As an unbiased bystander, I think the crusaders are better.

@jonathanthorsen7887

5 жыл бұрын

Lol same tbh

@pedrosabino8751

5 жыл бұрын

Why?

@Crmsn-qk2io

5 жыл бұрын

Crusader same

@pedrosabino8751

4 жыл бұрын

@@fawfulbenivictor5556 ah sorry. It's a little hard understand sarcasm in english comments.

@fawfulbenivictor5556

4 жыл бұрын

@@pedrosabino8751 oh it's ok I mean the joke is that his account is crusader so he's joking about the fact that he's an unbiased civilian even though his name and profile picture would betray that fact

3:31 holy cow it looks like he's holding a pistol I guess i Should've guessed a pope named urban would be packing heat

@thefinalroman

4 жыл бұрын

Dudes rocking a 1911 in 1111

@whispyrain1666

4 жыл бұрын

Maybe it is. Look up Mud Flood global reset.

@Tempusverum

3 жыл бұрын

He is holding a 🔫. BreadBoys confirmed!

@nobleman9393

3 жыл бұрын

Everyone gangsta till The Pope pulls out a gun

@jeffbezos8982

3 жыл бұрын

Of course it's an American who noticed lol😂😂

One thing that I like about Metatron is how he spends as much time focusing on the historical context of a warrior or society that creates the warrior rather than just taking the warrior in a vacuum. A warrior or the army they are a part of is an outgrowth of their society, which can do a great deal to define them and their behaviors and weapons and tactics. Very few people consider this when comparing two historical armies or warriors.

@rapidvetD

5 жыл бұрын

Peptuck and he doesn't quickly jump to conclusion

@ricardoramos1059

4 жыл бұрын

Metatron gives historical context of the topic. In this case he analysizes both crusaders and Roman legions at the peak of there respective faction ( training, weapons/armour, and tactics) but does it with neutral objectivity by this I mean he views both factions with there advantages and disadvantages present.

@whispyrain1666

4 жыл бұрын

History that is made up within a vacuum. The TV news lies to us every single day, no reason we can trust history books. AT ALL.

@sidlukkassen9687

4 жыл бұрын

This, indeed, is higher Clausewitz. No conflict can be separated strategically from the society that created the conflict, as this is what will determine morale and the length to which each side will be willing to go to in order to win.

I've got a soft spot for Crusader/Templar armour... they just look so badass with their bucket helms.

@inohalajian4151

10 ай бұрын

I'm more into Just Templar Armor Or Imperial Legion Armor.

@user-lj8gk1nv5i

6 ай бұрын

My ansectors were templars who survied the persictuition of the templars

Romans v dinosaurs

@smeghead765

5 жыл бұрын

A wild Legion appeared. The wild Legion used testudo. It's super effective! Ankylosaurus also used testudo. It's super effective! Looks like a tie to me.

@TheMteaIzLuv

5 жыл бұрын

Please do this Raf

@vojtik135

5 жыл бұрын

Let triceratops show them how to use turtle formation.

@Loromir17

5 жыл бұрын

Romans vs Dragons

@kinglouiev9530

5 жыл бұрын

Against a T-Rex the Roman needs to: A) Run to the woods 4 safe-T B) Go in a fortified camp 4 Safe-T C) Sling rocks at it like David D) Get a bigger sword

Well this is just plain unfair, the crusaders have the power of God and anime on their side

@artski09

5 жыл бұрын

\[T]/

@hypergogic3269

5 жыл бұрын

MLClone Da not anime, don't sully the the names of the crusaders

@buckleuputile2395

5 жыл бұрын

They've got Soliare and the Sun

@donbass4russia313

5 жыл бұрын

Muslim win. They are conquering all over the world

@gorilla_go_stupid

5 жыл бұрын

And the power to end them rightly

You left out the most important factor: whether the crusaders prayed their Rosary like they did in the Battle of Lepanto.

