- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Who would win between Rome and Ancient China?
Posted on 3/29/14 at 8:30 pm
Posted on 3/29/14 at 8:30 pm
They nwere both ancient superpowers only surpassed by Persia , Greece, India, or mayans
17
Posted on 3/29/14 at 8:31 pm to RyseofRome
What?
Posted on 3/29/14 at 8:32 pm to RyseofRome
romans ... they were expansionist more than the chinese, i think ... so they'd have more incentive to develop ways to kill people ...
Posted on 3/29/14 at 8:33 pm to RyseofRome
china has more soldiers, but rome had good tactics
Posted on 3/29/14 at 8:34 pm to RyseofRome
I assume China had way more population, so that's prob a big advantage. 
quote:
They nwere both ancient superpowers only surpassed by Persia , Greece, India, or mayans
Posted on 3/29/14 at 8:34 pm to RyseofRome
Romans
Posted on 3/29/14 at 8:35 pm to RyseofRome
Get a game of Civilization going to answer this question.
Posted on 3/29/14 at 8:36 pm to RyseofRome
Sparta
Posted on 3/29/14 at 8:36 pm to biglego
India had 100s of battle elephants, cavalry, archers, tons of infantry, and chariots
Posted on 3/29/14 at 8:42 pm to RyseofRome
The Roman soldier was one of the three best soldiers, along with the German soldier of WW2 and the Confederate soldier of the American war between the states. I will take the romans every time.
Posted on 3/29/14 at 8:43 pm to tiderider
quote:
romans ... they were expansionist more than the chinese, i think ... so they'd have more incentive to develop ways to kill people ...
.
Roman Empire at its peak:
Mongol Empire:
This post was edited on 3/29/14 at 8:44 pm
Posted on 3/29/14 at 8:47 pm to ManBearTiger
Believe it or not ancient china used quite a bit of chemical warfare. Not in the since of today's chemical warfare but still plenty of stuff did very awful things to people. They just used what was at their disposal back then.
However, the Romans had tactics that were beyond their time.
So I think I'm gonna go with ancient china/Mongols on this one
However, the Romans had tactics that were beyond their time.
So I think I'm gonna go with ancient china/Mongols on this one
Posted on 3/29/14 at 8:49 pm to RyseofRome
Rome was good, but you have to take into account that all Chinese soldiers could fly. I've seen plenty of martial arts movies to know this.
I'd give it to China/Mongols.
I'd give it to China/Mongols.
Posted on 3/29/14 at 8:50 pm to ManBearTiger
Concurring Europe, holy land and the Mediterranean > Central Asia
Posted on 3/29/14 at 8:55 pm to RyseofRome
Posted on 3/29/14 at 8:57 pm to RyseofRome
Romans and the west were all about practicality and efficiency.
Chinese were and still are all about formality. They've always been style over substance type of people. Even their martial arts have too many unnecessary moves. West wins every time and China will never become a true superpower. There's a reason why they suffered humiliation for last 500 years.
Chinese were and still are all about formality. They've always been style over substance type of people. Even their martial arts have too many unnecessary moves. West wins every time and China will never become a true superpower. There's a reason why they suffered humiliation for last 500 years.
This post was edited on 3/29/14 at 9:14 pm
Posted on 3/29/14 at 9:05 pm to Phat Phil
Are we talking about Rome pre-miscegenation with Moors and Berbers or after?
If you're speaking of multicultural and mestizo/mulatto Rome, then Ancient China would win easily the same way the Germanic Visigoths won easily. China's ethnic collectivism and refusal of multicultural subterfuge would give them the advantage over a mixed up Rome. The Germanics easily finished off Rome due to the fact Rome was already intermixed and watered down from within, and therefore the Visigoths had the advantage in collective solidarity and homogeneous socialism.
Rome's greed and willingness to accept inexpensive surplus labor from non-Western populations destroyed their body politic and turned them into a chaotic banana republic. The same can be said about New Orleans of today compared to New Orleans of the past.
If you're speaking of multicultural and mestizo/mulatto Rome, then Ancient China would win easily the same way the Germanic Visigoths won easily. China's ethnic collectivism and refusal of multicultural subterfuge would give them the advantage over a mixed up Rome. The Germanics easily finished off Rome due to the fact Rome was already intermixed and watered down from within, and therefore the Visigoths had the advantage in collective solidarity and homogeneous socialism.
Rome's greed and willingness to accept inexpensive surplus labor from non-Western populations destroyed their body politic and turned them into a chaotic banana republic. The same can be said about New Orleans of today compared to New Orleans of the past.
Posted on 3/29/14 at 9:10 pm to WhoDats10
quote:
India had 100s of battle elephants
A truly useless tool of warfare. Ask Hannibal how the war elephants worked worked out for him.
Posted on 3/29/14 at 9:14 pm to jonboy
quote:
A truly useless tool of warfare
Not really ... Hannibal did more damage to the Romans (Lake Trasimene) then any other leader. It was only until Scipio Africanus that the Romans finally figured out how to defeat the War Elephant.
Posted on 3/29/14 at 9:14 pm to jonboy
Russia
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News