[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

Tbh what upset me most about the pointless doomed Dothraki charge was seeing Ghost in it. (Without Jon, even.) I was shouting at the screen. And when it seemed like Ghost had died... such emotional manipulation. And without even actually killing off any of the characters (most) people cared about (how many people were really upset about Jorah or Theon dying?... aside from the brave few who predicted one of them might be Azor Ahai reborn).

[Abyss]

I’m kind of grateful the show didn’t do the UnCat storyline do there’s at least one interesting plot line I won’t sutomatically be comparing/confusing.

[Maark Abbott]

This is why I fucking hate assassin rogues

10d8 is bullshit

[Maark Abbott]

Further thoughts:

Despite all the hype, that episode was very, very muddy.

I get that it's a night battle but it was next to impossible to see what was going on for a good 1/3 of the episode.

The ending felt like a cop-out. Flying Arya out of nowhere with a sneak attack! Except to jump in there would have meant jumping off of thin air because it's in the middle of the Godswood. Didn't make sense and felt like an 'easy' option.

Plot armour in full force for the main characters.

WTF even were those special effects. Dire.

Both Mormonts got their Dying Moment of Awesome.

Who would win? An insufferable smuglet or one Kingy boi? His smile when the flames did shit all was precious.

The logical next point is Original Cersei has moved north and lays siege to the survivors, OR that they march on King's Landing (which seems less likely all things considered).

All in all it was a decent episode but hampered by some shoddy writing and muddy visuals.

[Andorion]

Maark Abbott, on 01 May 2019 - 07:24 AM, said:

Further thoughts:

Despite all the hype, that episode was very, very muddy.

I get that it's a night battle but it was next to impossible to see what was going on for a good 1/3 of the episode.

The ending felt like a cop-out. Flying Arya out of nowhere with a sneak attack! Except to jump in there would have meant jumping off of thin air because it's in the middle of the Godswood. Didn't make sense and felt like an 'easy' option.

Plot armour in full force for the main characters.

WTF even were those special effects. Dire.

Both Mormonts got their Dying Moment of Awesome.

Who would win? An insufferable smuglet or one Kingy boi? His smile when the flames did shit all was precious.

The logical next point is Original Cersei has moved north and lays siege to the survivors, OR that they march on King's Landing (which seems less likely all things considered).

All in all it was a decent episode but hampered by some shoddy writing and muddy visuals.

It would be supremely ironic if Cersei marched North only to have half the army founder in the swamps of the Neck and the other half freeze to death in winter. This is the North after all.

[Traveller]

It was interesting to see all those influenced by fire coming together to serve their purposes at the same time. Beric, Hound, Mel, all helped Arya to get where she needed to be. While Bran was off somewhere else. I wonder if Bran/3er is the lord of light? He seems to have manipulated events at the same time and for the same goal as the servants of fire.
He's also got those strong bonds to the Children of the forest. Could they have made a Red King to be in opposition to the White? That would explain the link between them. Maybe the 3eR was talking to the priests like Mel through the fires, and had the ability to resurrect followers, just like the NK, but by proxy. Seems weird to have the Lord of Light and the 3 eyes Raven being separate, really.
Can't remember it well but didn't one of the CotF use fireballs to save Bran at one point?


I think they'll clear up, regroup, head south, siblings and rivals will kill each other, the iron throne will be destroyed, and Gendry will be crowned at the end as the best in line after all the big names are dead.

This post has been edited by Traveller: 01 May 2019 - 09:20 AM

[Zuzu Bolin]

I really don't get people's issues with the battle tactics. Shit happens - look at the British in the Crimean War. They were led by professional generals

[Tapper]

Azath Vitr (D, on 30 April 2019 - 05:29 PM, said:

On the Dothraki, this part seems interesting---and counterintutive:

'The success of a cavalry attack against infantry requires either flanking (hitting a formation on its side while some other group “fixes” its front) or a shocking frontal assault that disrupts the formation. Both of these depend more on psychological than on physical factors. Fear of being attacked from two sides induces infantry to break and flee, just as fear of being overrun causes infantry to throw down their weapons and run. In either case, cavalry runs free and kills until the infantry can pull itself back together. But crucially, success depends on the ability of the cavalry to induce panic.'

So cavalry just doesn't work if the infantry doesn't panic?... What about horses trampling people and so forth?

Cavalry charges really do not work if infantry holds.
To a horse, any obstacle wide, dense and tall enough to look like a wall is treated as such. It will not go through it, but it it will seek to go around it through the nearest gap, or stop if it sees no such option, sometimes throwing its rider. A horse might trample (or jump) if the obstacle is the only visible thing between it and space, so a single line of infantry could end up being jumped or trampled: a somewhat deeper formation, nope.
As the article states, a charge can wreak havoc on infantry that moves away from it (either fleeing, or an open formation like retreating skirmishers), but charging a dense formation of holding infantry doesn't succeed unless the cavalry somehow creates a gap (which is a role Napoleontic battlefield artillery played, for example). Also, the article doesn't state this, but this goes especially for a charge in a column, square or line relying on shock impact, with multiple horses abreast, like in GoT and LotR.

