• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hey Guest. Check out the NeoGAF 2.2 Update Thread for details on our new Giphy integration and other new features.

Game of Thrones' incredible "Loot Train Attack" scene (SPOILERS for last week's ep)

Status
Not open for further replies.

kirblar

Member
Oct 9, 2010
63,320
1
660
Yes I'm aware. However given the preview for next week the point still stands considering now she's trying to appeal to the survivors after they just got done watching her burn all of their friends alive.

Additionally, why burn the food?
They didn't know it was food.
 

Haly

One day I realized that sadness is just another word for not enough coffee.
Oct 10, 2006
58,500
0
0
I feel like they should've known. What else could it be? It's either supplies or wealth, why would you ever torch either?
 

Maridia

Member
Dec 8, 2005
1,574
0
0
I feel like they should've known. What else could it be? It's either supplies or wealth, why would you ever torch either?

Because:

1. they don't need either, and the enemy does.

2. less casualties are incurred when torching than when trying to extricate the wealth.

3. there's an inherent (and enormous) "shock and awe" value in torching things, given that it involves such an unconventional and powerful weapon.

4. most importantly, they probably assumed, as I did (and do), that many of the wagons were full of people

Edit: also, the entire question of why burn the enemies' food, in the context of Game of Thrones, is kinda laughable
 

Haly

One day I realized that sadness is just another word for not enough coffee.
Oct 10, 2006
58,500
0
0
Because:

1. they don't need either, and the enemy does.
They just said in the episode that they can 't feed their army because the Lannisters took Highgarden.

2. less casualties are incurred when torching than when trying to extricate the wealth.
This doesn't make sense, as you would capture the supplies AFTER the battle is won.

3. there's an inherent (and enormous) "shock and awe" value in torching things, given that it involves such an unconventional and powerful weapon.
Fine.

4. most importantly, they probably assumed, as I did (and do), that many of the wagons were full of people
Jon specifically said before this scene "you don't want to go around burning things willy nilly like your dad". What if it was the wounded? What if it was prisoners??
 

Maridia

Member
Dec 8, 2005
1,574
0
0
They just said in the episode that they can 't feed their army because the Lannisters took Highgarden.


This doesn't make sense, as you would capture the supplies AFTER the battle is won.


Fine.


Jon specifically said before this scene "you don't want to go around burning things willy nilly like your dad". What if it was the wounded? What if it was prisoners??

I'll give you point one, dispute point two on account of it not being clear what the outcome of the battle would've been without dragons, and I'm gonna slide points three and four to my side of the table and cash out. Good night!
 

jviggy43

Member
Aug 27, 2016
2,883
0
0
Point three is silly. This show didn't used to be about blowing shit up. Point four, if it's the case that they wanted to be sure they destroyed anything that posed a threat, makes the Battista even sillier since that was like the one wagon they didn't destroy and it just happens to be the one thing that can hurt her dragon.
 

captjohnboyd

Member
Mar 12, 2015
1,044
0
0
NOLA
Bit off topic but I ADORE the composers work this season and last and I'm curious if anyone knows what that sounds is playing during "Khalessi" right when the dragon lands? It sounds a bit like sliding on an electric violin or cello or something. It played briefly last season as well I think

It happens the second after she says "Dracarus!"

I'm also curious if there's a musical version of the Khalessi theme that has that part included in it. Give me chills every time I hear it 😁
 

Maridia

Member
Dec 8, 2005
1,574
0
0
Point three is silly. This show didn't used to be about blowing shit up. Point four, if it's the case that they wanted to be sure they destroyed anything that posed a threat, makes the Battista even sillier since that was like the one wagon they didn't destroy and it just happens to be the one thing that can hurt her dragon.

I'm not really sure what you're arguing.

Haly was saying that it was dumb that Dany torched the train, and I argued that it wasn't.

Now, you've chimed in. Firstly, you dispute point three by stating that the show didn't used to be about blowing things up. Bullshit. Dany's entire arc in season one is her attaining this firepower, and, in every season since then, she's been one step closer to "blowing shit up." This was a long time coming, and it's not the first time she's shown off firepower.

Now, point four, I'm really not sure what you're talking about. Neither Haly nor myself mentioned degree of threat when debating whether the wagon train should've been burnt. In fact, your response, that the train contained a ballista, supports my opinion that Dany was right to burn the train.
 

jviggy43

Member
Aug 27, 2016
2,883
0
0
I'm not really sure what you're arguing.

Haly was saying that it was dumb that Dany torched the train, and I argued that it wasn't.

Now, you've chimed in. Firstly, you dispute point three by stating that the show didn't used to be about blowing things up. Bullshit. Dany's entire arc in season one is her attaining this firepower, and, in every season since then, she's been one step closer to "blowing shit up." This was a long time coming, and it's not the first time she's shown off firepower.

Now, point four, I'm really not sure what you're talking about. Neither Haly nor myself mentioned degree of threat when debating whether the wagon train should've been burnt. In fact, your response, that the train contained a ballista, supports my opinion that Dany was right to burn the train.
I said the show wasn't just about blowing shit up. Yes shit got blown up, but usually it was something that made sense and had a degree of thought behind it like when tyrion used it to defeat stannis at king's landing. Saying that she chose to blow shit up for the spectacle is something that isn't typically thrones.

My point about point 4 had to do with what I assumed you meant was a threat when you said people, otherwise why would she burn them if they weren't a threat. And my argument was, if it is the case the she destroyed the trains because they were a threat (like you just said) it's incredibly convienant that the one wagon she didn't torch just also happened to be the one thing that actually posed a threat to her.
 
Dec 3, 2013
8,418
2
0
They just said in the episode that they can 't feed their army because the Lannisters took Highgarden.