@skullheadbruv9058

Жыл бұрын

Are you stupid ? The Battle of Lepanto took place in 1571 , no crusaders , last Crusaders battle took place in 1291 , no crusaders after that year , now why praying Rosary was important ? When it comes to European history Americans always embarrassing yourselves

Here’s my guess for this series; Metatron will never allow another army to defeat the romans.

@metatronyt

5 жыл бұрын

Roman Legions vs modern tank division nuclear bombs and rifle infantry....ofcourse Roman victory :D

@user-wg1mv5hu5v

4 жыл бұрын

@@metatronyt Привет и скажи мне Был Крестовый поход на Персию🇮🇷⚔🇪🇦✝️⚔☪️Иран🇮🇷⚔🇪🇦✝️⚔☪️🇮🇶⚔🇨🇵✝️И Были там Сражений Франками-Тамплиерами🇨🇵✝️⚔Сарматами-Сарацинами🇮🇷🇮🇶☪️

@TheColombianSpartan

3 жыл бұрын

@@metatronyt The Romans will call upon their Gods and annihilate their foes! Alternatively they would adapt and _become Gods_

@the1009998

3 жыл бұрын

Not even other romans

Do Roman Legion VS Mongol Horde, it’d be very interesting!

@Dragons_Armory

5 жыл бұрын

forgetting the (as Mushu said:) Hunny buns?

@56k35

5 жыл бұрын

Dragon's Armory Are you referencing the Huns? Or something else.

@321AlterSchwede

5 жыл бұрын

You can see this Scenario at the endless roman-persian wars. Persian warfare is close to those of the mongols, with slightly more infantry. The romans had problems against horse-archers.

@Dragons_Armory

5 жыл бұрын

Huns, yep

@cembuyukalpelli8194

5 жыл бұрын

The cheeky Inquisitor in my opinion mongols would have won if Terreian was flat and dry also in my opinion is the cenghis khan best commander in world all time(his tactics even influenced USA aviation tactics) he started biological and physiological war if cenghis Khan was the commander they wouldn't have any chance

Try Alexander the Great vs Julius Caesar

@fathel9221

5 жыл бұрын

Carsar would win

@FilipMoncrief

5 жыл бұрын

That would be interesting af

@MrAlepedroza

5 жыл бұрын

UpperRobin29 Please notice this comment Metatron. I have been looking long for a vid discussing this.

@kwameankomah6366

5 жыл бұрын

Julius Caesar would win because he was more advance than Alexander the great. Pompey used Alexander the great's tactics against Caesar but was defeated by the Roman Pilum. Alexander has no answer for the Roman pilum. Caesar hurled pilums and javelins at pompey's cavalry causing it to flee. also consider that Caesar studies Alexander the great's tactics.

@primalforlorn

5 жыл бұрын

Obviously using a well known old tactic against a military genius who knows Alexander very well would result in failure. The key of this battle is whoever can exploit their advantages the most, what can Alexander do to Caesar’s fortified position when his pikemen don’t work out on uneven grounds or if Caesar can outmanoeuvre Alexander’s army with companion cavalry guarding its flank. If they are somehow evenly matched in cunning and fight in open battle , I would say it is a draw. Despite Caesar’s more flexible infantry can defeat a normal Macedonian army, but against the well drilled and battle hardened Alexander’s army, outflanking may proved to be impossible. However, Alexander cannot utilise his cavalry with its full potential against Caesar’s legion as Caesar always had reserves units in the back so hammer and avail may not be used effectively without being pelted by pilas. With both sides unable to effectively exploit their opponents’ weakness, the ones with stronger willpower to fight on attraction, better body conditioning and superior reactions on the commanders( not just Alexander and Ceasar, but also the commanders of each division who react to the surrounding changes) will emerge victorious

I've always wondered how the legions would match against other types of armies in later history. Thank you for covering this.

This is a very hard comparison to do since many medieval armies varied so much between locations with what their armies would be equipped with, hows they fight and the amount of actual professional men vs levies. Good video and I think you did a fantastic job.

