Latest Diablo 3 News
DiabloWiki Updates
Support the site! Become a Diablo: IncGamers PAL - Remove ads and more!

Who would win... Caesar or Ghengis?

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Dondrei, Sep 5, 2005. | Replies: 133 | Views: 3891

  1. Dondrei

    Dondrei IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    36,856
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Who would win... Caesar or Ghengis?

    Okay, so Julius Caesar gets the sort of troops and equipment that he typically used in his day, and Ghengis Khan gets what he typically used. But Ghengis doesn't get gunpowder, that would probably tip the scales. They get forces of roughly the same strength (that's difficult to measure though...). Who would win?
     
  2. memememe173

    memememe173 IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2003
    Messages:
    9,447
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    165
    I think on just a big field, probably Julis, but I have no evidence to back me up.
     
  3. Moosashi

    Moosashi IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2003
    Messages:
    2,711
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    120
    Well, the Roman legions were known for their ability to smack down the more undisciplined barbarian hordes. I'll go with Ceasar, but I don't know all that much about the Mongols, and I just finished watching "Rome" on HBO.
     
  4. Cooked

    Cooked IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2003
    Messages:
    1,520
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    346
    Mr. Khan, I mean with a name like Ghengis he must have been teased a lot in grade school and have the meanest disposition of anyone around.
     
  5. Dondrei

    Dondrei IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    36,856
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Personally, I tend to think Caesar as well. But Ghengis Khan was not quite the sort of barbarian the Romans were used to facing. He had remarkable organisation for his time (and place). I think it would be at least a mighty battle.

    Hmm... actually to make it more interesting let's make it a whole war, not just a single battle. That way strategy comes into play.
     
  6. Dondrei

    Dondrei IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    36,856
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Well Caesar's first name was Gaius, so surely he'd be even meaner.
     
  7. memememe173

    memememe173 IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2003
    Messages:
    9,447
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    165
    My probably wrong reasoning is that I thought the hordes fought on horses, while the Romers used a lot of spears.
     
  8. Dondrei

    Dondrei IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    36,856
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Pretty much. Romans used cavalry as auxiliaries, the rank and file wielded a short javelin (pilum), a short sword (gladius) and a big rectangular shield (scutum). They'd usually chuck their javelins in the first wave and then move in in formation to use their short swords at close range.

    The Romans never seem like an impressive military force, but their strength was always organisation, tactics, strategy and teamwork. They'd work like a giant machine, grinding down much larger foreign armies. Provided they had a good leader. Often their armies would be headed by military incompetents and they'd get slaughtered.

    The Mongols I don't know so much about, except that they used cavalry extensively. I think they mostly had scimitars and little round cavalry shields. Ghengis Khan used a lot of foreign fighters in his army as well... does anyone know more about this than me?
     
  9. asdf

    asdf IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    1,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    466
    you should have thrown in alexander the great too.
     
  10. Ron Burgundy

    Ron Burgundy IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2005
    Messages:
    418
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Oh and Colonel Sanders too. We'll make it a four person Battle Royale!
     
  11. Ron Burgundy

    Ron Burgundy IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2005
    Messages:
    418
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I'm not so sure about that. I see Little Caesar countering by stabbing Khan with his trident, and when asked what he wants on his Pizza Pizza before he dies, Khan replies "Kosher pepperoni". That's when Caesar bites off Khan's face.
     
  12. Ash Housewares

    Ash Housewares IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2003
    Messages:
    21,801
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    466
    if the Romans could rather easily, with pikemen, form as such that horses would not want to charge them but... Mongols had rather proficient mounted archers which would force the Romans on the offensive rather than be bled to death by arrows and then there would be the openning for the more mobile Mongols to exploit

    furthermore, the Mongols most often gained victory as outnumbered invaders, should their numbers be similar I cannot envision victory for Caesar

    Caesar had first rate troops and artillery but the Mongols are used to fighting the odds, and I have to think they could find and exploit the weak point of their enemy

    also worth mentioning is that alot of other factors played into their successes, Caesar's politicking to divide his opponents and Khan's use of fear tactics and psychological warfare

    I could say more but we're trying to keep conditions of battle vague
     
  13. memememe173

    memememe173 IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2003
    Messages:
    9,447
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Couldn't the Roman do the "Spikey Turtle" with most of their tropps covered with shields and a bunch of speats sticking out?
     
