From what I’ve read, including “Powers and Thrones,” it sounds like it would be the Mongols. However, we need to give a shout-out to the scrappy Ukrainians or maybe even the Finns—anyone brave enough to smack a rolled-up newspaper on the nose of the Russian dog.
I suggest we distinguish BGP (Before Gunpowder) and AGP (After Gunpowder).
In BGP I’d like to see (well, not really, but you get it) a Mongols v Romans battle. The Mongols probably have the edge in ruthlessness, but the Romans may be more disciplined. I’d go for the Romans in extra time, not based on any indepth knowledge, but merely because I’ve just finished a (fiction) book on the battle of the Teutoburger Forest, and the Romans just don’t waver, not even when ambushed. Their discipline and experience in a nice orderly battle would eventually get the better of the Mongols, who are better at scaring a civilian population, which is not useful here.
Edit: I'm all of a sudden not sure the Mongols used gunpowder or not (Dan! Help!) But no matter what, it's not allowed against the Romans, level playing field and all that.
BTW, in the book I mentioned (Roman Mask by Thomas M.D. Brooke) the fate of the captured Romans was so sickening, that I could not stomach checking its authenticity.
AGP: how about pitching the allied D-Day forces against the Soviet military when bearing down on Berlin? Both had practically infinite resources of personnel and material (IRL the Soviets even from the Americans 😏). My money would be on the Soviets, because backing down would mean getting shot by political commissars: they’d probably take their chances fighting on. Americans would be more willing to go for a tactical retreat, leaving the field to their relentless opponents (or is this controversial?).
Hi Valérie - the Mongols used gunpowder extensively. They were fascinated by Chinese technology and utilised it widely in building communication and war
I think if we take out the gunpowder advantage the Mongol calvary would struggle against the disciplined and heavily armoured Roman phalanx but that’s just my view⚔️
If we’re talking a battle royale style conflict where literally everyone is involved, it would probably go to whoever has the sheer numbers. So modern China.
If we’re talking dream combos I’d like to see the similarly equipped (no guns vs swords shenanigans) Spartans go up against the Vikings. Battle of the Hollywood heavyweights!
I think having the Romans, lead by Scipio Africanus, Gaius Marius, or Julius Caesar fight the Mongols with a home field advantage would be close. Take stirrups, gunpowder and any other medieval tech they used away from the Mongols and suddenly the battle looks a lot more even!
I think it is safe to say any army whose, so called, military might is shown off via mass parades is not to be trusted.
Logic would dictate the US army based on its size and access to resources.
However, surely any air force would have a massive advantage over the "home side" from history. Therefore does air attack need to join the no nuclear weapons list?
Special mention needs to go to the Ukrainian military for fending off the Russians, the Afghan army in the 1970s and 1980s for fending off the Russians, the Japanese army in 1905 for fending off the Russians.
But to bring warriors to parity a showdown between the Mongols and modern US army would be impressive to watch
I’m gonna go with a singular warrior and throw Margaret of Beverley/Jerusalem into the mix. A tough Yorkshire lass with makeshift kitchen armour! Don’t mess with Margaret. She will take them all down!
Give the Mongols Home Field? Equalize the weaponry and they take all comers. They were unburdened by conscience and would do whatever it takes to win, which is what it would take. In basketball ball lingo they would get all the loose balls and offensive rebounds
The Apache and Comanche would give anyone a run for their money, and there are notable similarities in fighting style with the early caliphs. I'd bet my money on those two.
I'd say the soldiers in WW1. They had to deal with some extraordinary conditions, and trench warfare was absolutely gruesome. They had to be pretty tough to survive that.
From what I’ve read, including “Powers and Thrones,” it sounds like it would be the Mongols. However, we need to give a shout-out to the scrappy Ukrainians or maybe even the Finns—anyone brave enough to smack a rolled-up newspaper on the nose of the Russian dog.
The Ukrainians are high up on my list too!
Suffragettes
Facebook moms
I room full of Karens waiting on a manager
Oh yes in any subject field too! 🙄
William Marshal. All takers.