Why does Pope Urban II wield a handgun? 3:30

@namelessman8097

5 жыл бұрын

Silen I think that's just a bad drawn finger.

@Silen00

5 жыл бұрын

What the hell, when I look at the picture I keep seeing a pistol for some reason. Clearly there's something wrong with me...

@namelessman8097

5 жыл бұрын

Silen no, I see it very clearly too .-.

@benerdick_cumberbiatch

5 жыл бұрын

Silen proof time travel exists.

@nokuhobune

5 жыл бұрын

indeed he was preparing to bust a cap in arab ass

You forgot to mention crusaders have the special move DEUS VULT, which smites all non christian foot soldiers and cavalry on the field. Its actually pretty one sided.

@Alaryk111

5 жыл бұрын

But what if legionaries were Christians?

@FilipMoncrief

5 жыл бұрын

all foes except sons of ares

@hugogh3507

5 жыл бұрын

Yeah but they can just counter with ROMA INVICTA or something like that

@sejfzlrrhman

5 жыл бұрын

But we Muslims won the crusades.

@tadhgknight3484

5 жыл бұрын

TheWisePaladin Oof

Youre awesome man!! Keep spreading our history in cool and dynamic ways :)

AWESOME ! thanks metatron , i love your videos . Keep em coming .

Monty python: The quest for the life of Brian

@sargemooseriders6338

5 жыл бұрын

the time is now!

@waitwhat1264

2 жыл бұрын

Weleash Woger! Weleash Woger! Weleash Woger!Weleash Woger!

Byzantines vs 1st century romans

@HolyknightVader999

5 жыл бұрын

1st century Romans, unless the Byzantines use Greek Fire and Latinkon.

@yehudasam

4 жыл бұрын

@@HolyknightVader999 you mean wildfire

@heeheeee9451

3 жыл бұрын

Byzantines were bad and evil

@helium-379

3 жыл бұрын

@@heeheeee9451 So was every nation that ever existed. Evil deeds must be done for the survival of a society. We arent "morally superior" because we dont stoop to the levels they have. Different times call for different actions.

@louisvictor3473

3 жыл бұрын

So Romans vs Romans. Sounds like a tie to me.

The way you just don’t go and say they will win or that is why they would win is great. You make good points for both sides as to who would win. It’s so accurate of a way of doing these matchups. Love your channel and your work as always my friend, keep up your passion.

This was all very well said. Nice work man.

Roman Legion vs White Hand Orcs of Saruman the White. The Romans might find it hard at first to fend off the thick armour of the Uruk-Hai

@InSanic13

5 жыл бұрын

Well, you would first need to specify whether or not this encounter would utilize movie-logic, given that the Uruk armor was depicted as utterly useless in the movie (being casually pierced by arrows and cut through by the heroes, etc.).

@Litany_of_Fury

5 жыл бұрын

Good point. Plot armour aside (plot armour is bad for the bad guys) the defenders of Helms Deep seemed to believe the Orcs armour was extremely thick and it looked it too. Not to mention the Orcs had crossbows.

@InSanic13

5 жыл бұрын

Honestly, it doesn't make any sense for them to use crossbows. Longbows are easier to make and Uruks have the strength to use them.

@Litany_of_Fury

5 жыл бұрын

Too aggressive to aim maybe?

@Litany_of_Fury

5 жыл бұрын

I do think the romans would adapt to the armour of the Orcs but at the same time have a problem with the main weapons of the Orcs (Pike and Zombie Machete) The sword of the White Orc has a hook on it meaning they can pull shields aside and let the pikemen stab the romans to death.

Very nice and good Considered Video! Im not shure who wood win... But Idea for a new Video:Early Imperial Roman Legion Against A Chinese Army from the Same Time? ( i dont know the Dynasty Of Emperors in this Time on China)

@babiecathegreat163

5 жыл бұрын

Hannes That would be the Han dynasty (If we are talking about Rome during Pax Romana)

@HK_S4A

5 жыл бұрын

Babieca! Okay Thank you!

