|
|
Post by LeeClaire on Nov 22, 2016 2:26:38 GMT
Let's talk about history and such. Mostly so I can get some opinions on this:
Top notch Mongol army under Genghis vs top notch Roman imperial army under Trajan
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2016 3:06:27 GMT
I would probably go with the Mongols. The Romans struggled against armies that used similar tactics. I would say the Mongol horse archers could probably handle the Romans on their own. There is a reason the Mongols kicked pretty much everyones ass.
Also, this is my favorite subject. 10/10.
I didn't think anyone else liked history here!
|
|
|
|
Post by LeeClaire on Nov 22, 2016 3:36:40 GMT
I would probably go with the Mongols. The Romans struggled against armies that used similar tactics. I would say the Mongol horse archers could probably handle the Romans on their own. There is a reason the Mongols kicked pretty much everyones ass. Also, this is my favorite subject. 10/10. I thought I remember reading that the Romans eventually learned how to handle eastern European/western Asian armies that had a lot of cavalry with a large contingent of horse archers, and that they even incorporated them into the Roman legions as auxiliary units. Oh, look at Steel. Over here thinking he's the only one who likes a thing, with his necktie belt, pink socks, and cock tattoo pointing at his mouth. You probably take pictures of your food too, don't you? You goddamn hipster fairy. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2016 3:50:52 GMT
I would probably go with the Mongols. The Romans struggled against armies that used similar tactics. I would say the Mongol horse archers could probably handle the Romans on their own. There is a reason the Mongols kicked pretty much everyones ass. Also, this is my favorite subject. 10/10. I thought I remember reading that the Romans eventually learned how to handle eastern European/western Asian armies that had a lot of cavalry with a large contingent of horse archers, and that they even incorporated them into the Roman legions as auxiliary units. Oh, look at Steel. Over here thinking he's the only one who likes a thing, with his necktie belt, pink socks, and cock tattoo pointing at his mouth. You probably take pictures of your food too, don't you? You goddamn hipster fairy. I would say if we are going to do this hypothetical battle we could use the Parthians as an example. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_CarrhaeThe only way I could see the Romans winning is if it was a Thermopylae type battle. In the open they wouldn't stand a chance at all, the Mongols were just so damn good at changing their tactics based on the situation. What would probably happen is the Mongol scouts would harass the Roman Calvary and eventually lead them into an ambush. The Parthians had a lot of success against the Romans, now add years of technology into the mix and better tactics/generals and you would get your answer. Not to mention if it was a long campaign the Mongols were much better at living off the land and were very quick to move. The Romans were a much slower moving army and therein lies the problem. The Mongols were much better at adapting to any situation and finding a way to win. If you broke one part of the Roman fighting machine the whole thing would crumble, and the Mongols would figure that out very quickly. The Mongols had compound bows as well, they outraged anything the Romans had. I mean the fucking Mongols defeated the Russians in winter! That alone says how good they were, not many armies can claim that. The Huns also had a lot of success against the Romans, although they were eventually defeated. Genghis had a lot more patience than Attila though and A LOT more men. |
|
|
|
Post by yepsure on Nov 22, 2016 5:45:04 GMT
I'm a Modern History guy personally, I'll be following this battle though.
|
|
|
|
Post by General Smithers on Nov 22, 2016 6:48:08 GMT
Which of the following REAL historical figures would best succeed in chopping off Lee's COCK?