Probably biased but I wouldn't mess with the Spartans
I suggest we distinguish BGP (Before Gunpowder) and AGP (After Gunpowder).
In BGP I’d like to see (well, not really, but you get it) a Mongols v Romans battle. The Mongols probably have the edge in ruthlessness, but the Romans may be more disciplined. I’d go for the Romans in extra time, not based on any indepth knowledge, but merely because I’ve just finished a (fiction) book on the battle of the Teutoburger Forest, and the Romans just don’t waver, not even when ambushed. Their discipline and experience in a nice orderly battle would eventually get the better of the Mongols, who are better at scaring a civilian population, which is not useful here.
Edit: I'm all of a sudden not sure the Mongols used gunpowder or not (Dan! Help!) But no matter what, it's not allowed against the Romans, level playing field and all that.
BTW, in the book I mentioned (Roman Mask by Thomas M.D. Brooke) the fate of the captured Romans was so sickening, that I could not stomach checking its authenticity.
AGP: how about pitching the allied D-Day forces against the Soviet military when bearing down on Berlin? Both had practically infinite resources of personnel and material (IRL the Soviets even from the Americans 😏). My money would be on the Soviets, because backing down would mean getting shot by political commissars: they’d probably take their chances fighting on. Americans would be more willing to go for a tactical retreat, leaving the field to their relentless opponents (or is this controversial?).
Hi Valérie - the Mongols used gunpowder extensively. They were fascinated by Chinese technology and utilised it widely in building communication and war
I think if we take out the gunpowder advantage the Mongol calvary would struggle against the disciplined and heavily armoured Roman phalanx but that’s just my view⚔️
Thank you, Dom. Forget I said anything about the BGP and AGP thing 😁
If we’re talking a battle royale style conflict where literally everyone is involved, it would probably go to whoever has the sheer numbers. So modern China.
If we’re talking dream combos I’d like to see the similarly equipped (no guns vs swords shenanigans) Spartans go up against the Vikings. Battle of the Hollywood heavyweights!
I think having the Romans, lead by Scipio Africanus, Gaius Marius, or Julius Caesar fight the Mongols with a home field advantage would be close. Take stirrups, gunpowder and any other medieval tech they used away from the Mongols and suddenly the battle looks a lot more even!
I think it is safe to say any army whose, so called, military might is shown off via mass parades is not to be trusted.
Logic would dictate the US army based on its size and access to resources.
However, surely any air force would have a massive advantage over the "home side" from history. Therefore does air attack need to join the no nuclear weapons list?
Special mention needs to go to the Ukrainian military for fending off the Russians, the Afghan army in the 1970s and 1980s for fending off the Russians, the Japanese army in 1905 for fending off the Russians.
But to bring warriors to parity a showdown between the Mongols and modern US army would be impressive to watch
I’m gonna go with a singular warrior and throw Margaret of Beverley/Jerusalem into the mix. A tough Yorkshire lass with makeshift kitchen armour! Don’t mess with Margaret. She will take them all down!
Loved reading about her in crusaders! Would not want to pick a fight with her
This question reminds me of the debates we had when I was a boy. Who would win in a fight......one example was a giant shark vs a submarine.
This makes me think of those shit movies on dodgy sky sci fi channels. Supercrock vs megashark or similar.
You can't beat Sharknado
Sharknado! 🤣🤣🤣
I produced that when I was 8 🤣🤣🤣
Give the Mongols Home Field? Equalize the weaponry and they take all comers. They were unburdened by conscience and would do whatever it takes to win, which is what it would take. In basketball ball lingo they would get all the loose balls and offensive rebounds
The Apache and Comanche would give anyone a run for their money, and there are notable similarities in fighting style with the early caliphs. I'd bet my money on those two.
I was thinking apache vs mongols given similar army sizes of course
I'd say the soldiers in WW1. They had to deal with some extraordinary conditions, and trench warfare was absolutely gruesome. They had to be pretty tough to survive that.
The like the suggestions on vikings vs spartans.
My thoughts are:
1: Apache vs Mongols
2: Napoleon vs Hitler
It would be interesting to see who would win in a fight; the Mongols or the Crusaders?? My money is on the Mongols