@chaosvolt

5 жыл бұрын

I second this, it'd be a very interesting scenario given they had some vague awareness of each other.

@HK_S4A

5 жыл бұрын

Chaosvolt Yes Ist true i think In Han records was written about Emperor Ant-un (Probably Antonius Pius) From the Western Empire

@JustGrowingUp84

5 жыл бұрын

Metatron has a video listing all the Chinese dynasties, it's quite cool.

Great video. I love history. This speculation on warfare is very intriguing.

Very nice video straight to the point and still entertaining great job thank you

Damnit, Metatron. You're like an NPC.

@namelessman8097

5 жыл бұрын

Anders Engman why tho?

@andersengman3896

5 жыл бұрын

It's the cool lighting and the serious tone. Looks like he's got a sidequest for us.

@namelessman8097

5 жыл бұрын

Anders Engman xD

@smack6564

5 жыл бұрын

Well as far as everyone but him is concerned, he is.

@rodom303

5 жыл бұрын

Anders Engman truuuuuuuuuue

What about a Roman Legion vs a katana?

@Dragons_Armory

5 жыл бұрын

Katana, duh Katanas melts jet fuel

@CheefCoach

5 жыл бұрын

Entire legion versus single Katana (whiteout of Samurai).:D

@MarcosZilio

5 жыл бұрын

The Katana won, all romans kill thenselves trying to take it

@nokuhobune

5 жыл бұрын

what about a stick stick win everytime

@maelgugi

5 жыл бұрын

Nonbisco, Provider of Cancer *a single pommel thrower There's no way you'll need more than one pommel

I just discovered your videos. Very wonderful! Excellent perspectives and thoughts! Thank you very much for making these videos!

@metatronyt

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you very much for watching

I was critical about your previous video. This time however, I think you made a well ballanced story. I enjoyed it. One point I missed again is the comparison of the organisational structures. The effect of feudalism.

The legion vs the NCR.

@donaxtrunculus5023

5 жыл бұрын

Paulius Smirnovas Ave, true to Caesar.

@IsaacClarke39

5 жыл бұрын

Paulius Smirnovas A fight so ferocious that it makes you wish for a nuclear winter

@SuperGman117

5 жыл бұрын

I say NCR wins. Even their crappy standard-issue Service Rifles are enough to mow down a charging wave of Legionaries when massed.

@SuperGman117

5 жыл бұрын

Even ignoring the realistic outcome of the most basic NCR troops being able to produce a sizable storm of bullets and mowing down pretty much everything short of a centurion, even in the game, NCR troopers are better than legionaries. Maybe not in their stats, but in overall combat effectiveness, NCR troops always win when put up against legion troops with similar roles. Yes, the NCR is stretched thin, but even in the event that the Legion should take the dam, they'd have a hard time taking Vegas and the various NCR bases throughout the Mojave, After taking as many losses as they would from the Dam battle, an NCR counter-attack would certainly be likely. There are enough troops in the Mojave to potentially even take the eastern side of the river, but they're stretched thin trying to take care of everything. In the case of a Legion takeover of the Dam, though, they'd no doubt set aside their smaller problems and prevail once again. Even if the Legion should take Vegas and the rest of the playable area in F:NV, there's no doubt that the NCR and many of the surrounding states, some of them being no friend of the Republic, would go into overdrive to ensure their survival against those crazies in the Legion. Plus, Caesar could die from brain cancer at any time, and nobody in his Legion is an equal to him. The Legion is kept together by fear, and most of all they fear Caesar. Without him, civil war is inevitable, and it's very likely the less clever Lanius would win due to his martial prowess, making the Legion even less sophisticated. A coalition of western states would likely then sweep through the Mojave territory, retaking it and even giving the NCR a better level of control than they had before, since in this scenario, House would've been defeated by the Legion.

