- 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
re: OT hypothetical: let’s say you wanted to conquer the ancient world
Posted on 7/19/18 at 8:54 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Posted on 7/19/18 at 8:54 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
500K Scythian Horse Lords.
From the Bible:
From the Bible:
quote:
Their quivers are like open graves; they are all mighty warriors. They will devour your harvest and food; they will consume your sons and daughters; they will eat up your flocks and herds; they will feed on your vines and fig trees. With the sword they will destroy the fortified cities in which you trust.…
1
Posted on 7/19/18 at 9:34 pm to Green Chili Tiger
Give me 500k knights of the First Crusade, led by Godfrey of Boullion. Those were some of the baddest warriors in history. They literally marched their way from Europe into Anatolia, defeated every Turkish and Muslim Army that attacked them, then captured major strongholds such as Antioch, Acre, and Jerusalem.
This post was edited on 7/19/18 at 9:36 pm
Posted on 7/19/18 at 10:18 pm to JohnnyBgood
There really is no answer other than the Mongols. Ghengis was on a war path that would have anhilated everything from Mongolia to the English Channel if he wouldn’t have croaked.
Posted on 7/19/18 at 11:01 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Obviously the answer is situational. What’s the terrain? What’s the enemy like? Are we looking for a decisive win in the field or a guerrilla campaign?
A lot of the Mongolian armies had gunpowder units so I don’t think they actually count.
An army of 10% spearmen and 90% English longbowmen fricks up a lot of ancient armies.
A lot of the Mongolian armies had gunpowder units so I don’t think they actually count.
An army of 10% spearmen and 90% English longbowmen fricks up a lot of ancient armies.
Posted on 7/19/18 at 11:54 pm to VOLhalla
quote:
An army of 10% spearmen and 90% English longbowmen fricks up a lot of ancient armies.
Yeah, 500k English longbows from Edward III time would wipe out any force, including Mongols.
Posted on 7/19/18 at 11:54 pm to JohnnyBgood
quote:
Give me 500k knights of the First Crusade, led by Godfrey of Boullion.
Bohemond was better
Posted on 7/20/18 at 12:21 am to biglego
I would like a split force...
250,000 Mongols led by Ghengis Khan
250,000 Babarians led by Hannibal
250,000 Mongols led by Ghengis Khan
250,000 Babarians led by Hannibal
Posted on 7/20/18 at 12:26 am to DannyB
quote:
250,000 Babarians led by Hannibal
Like Germanic barbarians?
Posted on 7/20/18 at 12:46 am to TigerFanInSouthland
Give me 500,000 Picts and all y'all will be painting yourselves blue in five years.
Posted on 7/20/18 at 1:50 am to TigerFanInSouthland
This is a really awesome topic and I generally love thinking about alt history or what-if’s. I read a story with a similar idea a year or two ago and it’s really awesome. It started as a simple discussion and some guy ended up writing a story about it.
Could I destroy the entire Roman Empire during the reign of Augustus if I traveled back in time with a modern U.S. Marine infantry battalion or MEU?
Could I destroy the entire Roman Empire during the reign of Augustus if I traveled back in time with a modern U.S. Marine infantry battalion or MEU?
This post was edited on 7/20/18 at 1:51 am
Posted on 7/20/18 at 2:00 am to biglego
quote:
Like Germanic barbarians?
No, Hannibal's barbarian forces.
Posted on 7/20/18 at 7:09 am to VOLhalla
quote:
Obviously the answer is situational. What’s the terrain? What’s the enemy like? Are we looking for a decisive win in the field or a guerrilla campaign?
The subject is “let’s say you wanted to conquer the whole world”
The terrain is the entire fricking world and you only have 500,000 men to do conquer it.
Posted on 7/20/18 at 7:10 am to biglego
quote:
Yeah, 500k English longbows from Edward III time would wipe out any force, including Mongols.
They don’t have the speed nor mobility that a Mongol horde has though.
Posted on 7/20/18 at 7:30 am to TigerFanInSouthland
The Mongols are as good a choice as any, but if we are talking about the whole ancient world, they would run into trouble outside of their flat, relatively dry native environment (composite bows of that era lose their effectiveness in rain and high humidity, for example). But any military out of its element would be at a disadvantage.
But tactics aside, what many in this thread are missing are the political implications of conquest. Who had the organizational and political acumen to take, hold, and rule foreign lands?
Would the Mongols be able to administrate European lands, under their system of rule?
Would a Roman system of imperial control and taxation work in China?
It's more than just tactics. That's the easy part, in my opinion.
But tactics aside, what many in this thread are missing are the political implications of conquest. Who had the organizational and political acumen to take, hold, and rule foreign lands?
Would the Mongols be able to administrate European lands, under their system of rule?
Would a Roman system of imperial control and taxation work in China?
It's more than just tactics. That's the easy part, in my opinion.
Posted on 7/20/18 at 8:39 am to SpqrTiger
quote:
But tactics aside, what many in this thread are missing are the political implications of conquest. Who had the organizational and political acumen to take, hold, and rule foreign lands?
You’re thinking way too much into this. I just said conquer it militarily, not rule over it politically.
Posted on 7/20/18 at 8:50 am to DannyB
Ok, I just never heard Hannibal’s army called barbarians.
Posted on 7/20/18 at 9:01 am to TigerFanInSouthland
quote:they destroyed French knights who rode on horseback. The think with the English long bow is that the archers would just shoot huge volleys into the sky and have them rain down on the enemy. The English archers would have a far greater range even than the Mongolian archers. Some say the longbowman could fire as far out as 3 or 400 yards.
They don’t have the speed nor mobility that a Mongol horde has though.
Posted on 7/20/18 at 11:33 am to Hawgnsincebirth55
quote:
they destroyed French knights who rode on horseback. The think with the English long bow is that the archers would just shoot huge volleys into the sky and have them rain down on the enemy. The English archers would have a far greater range even than the Mongolian archers. Some say the longbowman could fire as far out as 3 or 400 yards.
Yeah but how many Frenchmen were there riding on horseback compared to an entire people on horseback, and these horses were faster, more agile, had more stamina and the guys on their backs were the best horse-archers ever in the world.
Posted on 7/21/18 at 9:12 am to TigerFanInSouthland
quote:well in this scenario both would have 500,000 men. And the longbowman were also some of the best archers of their time
Yeah but how many Frenchmen were there riding on horseback compared to an entire people on horseback, and these horses were faster, more agile, had more stamina and the guys on their backs were the best horse-archers ever in the world.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News