Cavalry units that adopt a pointier formation like a wedge, arrow or diamond can rely on herd instinct: by leading the first few horses through an existing gap comfortably wide enough for them, instinct forces the entire formation to go through to the point where the formation uses its mass and speed to increase the gap, allowing the riders to strike to either side, thus manually widening the gap further. Of course, this has its limits, too. You cannot expect to lead a wedge through a gap of just a few yards wide between two twenty rank deep infantry formations without most of your unit being slowed down to a standstill and then being killed.

@Tiste: I did enjoy parts .
Specifically, I liked the horror sequence of Arya in the library, enjoyed Theon's last stand, Jorah's death and I loved the banter in the crypts. I have no issue with Arya showing up from nowhere (apart for why they didn't
make her jump down from the tree?). I am happy Melisandre showed up and Arya's knife trick was pretty cool.
What I didn't like from a personal point of view was the endless repetition of short scenes in which named characters consistently fight and just hold on in the front rank of the battle without ever falling, yet the nameless people behind them apparently all end pushing up daisies.

But when it comes to tactical/ military gripes: I cannot flip a switch and turn my brain off. I spent my last two years at uni almost exclusively focused on military history (yeah, I was that kind of teenager/ twenty-something). Cavalry has a tactical role and impact related to the armament and quality of the infantry of its period, which is both predictable and more or less circular, especially in pre-gunpowder times, and horses will be horses.
Hiring a consultant from any university anywhere in the world that reads medieval/ military history would have solved all this, for a sum of maybe $ 2.500,- out of that 15 million dollar episode budget. All the directors would need to do, is attend a 45 minute powerpoint presentation of how not to look like an idiot. It would have been money and time well spent, especially since they must know plenty of people and media will jump on it.

[Tapper]

Zuzu Bolin, on 01 May 2019 - 09:20 AM, said:

I really don't get people's issues with the battle tactics. Shit happens - look at the British in the Crimean War. They were led by professional generals

The whole first half of the 19th century consists of military men trying to undo (for political needs) all the lessons learned from Napoleontic warfare. The second half of the 19th century consists of military men underestimating the firepower of infantry formations at their disposal.

[Andorion]

Tapper, on 01 May 2019 - 11:10 AM, said:

Azath Vitr (D, on 30 April 2019 - 05:29 PM, said:

On the Dothraki, this part seems interesting---and counterintutive:

'The success of a cavalry attack against infantry requires either flanking (hitting a formation on its side while some other group "fixes" its front) or a shocking frontal assault that disrupts the formation. Both of these depend more on psychological than on physical factors. Fear of being attacked from two sides induces infantry to break and flee, just as fear of being overrun causes infantry to throw down their weapons and run. In either case, cavalry runs free and kills until the infantry can pull itself back together. But crucially, success depends on the ability of the cavalry to induce panic.'

So cavalry just doesn't work if the infantry doesn't panic?... What about horses trampling people and so forth?

Cavalry charges really do not work if infantry holds.
To a horse, any obstacle wide, dense and tall enough to look like a wall is treated as such. It will not go through it, but it it will seek to go around it through the nearest gap, or stop if it sees no such option, sometimes throwing its rider. A horse might trample (or jump) if the obstacle is the only visible thing between it and space, so a single line of infantry could end up being jumped or trampled: a somewhat deeper formation, nope.
As the article states, a charge can wreak havoc on infantry that moves away from it (either fleeing, or an open formation like retreating skirmishers), but charging a dense formation of holding infantry doesn't succeed unless the cavalry somehow creates a gap (which is a role Napoleontic battlefield artillery played, for example). Also, the article doesn't state this, but this goes especially for a charge in a column, square or line relying on shock impact, with multiple horses abreast, like in GoT and LotR.

Cavalry units that adopt a pointier formation like a wedge, arrow or diamond can rely on herd instinct: by leading the first few horses through an existing gap comfortably wide enough for them, instinct forces the entire formation to go through to the point where the formation uses its mass and speed to increase the gap, allowing the riders to strike to either side, thus manually widening the gap further. Of course, this has its limits, too. You cannot expect to lead a wedge through a gap of just a few yards wide between two twenty rank deep infantry formations without most of your unit being slowed down to a standstill and then being killed.

@Tiste: I did enjoy parts .
Specifically, I liked the horror sequence of Arya in the library, enjoyed Theon's last stand, Jorah's death and I loved the banter in the crypts. I have no issue with Arya showing up from nowhere (apart for why they didn't
make her jump down from the tree?). I am happy Melisandre showed up and Arya's knife trick was pretty cool.
What I didn't like from a personal point of view was the endless repetition of short scenes in which named characters consistently fight and just hold on in the front rank of the battle without ever falling, yet the nameless people behind them apparently all end pushing up daisies.