@SuperGman117

5 жыл бұрын

Discipline and training aren't everything. The game and its engine reflect a realistic result of a firing line of soldiers with semi-automatic rifles versus a charging mob with only a few guns and mostly machetes and spears. Ever heard of the Anglo-Zulu War? The Battle of Rorke's Drift? While it is true that the discipline of the British was superior, they also didn't have semi-automatic weapons. Discipline is certainly a good thing, but it's only really as paramount as you suggest in older types of warfare. Actually, I don't think you understand guns at all. Some makeshift football armor isn't going to protect against a speeding bullet. Humans also don't use HP in real life. If you get hit at all, you're pretty much out of the fight. You might not die, but there's no way you're going to effectively fight the enemy unless you have some other advantages. Realistically, the NCR would be *even more* effective than they are in-game. As I said, if the Legion starts taking over the Mojave, it would force tons of other states to ally themselves with the NCR, and it would also get the NCR to go into full crisis mode, total war mode. Nobody wants to be taken over by the Legion. If the NCR retreats, then that minimizes losses of both manpower and equipment, and they both wouldn't have to recover that much and wouldn't be leaving as much equipment for the Legion to steal. Nobody is going to be prioritizing some petty bullshit over stopping a horrifying enemy from slaughtering a significant amount of the population and enslaving the rest. The Legion would end up facing a coalition consisting of most, if not all of the factions west of the Mojave region. Believe it or not, there's a lot of potential power in the NCR. It has a lot of citizens, a lot of territory, and a lot of resources. Pretty much all of that is going to be used against the Legion if they become a big enough threat. Also, the nuclear holocaust wasn't because of the failures of democracy or whatever bullshit Caesar told you. The war started because of limited resources, plain and simple. It wasn't a problem on America's part; America still had the best living conditions of any nation on the planet, and hadn't even been doing anything aggressive until they fought China, which was when they annexed Canada, for example. It's very heavily implied that the nuclear exchange wasn't even brought about by human hands at all, but rather by the Zetans.

Great vid as always, Rafaello. I would like to elaborate a bit more in a strictly tactical level: Roman infantry would be better armored, drilled, led and be more flexible than their crusader counterparts, being able to redeploy cohorts of legionaries to wherever weak point that might appear in the infantry line. The crusader infantry, however, could be very disciplined under capable commanders such as Richard the Lionheart, and would be armed mostly with spearmen, similar to those who forced the romans to change the equipment of legionaries by the 4rth century, since the germanic spearmen were able to hit and and decimate the legionaries from a longer range in melee (if I recall well). Eventually, the reinforcement cohorts might not have been enough and a weak point might have appeared in the roman infantry line, which might have been exploited to terrible effect by the crusader cavalry, which was heavier and more powerful than any heavy cavalry the romans faced in their times. A flanking maneuver performed by the crusader would have ideally been stopped by roman cavalry (equites), but they were ill equipped to face the much better armored crusader knights. Overall, not saying the romans would have definitely lost, but they would not have had as many advantages as people think, at least in a single PITCHED BATTLE, not necessarily a war . They would have had a hard time against the descendants of the barbarian foes that once made their empire fall (not saying it was the only cause).

You get the thumbsup for clearly stating your sources, already. Independent of the conclusions this is more than I am used to on youtube (or any current media). Tanks for being professional.

Hello mr Raphael, your videos are the most delightful stuff to watch Greetings from Mexico

Two of my favourite militaries, fighting each other. What a time to be alive

Would love to see you do a Roman army from the Princapate vs Roman army post Diocletian/Constantine reforms

Good video, I came across this in my recommendations you got a new subscriber

Another thoughtful analysis.

The people’s cruzade was more a pilgrimage than an army

I’d love to see 1st century Romans vs Belisarius’ army which retook rome. It’ll be interesting to see whether the Roman army changed for the worse or the better over the centuries

I liked this episode better, well thought-out!