Robin Hood
Pocahontas
Hercules
Zeus
Jesus
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2016 6:49:31 GMT
Also keep in mind I'm not saying Rome had a shitty army. It's just the Mongols had better equipment due to the time period. If both armies got the same equipment it would be interesting and probably a stalemate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2016 6:50:15 GMT
Which of the following REAL historical figures would best succeed in chopping of Lee's COCK? Robin Hood Pocahontas Hercules Zeus Jesus Jesus the carpenter. |
|
|
|
Post by Alan-P on Nov 22, 2016 7:51:44 GMT
Which of the following REAL historical figures would best succeed in chopping of Lee's COCK? Robin Hood Pocahontas Hercules Zeus Jesus Jesus the carpenter. No, my gardener. |
|
|
|
Post by Jayzon on Nov 22, 2016 8:56:55 GMT
Re: Mongols vs. Romans
In addition to their tactical prowess, I also feel that the Mongols would have had the edge in sheer numbers. Even at that time, there was much more people in the Far East, and the Mongol Kingdom at the height of its glory was almost all of Asia minus Siberia. They probably could've just zergling rushed the Western World if they really wanted.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kimbo on Nov 22, 2016 12:47:22 GMT
Also, this is my favorite subject. 10/10. LIES!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Baba Yaga on Nov 22, 2016 16:24:45 GMT
Well, in the battle of the Met BB:
Steel: 1 Lee: 0
|
|
|
|
Post by LeeClaire on Nov 22, 2016 17:23:34 GMT
I thought I remember reading that the Romans eventually learned how to handle eastern European/western Asian armies that had a lot of cavalry with a large contingent of horse archers, and that they even incorporated them into the Roman legions as auxiliary units. Oh, look at Steel. Over here thinking he's the only one who likes a thing, with his necktie belt, pink socks, and cock tattoo pointing at his mouth. You probably take pictures of your food too, don't you? You goddamn hipster fairy. I would say if we are going to do this hypothetical battle we could use the Parthians as an example. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_CarrhaeThe only way I could see the Romans winning is if it was a Thermopylae type battle. In the open they wouldn't stand a chance at all, the Mongols were just so damn good at changing their tactics based on the situation. What would probably happen is the Mongol scouts would harass the Roman Calvary and eventually lead them into an ambush. The Parthians had a lot of success against the Romans, now add years of technology into the mix and better tactics/generals and you would get your answer. Not to mention if it was a long campaign the Mongols rwere much better at living off the land and were very quick to move. The Romans were a much slower moving army and therein lies the problem. The Mongols were much better at adapting to any situation and finding a way to win. If you broke one part of the Roman fighting machine the whole thing would crumble, and the Mongols would figure that out very quickly. The Mongols had compound bows as well, they outraged anything the Romans had. I mean the fucking Mongols defeated the Russians in winter! That alone says how good they were, not many armies can claim that. The Huns also had a lot of success against the Romans, although they were eventually defeated. Genghis had a lot more patience than Attila though and A LOT more men. But the Battle of Carrhae happened during the time of Antony when Romans generally didn't know what the fuck to do with that type of enemy. And Antony's forces were able to launch successful counterattacks. And I think Trajan bitchslapped the Parthians before revolts and him having to deal with dying came about. I think a top notch imperial army during Trajan's time could give the Mongols some trouble depending on the terrain. If it was on the steppes or open plains then the Mongols would probably take it, but if it was in heavily-wooded areas of western Europe I wouldn't be averse to giving the Romans the edge. Especially since the Romans had adapted to similar Mongol type enemies by then. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2016 17:26:24 GMT
300 was good film.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kimbo on Nov 22, 2016 20:29:10 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2016 22:13:09 GMT
It was so fucking bad, ugh. |
|
|
|
Post by waunakonor on Nov 22, 2016 22:17:33 GMT
300 was fun for about an hour and then I started getting massively bored. Never saw the sequel.