  14. rikstaker

    rikstaker IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2004
    Messages:
    3,316
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Khan.

    Fast horses,ranged cavalry vs not so mobile heavy armoured roman legion,easy fight.

    Rik
     
  15. Ash Housewares

    Ash Housewares IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2003
    Messages:
    21,801
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    466
    testudo really doesn't give the romans much of a means of countering, and how long do they plan on maintaining it? it's very limited and while it can allow for slow paced movement towards enemy fortifications or massed bowman, with a bunch of mobile archers there's no way to win hiding, the mobility of the mongol archers negates the ability of the romans to move under fire because... where will they move to?
     
  16. zarikdon

    zarikdon IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2003
    Messages:
    326
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    62
    Genghis would slaughter a Roman Legion, whether it was led by Caesar or not. There's a reason why the Mongols overran all of China, central Asia, Russia, and Eastern Europe... their mobility (and their ability to exploit it) was entirely unprecedented. It's a good thing that Ogedei Khan coincidentally died during their invasion of Europe, or western civilization might have been set back a good hundred years. Unfortunately for Islamic civilization, Baghdad happened to be located a little more directly in the Mongols' path.
     
  17. Madness

    Madness IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    1,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Age of Empires II is fun.

    I vote for Khan.
     
  18. Dondrei

    Dondrei IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    36,856
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    467
    That's true, the mobile horse archers are an advantage for Khan. The Romans didn't have pikemen, the average legionary carried a short, stout javelin. Spears were available but they were more the weapon of the Greek phalanx. Pikes weren't invented for centuries. The lightning speed and deadly potential of the horse archers would be a major problem for him.

    The same is true for the Romans. Caesar fought all of Gaul and parts of Germany all the time heavily outnumbered. The legendary Roman general Gaius Marius fought half a million six foot tall Teutonic warriors with a fifth of their men, and crushed them.

    Caesar was legendary for the same thing.

    The Romans were extremely well trained and forces led by a powerful, charismatic general like Caesar were very hard to intimidate. I think Caesar's strategic and tactical genius would be a big factor, too. He won many a battle even against well trained, well commanded veteran Roman units, mostly because of tactical or strategic superiority.
     
  19. Dondrei

    Dondrei IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    36,856
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    467
    True, the tortoise formation would be a good way to sustain an archer attack but it wouldn't get Caesar ahead. Mind you, Caesar had encountered many and varied styles of armies in his career, and showed a remarkable ability to adapt to new tactics. He also used the terrain to gain an advantage masterfully - many times this won the battle for him. And the Romans had encountered both horse archers and guerrilla tactics before (they are even sometimes referred to as Fabian tactics, after the Roman general Fabius Maximus who used them to drive off Hannibal's enormous army). Mind you, I don't think they ever fought horse archers as powerful as Ghengis Khan's.

    Another thing the Romans have over the Mongols is their engineering skills. A well built, manned Roman fortress would be all but impenetrable to the hordes. Mongol camps and fortifications on the other hand would be a pushover for Roman artillery, sappers and plain old ingenuity.

    I think this is a pretty good match up. Each side has great strengths, and have very different styles of fighting.
     
  20. Dondrei

    Dondrei IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    36,856
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    467
    It's hard to say how well Alexander would stack up against Caesar and Khan as a general, but there is a serious gap in military technology from his time to Caesar's (not to mention Khan's). Roman armies by Caesar's time could basically tear apart your traditional Greek-style phalanx. And Greek/Macedonian troops and their allies aren't really the legendary forces the Romans and Mongols were. I considered Alexander, but in the end I decided that there were too many extra complications involved in including him.
     

Share This Page