"welcome back to my channel" bud it's been a while, and i come back... and you have a BADASS video. jesus i've missed this channel

Well, I would be interested in Greek or Macedonian army vs 16th century European army. You know, cassical vs reinaissence period. (I would also like to see Roman vs 16th century army)

@duchessskye4072

5 жыл бұрын

The greeks would stand no chance against the pike&shot formations of the renaissance

@Velkan1396

5 жыл бұрын

Draugr_the_Greedy they definitely would't, but I think that what gives the upper hand to the 16th century army is the artillery.

@Velkan1396

5 жыл бұрын

DanHil399 Yes I mostly agree, but I am interested on seeing a viddo about it anyway. And yes, firearms are what gives the upper hand to the Renaissance armies, the artillery would definitely outstand (I hope the usage of this word is correct here) the ancient warriors. But, it wpuld be interesting anyway. Also while it's true that in 16th century the plate armor is still a thing most wealthy combatants (not knights) usually choosed to wear 3/4 harness, without mail, and the most"pour" of the soldiers would not wear much more protection than a helmet and a cuirass (sometimes even without the backplate) so, I think that the close cuarters combat would maybe be more balanced than we may assume'

Early Imperial Roman vs Qin China

@wisdomleader85

5 жыл бұрын

No, I don't want his channel to be spammed by an army of butthurt "know-it-all" Chinese trolls.

@wisdomleader85

5 жыл бұрын

Mehmet Mohammed I do, which is why I know my people better than most other non-Chinese do.

@ScreamBloodyGwar

5 жыл бұрын

I think Qin is a little too early, I think Tang might be better, i was gonna say Song but I heard the Song didn’t have as good military organization

@nathanb.8114

5 жыл бұрын

@@wisdomleader85 Chinese people are weird. They even say bad things about Chinese people themselves, and how "disgusting" they are even if their Chinese too.

Love your content, thank you.

I love your detailed account of ancient/medieval warfare. However many channels cover the same subjects Vikings, Romans, Samurai, Crusaders, Spartans ect. I would love to hear you talk about the lesser known warriors/warfare of the ancient/medieval era. It almost seems like nothing was going on in the Americas or in the southern half of Africa before colonial times. I love the amount of research you do into these subjects and really feel I can trust the information i receive. Keep up the good work!

@Metatron Nice Video! I agree, the Roman Legion would be in general advantage against a Crusader Army, especially through their training, tactics and their general versatility. Let's not forget the really well equipped Crusader Knights where just a small part of an Crusader Army. Someday when run out of ideas for real world armies, you could do Orcs (Tolkien) vs. Roman Legion, just for the fun of it.

@harkonnentruppen4094

4 жыл бұрын

No dude, a Roman Catholic Crusader Army will demolish any ancient army from the Iron Age. The tactics were different, the Warfare was different it was more advanced. The Middle Ages people have tried experimenting with the legions and failed because of shock cavalry. Shock cavalry is something it was truly invented in medieval Europe where Knights and heavy Cavalry men were able to smash through ranks of soldiers, that didn't exist in the ancient times.

@reidf8506

4 жыл бұрын

Harkonnen Truppen How do you think a cavalry charge into a block of highly trained and disciplined heavy infantry would go. Just ask Darius of Persia about his chariot charge into the front of the Macedonian phalangites.

@harkonnentruppen4094

4 жыл бұрын

@@reidf8506 against a wall of troops? For the mounted Knights/Man-At-Arms pretty dam good. If they had plate very successful. Chariots were already obsolete in Europe by 1000 BC. Heavy infantry as well as normal cavalry made cherriots obsolete. Knights are a different Soldier/Warrior all together though. A mounted knight's lance was about 14-18 foot long being about 5-8 lbs. 13th century Knights were fully mail armor and the horses will often have some kind of quilted sometimes mail armor, charging almost knee to knee in a formation smashing into the block of troops running them over... Knights where one big very heavily-armored, very mobile, fast moving phalanx on horseback. Something like that had never existed before the Middle Ages, heck, it barely existed outside of Europe. European heavy Cavalry successfully engaging pikes in the battles of Seminara, Ravenna, Marciano etc. Roman Catholic Crusader armies plowed through Muslim infantry like nothing where you can have around 300 to 800 mounted Knights that was capable of defeating 2000 to 4000 infantry men.