|
|
|
|
Post by theglassprisoner on Nov 22, 2016 23:08:02 GMT
The Mongols had one huge advantage over the Romans and everyone else....they didn't have politics to distract them or to slow them down. Sure they had some form of politics but under Genghis Khan, they ran such a tight ship and had everything under control that they were focusing purely on military. Genghis Khan's tactics were way ahead of their time as well, because the Mongol's understood and raised Horses on another level compared to anyone else they were moving so fast that the Chinese thought there was more than one army running around. If you looked at their attack patterns it would look like something you would see from World War 2 where they were coming in at different directions with greater numbers used for flanking. The Romans had better discipline and equipment but that's about it. They were always changing political hands which would have been distracting for them and they never really changed their battle tactics until they were coming up against battle Elephants. The Mongol's only started getting better equipment once they threatened and got gifts from China in hope to be left alone, and because by then they sacked enough villages and towns to get resources. I am in the middle of studying full time to be a ancient and modern history teacher. I would highly recommend everyone hear to listen to "Dan Carlins Hardcore History" podcast, its the best podcast out there. www.dancarlin.com/ |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2016 23:10:59 GMT
The Mongols had one huge advantage over the Romans and everyone else....they didn't have politics to distract them or to slow them down. Sure they had some form of politics but under Genghis Khan, they ran such a tight ship and had everything under control that they were focusing purely on military. Genghis Khan's tactics were way ahead of their time as well, because the Mongol's understood and raised Horses on another level compared to anyone else they were moving so fast that the Chinese thought there was more than one army running around. If you looked at their attack patterns it would look like something you would see from World War 2 where they were coming in at different directions with greater numbers used for flanking. The Romans had better discipline and equipment but that's about it. They were always changing political hands which would have been distracting for them and they never really changed their battle tactics until they were coming up against battle Elephants. The Mongol's only started getting better equipment once they threatened and got gifts from China in hope to be left alone, and because by then they sacked enough villages and towns to get resources. I am in the middle of studying full time to be a ancient and modern history teacher. I would highly recommend everyone hear to listen to "Dan Carlins Hardcore History" podcast, its the best podcast out there. www.dancarlin.com/Yeah that's a good podcast. worldwariipodcast.net/This one is great as well. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2016 23:17:27 GMT
Also, this is cool.
|
|
|
|
Post by Habuji on Nov 23, 2016 0:11:19 GMT
It was one of those movies that didn't even need a sequel. |
|
|
|
Post by LeeClaire on Nov 23, 2016 1:27:19 GMT
Mongol technology would also have likely allowed them to stomp since their warfare tech was so good not only for its time but a thousand years ahead of Rome's, but I do think that if they had equal tech levels the Romans would have faired better than most anyone else.
What we should really be focusing on is how we're going to use time travel to send me back to the Tang Dynasty, because I want to see if my westerner view of it having a magicical mystique is well-founded.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2016 3:56:51 GMT
We would probably take the machine back and be killed instantly.
But I would go with you, just so you wouldn't have to die alone.
Actually we could just go back in time and duel in different time periods.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baba Yaga on Nov 23, 2016 4:13:04 GMT
So how did Hannibal die? I hear that he was just exiled and died unkown or that he died in some battle as an old commander.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2016 5:48:23 GMT
So how did Hannibal die? I hear that he was just exiled and died unkown or that he died in some battle as an old commander. He defeated the Pergamene fleet, which made Rome intervene on Pergamon's side. So he eventually ended up killing himself with poison to avoid being captured by the Romans and probably killed. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2016 23:46:14 GMT
This is interesting.
Also a really cool channel.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2017 19:08:43 GMT
Been watching this guy lately, he explores a lot of cool bunkers and shit like that.
|
|
|
|
Post by yepsure on Feb 15, 2017 21:53:26 GMT
Been watching this guy lately, he explores a lot of cool bunkers and shit like that. If you're into that stuff you should check out www.thirdreichruins.com |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2017 2:18:52 GMT
Been watching this guy lately, he explores a lot of cool bunkers and shit like that. If you're into that stuff you should check out www.thirdreichruins.com Yeah I love that site. It's crazy how much of the war is left scattered about. Even in the Pacific. This guy has a playlist of when he went to some Pacific battlefields and went searching. Some of it is sad because of how much graffiti and shit is all over the stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by Baba Yaga on Feb 16, 2017 3:00:37 GMT
Rosa Parks was alive in 2005...
|
|
