. So yes 10k is very doable. No they won't be as good one on one as Robbs men or Vics but they will have the advantage I named above. On any case they can defeat Asha and Dagmer easily and attempt to bottle Vic up. The possible hammer and anvil. Balon could not win. His strategy went against his goal, and was unattainable hence he was a fool

I totally agree with you.

Moreover do not forget few things:

  • the Manderlys are enormously rich, so you should not crowd-out any mercenary force
  • the North remembers: the IB are taugth, but the Nmen are no joke. There would have been rebellions against the invaders.
  • The IB rose in rebellion at the begininnig of Robert's reign, so their soldiers must be way less than previous estimation. Despite Robert been of "kind heart" (according to Cersei) they should have suffered heavy losses (1/3 of warriors plus the totality of their fleet??).
  • I feel that in the days of Harren the Black the population of the IB was larger because they had the harvest of the Riverlands to support them.

Was Theon the only one fostered "abroad"? I get the feeling that it could have happened to many other noble boys (and girls of course) and so the leaders and the "officials" of the Iron fleet would have been "weak".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree with you.

Moreover do not forget few things:

  • the Manderlys are enormously rich, so you should not crowd-out any mercenary force
  • the North remembers: the IB are taugth, but the Nmen are no joke. There would have been rebellions against the invaders.
  • The IB rose in rebellion at the begininnig of Robert's reign, so their soldiers must be way less than previous estimation. Despite Robert been of "kind heart" (according to Cersei) they should have suffered heavy losses (1/3 of warriors plus the totality of their fleet??).
  • I feel that in the days of Harren the Black the population of the IB was larger because they had the harvest of the Riverlands to support them.

Was Theon the only one fostered "abroad"? I get the feeling that it could have happened to many other noble boys (and girls of course) and so the leaders and the "officials" of the Iron fleet would have been "weak".

Well we know I believe Bael
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...