@harkonnentruppen4094

4 жыл бұрын

Not really, the Crusader Army was pretty well-equipped depending on the Army though. But generally speaking most Crusader armies were pretty well-equipped, medium and heavy infantry troops was very common for the Crusader Army and most European armies especially Western Europe while much later on it was common in Eastern Europe too. As for the Romans don't get me wrong there military is amazing and I think the Imperial Roman army can easily make a run of their money. I think the Romans still have a possibility of winning against such an army because of how organized, amazing generals, and disciplined as well as the Romans are very well equipped. Saying that the Crusader Army can thrash any Iron Age Army it's just the Romans, and Macedonians/Greeks will be a much tougher cookie to break. The Han Empire, ancient Egyptians, ancient India, Huns, and others will be a piece of cake for a Roman Cathlic Crusader army.

@forickgrimaldus8301

3 жыл бұрын

Depends on who are leading think of the 2 as a steamroller rts faction (Crusaders) and a balanced rts faction (Legions)

The Zulus under Shaka vs The Egyptians at their peak.

@EEYore-py1bf

5 жыл бұрын

All Shaka came up with was basic flanking and he made his spears act similar to a Roman gladius. No technology whatsoever. The Egyptians would have completely smashed the Zulus.

@FoundWanting970

5 жыл бұрын

Chariots would send them running!

@tuxedosteve1904

5 жыл бұрын

The zulu are extremly primitive Ancient Egyptian's would wipe their ass.

@misterlove7895

2 жыл бұрын

Egypt had Mamluks lol, Zulu get annihilated easily

Came here from legion vs agincourt army haha awesome videos man! A condottiere vid would be cool

This was a very fascinating and astute explanation on the differences of strategy. I really think that the majority of Roman superiority in their military was the combination of them being a Professional and Highly Trained / Disciplined Army but coupled with the fact that their motivations and goals of Romans were far more Noble and unifying in scope for what they sought to achieve than many of the rivals that they encountered, of which some were just warlike or aimless in their fighting, only concerned with the moment. That being said, Metatron, I do have a request, I would love to see you do a video explanation sometime comparing both the fighting strategies of Romans vs the Gauls and the descriptions of their encounters and the Love-Hate Relationship between the Romans and Gauls. Because the Gauls have always been known for being very warlike, primitive and a bunch of simple-minded craftsmen who never had a higher order of state, and would become defensive against anything such as the highly organized state that Rome was. The Gauls (even today Celts and Scottish Highlanders) always have very unstable personalities and start in-fighting any time order or aristocratic leadership begins to form. They were vicious fighters however, but man those Gauls really had nothing to live for except for whatever spoils they could get from war, since war was their main career!

Speaking of Byzantium, I'd love to hear you talk about Flavius Belisarius.

Any chance you would want to do some videos about the Kingdom of Bohemia and that era? Before, after the hussite wars, etc..

Really enjoying the new series quite intellectually stimulating. How about early Roman republic armies vs. Egyptian armies at the height of their military power

Like! Well researched.

1st Century Roman Legion vs late Yayoi Period Japanese Army or Roman Legion vs late Han-Dynasty Army

@valorwarrior7628

5 жыл бұрын

Romans vs Yayoi Period Army, LOL! that would be a massacre to the Japanese, though Romans and the late Han-Dynasty Army would be a perfect balance.

@porygonyt8014

5 жыл бұрын

wtf. Just because they're the same century doesn't mean they're equal. Yayoi wouldn't stand chance.

An army commanded by Alexander the Great vs an army commanded by Sun Tzu would be interesting

Nice video Raph.

Epic video !!

Saladin forces would be interesting, I'm totally not biased by my study of the near East 1080-1205

I'd LOVE to see a battle of The Roman Empire/Republic v.s Japan. The time period would be during the period of Mongol invasions that were destroyed by the Divine Wind.