This doesn't make sense, as you would capture the supplies AFTER the battle is won.


Fine.


Jon specifically said before this scene "you don't want to go around burning things willy nilly like your dad". What if it was the wounded? What if it was prisoners??

I'm not even a fan of Danny and these complaints are straight up laughable. It's war. There is no magical way to do everything correctly, and she wiped out part of one army with very little casualties while completely horrifying the rest. Jon was also clearly talking about cities where many civilians live, since it would mean she would burn lots of innocent people on her way to victory. Unfortunately Jon isn't a gaffer with a wealth of experience on how to win wars where everything magically ends up perfectly well.

There's nitpicking and then there's this bullshit.
 

Window

Member
Jun 28, 2011
3,460
0
0
It doesn't ruin the scene or the show but I do think people asking why burn the food is fairly understandable and not bullshit nitpicking when just in the prior scene (and in the prior episode) they make it a point to mention the importance of food (and the lack of it for Dany's and Cersei's armies, not to mention Winterfell as well. In fact lots of food talk this season). Maybe they will address it next episode.
 

Pagusas

Elden Member
Jun 9, 2006
12,514
4,039
1,685
Prosper, Tx
It doesn't ruin the scene or the show but I do think people asking why burn the food is fairly understandable and not bullshit nitpicking when just in the prior scene (and in the prior episode) they make it a point to mention the importance of food (and the lack of it for Dany's and Cersei's armies, not to mention Winterfell as well. In fact lots of food talk this season). Maybe they will address it next episode.

Maybe that's the twist at the end, Danny and Jon succeed, win the 7 kingdoms, beat the white walkers, but ultimately everyone dies of hunger.
 
Sep 9, 2006
7,968
59
1,540
Brampton, Ontario
Bit off topic but I ADORE the composers work this season and last and I'm curious if anyone knows what that sounds is playing during "Khalessi" right when the dragon lands? It sounds a bit like sliding on an electric violin or cello or something. It played briefly last season as well I think

It happens the second after she says "Dracarus!"

I'm also curious if there's a musical version of the Khalessi theme that has that part included in it. Give me chills every time I hear it 😁

This has been happening everyone Drogon breathes fire. At first I thought it was just the sound Drogon makes to breathe fire but it's a musical cue that fire is coming.
 

Haly

One day I realized that sadness is just another word for not enough coffee.
Oct 10, 2006
58,500
0
0
There's nitpicking and then there's this bullshit.

Please. It's like Bush starting the Iraq War by bombing oil fields. Do you remember Dany's justification for ignoring King's Landing? She wants to be Queen of Westeros, not "Queen of the Ashes".

And then she goes and does this.

Like, have fun waging war while destroying spoils and supplies.
 

cw_sasuke

If all DLC came tied to $13 figurines, I'd consider all DLC to be free
Sep 9, 2006
27,409
2
0
Awesome scene only thing i didnt like was that no one tried to attack Bron while he was charging to shoot Drogon...he def. had a invincible mod installed.
 

Einchy

semen stains the mountaintops
Jun 21, 2010
23,750
2
790
Yeah I love that sound.

https://youtu.be/OfmoyTL64R0?t=1m48s

 
Dec 3, 2013
8,418
2
0
Please. It's like Bush starting the Iraq War by bombing oil fields. Do you remember Dany's justification for ignoring King's Landing? She wants to be Queen of Westeros, not "Queen of the Ashes".

And then she goes and does this.

Like, have fun waging war while destroying spoils and supplies.

That comparison hurts my head, that's how completely nonsensical it is lol.. They went to war because of oil, Danny isn't going to war because of food supplies. We also don't know how much of the food supplies she actually obliterated.

Like have fun destroying spoils and supplies? You mean like other very successful rulers that have done exactly that in our own history? Or does perfect gaffer tactician Haly know far more than them as well?
 

Neece

Member
Mar 15, 2017
544
1
250
Remember that Lady Tyrell told Tyrion that the reach was supplying millions of bushels of grain and hundreds of thousands of cattle to King's Landing. And that's just King's Landing, not including their own supply.

We're talking many hundreds of wagons worth of food. And how many did Dany burn? A few dozen?

I find it highly unlikely that Dany destroyed even a fraction of the reach's supply of food built up for winter.
 

TAJ

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Jun 9, 2004
24,937
0
0
I feel like they should've known. What else could it be? It's either supplies or wealth, why would you ever torch either?

At worst gold would just melt.
 

Haly

One day I realized that sadness is just another word for not enough coffee.
Oct 10, 2006
58,500
0
0
Like have fun destroying spoils and supplies? You mean like other very successful rulers that have done exactly that in our own history? Or does perfect gaffer tactician Haly know far more than them as well?

In a war of conquest? Name one. Go on.

There are plenty of valid reasons to destroy supplies over routing. It can be a hit and run attack (in which case Dany alone would've sufficed). It can be a siege (they did talk about a siege but I don't think they had one set up yet). It could be to deny an objective they don't desire (like Jaime's troops with Highgarden castle).

She did not have good reasons to torch the train.
 

Speevy

Banned
Jun 26, 2004
62,861
1
0
The Reach has the most Lannister forces right now, so either Dany plans on killing them all or she's just left them in the same place as the Unsullied - stranded.

Best case scenario, these men who can't even be asked to protect their khaleesi are going to murder innocent Westerosi, burn villages, and enslave women and children like they did to Miri Maz Durh's village.

Drogon has more restraint than the Dothraki.
 
Feb 5, 2015
1,551
0
0
New Orleans
Our own Aerys Targaryen is way ahead of you.
If he needs a wingman, I'm always here




I'm guessing things are going to go the route of the Lannister army planting around populated areas/near shielding in response, but that's all I'm going to venture for now. I'm hoping to be surprised by what happens next.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.