But when it comes to tactical/ military gripes: I cannot flip a switch and turn my brain off. I spent my last two years at uni almost exclusively focused on military history (yeah, I was that kind of teenager/ twenty-something). Cavalry has a tactical role and impact related to the armament and quality of the infantry of its period, which is both predictable and more or less circular, especially in pre-gunpowder times, and horses will be horses.
Hiring a consultant from any university anywhere in the world that reads medieval/ military history would have solved all this, for a sum of maybe $ 2.500,- out of that 15 million dollar episode budget. All the directors would need to do, is attend a 45 minute powerpoint presentation of how not to look like an idiot. It would have been money and time well spent, especially since they must know plenty of people and media will jump on it.

Re: cavalry, I never liked how GRRM armed the Dothrakhi with the sword rather than the composite bow. Historically, the great horse tribes of the steppes - the Huns, the Mongols wielded that bow to terrible effect. They never did the mass charge, they used feints false charges and hit and run tactics to harass and bleed their enemy. Thus the Mongols conquered Asia and the Huns destroyed the Roman legions at Adrianople.

[Gorefest]

Yeah, but if you would set bows on fire, they'd burn.The Mongol horse warriors had both bows and curved swords. So that is all still in theme with the Dothraki. Melisandre specifically asked them to draw their swords, because physics. Well, GoT physics. Swords burn indefinitely when magically powered, wood doesn't. Or something like that.

Also, it looks more spectacular.

This post has been edited by Gorefest: 01 May 2019 - 12:08 PM

[Cause]

Andorion, on 01 May 2019 - 12:01 PM, said:

Re: cavalry, I never liked how GRRM armed the Dothrakhi with the sword rather than the composite bow. Historically, the great horse tribes of the steppes - the Huns, the Mongols wielded that bow to terrible effect. They never did the mass charge, they used feints false charges and hit and run tactics to harass and bleed their enemy. Thus the Mongols conquered Asia and the Huns destroyed the Roman legions at Adrianople.

The dothraki have 3 traditional weapons, the arahk, the composite bow and the whip. The show somehow forgot the bows almost since the beggining. Though I have to sat that archery should be pointless against the undead, the dothraki I think I based on the mongols as well as several other horse tribes. They are a super almagamation of horse cultures. That said the mongols also had heavy cavalry (for them), after the feints and arrows do their work at some point you do need a charge to finish things.

At his wedding khal drogo recieved a valyrian steel arahk and a dragon bone bow.

This post has been edited by Cause: 01 May 2019 - 12:50 PM

[Maark Abbott]

Andorion, on 01 May 2019 - 08:46 AM, said:

Maark Abbott, on 01 May 2019 - 07:24 AM, said:

Further thoughts:

Despite all the hype, that episode was very, very muddy.

I get that it's a night battle but it was next to impossible to see what was going on for a good 1/3 of the episode.

The ending felt like a cop-out. Flying Arya out of nowhere with a sneak attack! Except to jump in there would have meant jumping off of thin air because it's in the middle of the Godswood. Didn't make sense and felt like an 'easy' option.

Plot armour in full force for the main characters.

WTF even were those special effects. Dire.

Both Mormonts got their Dying Moment of Awesome.

Who would win? An insufferable smuglet or one Kingy boi? His smile when the flames did shit all was precious.

The logical next point is Original Cersei has moved north and lays siege to the survivors, OR that they march on King's Landing (which seems less likely all things considered).

All in all it was a decent episode but hampered by some shoddy writing and muddy visuals.

It would be supremely ironic if Cersei marched North only to have half the army founder in the swamps of the Neck and the other half freeze to death in winter. This is the North after all.

Real Brexit hours

[nacht]

Maybe this is not over yet.

Benjen Stark/Cold Hands could the new night king with the power to call on the dead.
Also the reason behind the cyclical nature of the night king (i.e. the answer to the question Why now?) might be tied to the number of dead in the north. It appears that the army of the dead should be a certain size or more to be effective.

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

'The Long Night is lowest ranked Game Of Thrones episode since Season 5 and second lowest of all time'

https://wikiofthrone...pLFcpKjmreG9S-I

[Malankazooie]

From her IG - https://www.instagra...source=ig_embed

[Maark Abbott]

Azath Vitr (D, on 01 May 2019 - 05:52 PM, said:

'The Long Night is lowest ranked Game Of Thrones episode since Season 5 and second lowest of all time'

https://wikiofthrone...pLFcpKjmreG9S-I

Summon forth he who mances trains, for his gruntlement is as mine own in this.

[Cause]

Will the faceless men play a part? The show has left out some of their lore.

Will they want to punish arya?
will they want to kill daenerys, the last dragonlord?
Will they regret the end of the nightking? An aspect of death

I mean what is the show about now? Defeat cersei? Decide of john or Danny rules?

[amphibian]

I think at this point, Braavos and all of East-eros doesn't matter to the show.

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

Cause, on 01 May 2019 - 09:48 PM, said:

Will the faceless men play a part? The show has left out some of their lore.

Will they want to punish arya?
will they want to kill daenerys, the last dragonlord?
Will they regret the end of the nightking? An aspect of death

I mean what is the show about now? Defeat cersei? Decide of john or Danny rules?

Bran is the obvious choice for new NK / smirking supervillain... but what if it's Arya---either possessed by the Many-Faced god, or secretly assassinated and replaced?...