I think not.Soulblighter was loyal to Balor all the way.
Ok,he may act sometimes by himself but he was not a traitor.
Remember that after all,he was the last Fallen lord(Exept the Deceiver who was half frozen).
Mirkridia was a neccesity for him.Just imagine him without the Mirkrs.He couldn't to anything!
He couldn't had Myrmidons,he hadn't Trow!!No Sades(at least fewer than the great war)
The army he owned had the lifeless Trall,Soulless and Wights.The only well worth it unit was Fetches.As for Mauls no big deal.
So as we can see the only way to become extremely dangerous and leathal was to raise the Myrkridia.
This weakness we saw it after Summoner was killed.When Soulblighter couldn't have access on Myrkridia the game lost.
For the end I have an observation to make.
The lack of generals that Soulblighter had (exept Shiver)was one the keys of his defeat!!!
Remember that in the great war,Balor was powerfull with the combination of the other Fallen lords(his's Generals like the Watcher,the Deceiver,Soulblighter e.t.c).
He gave orders and the Fallen obey and burned the land on multiple ways and directions.But now what?
An army without Great general with only the leadership of Fetches or maybe no leader was much more easy to be destroyed .
Soulblighter should walk with his main army and destroy.There was no help for him so he should fight all the way,all towns and forts insteed of having some Generals making things more easy for him.