@PajamaJazama

5 жыл бұрын

Kind of a bad period considering they'd both be run down by mongols as soon as they tried to fight lol. Japan wouldn't stand a chance against Rome though, they had nothing akin to the kind of drilling and organization the Romans acquired through centuries of being invaded.

Love the Shad reference!!😂😂 I do feel you mis-spelled 'dragons' a little bit, though...

Great video

Here is one to imagine: put a legion on Senlac Hills near Hastings facing William the Bastard and his Franco-Norman bunch. Assume that the Legion has just completed a 320km in seven days.

Who would win in a fight? An army of knights with swords or a bunch of Bois with pointy sticks

@maelgugi

5 жыл бұрын

No this is Patrick Who'd win, a knight or a rabbit?

@maxflow151

5 жыл бұрын

I'm voting for the pokey bois

@nothisispatrick4644

5 жыл бұрын

Depends if the knight has the holy hand grenade or not

@juanfranciscocosta5387

5 жыл бұрын

It depends, are they Japanese pointy bois?

@Sawtooth44

5 жыл бұрын

sorry that my grenade ill be having that back now

Your best video ever!

@metatronyt

5 жыл бұрын

Thanks!

Ahhh Metatron you are a wise man! The logistican likes to talk tactics where the tactician talks logistics. And your reference to a Calvary attack was called a Squadron Charge. Excellent commentary!

i imagine both armies ordering "Rrrrrrrrroman Catapult!"

From a retired U.S. MARINE I would like to see the Roman Legions of the Pax Romana and the Han dynasty. I would really like to hear your views on that one.

@protikdatta8716

5 жыл бұрын

Thank you for your service mate!

@monsimix6839

4 жыл бұрын

Fuck Off killer

@ZeroGaming-el7yt

4 жыл бұрын

monsimix lmao, being a marine doesn’t make you a killer, your a fool🙃

@averagewikipediaenthusiast3088

4 жыл бұрын

I would like to see the marines shooting at the Romans.

would be cool if you did two distinct versions of the scenarios - one with realistic numbers for the armies each could field, and one where the gap is somewhat controlled. give the most likely scenario and, also an alternate in which the other side could win. would be more interesting if you delved a bit into the specific tactics one might see.

Looking slick metatron!

Romans vs Romans! A "classic" Roman army as discussed here vs one with late imperial weapons and organization

Of course you didn't match Romans aganist the best, in my opinion, overall Crusader Army. That of the Third Crusade.

@forickgrimaldus8301

3 жыл бұрын

Same problems just a more central command chain unfortunately.

Roman Vs The Han Chinese ,by the way good video with a good explanation of asymmetric warfare .

Thank you for the pretty pictures

Romans Vs LandsKanecht/ Swiss mercenaries

@SuperGman117

5 жыл бұрын

Landsknecht*

@finnianquail8881

5 жыл бұрын

@Marcus Tullius Already happened in real life

@Kolchak_Enjoyer

3 жыл бұрын

Swiss mercenaries can still beat they're ass up

Romans VS The Vikings would be awesome.

@theghosthero6173

5 жыл бұрын

presley baldwin vikings would loose. They are very similar to Celt, and only have more helmet at most. Even their boat would be inferior in naval warfare

@namelessman8097

5 жыл бұрын

Already done.. Go check it out

@presleybaldwin3756

5 жыл бұрын

The GhostHero I know, I thought it would be nice to hear the particulars as they were both powerful forces in their times.

@cobraglatiator

5 жыл бұрын

>"The Vikings"

@Beardshire

5 жыл бұрын

Celtic tribes sacked Rome though.

I love your videos.

Thumbs up for using Mandalorian new crusaders in the end there. Also triple battle the Byzantine Empire vs the Roman Empire vs the Holy Roman empire.

this shouldve been on tv instead of that "the deadliest warrior" as entertaining as it was, this is simply better on all terms except production value and revenue

OK, So what you are saying is that if Romans would be fortified in their own teritory fighting against starved crusader army, which was harrased by them for many months in inhospitable terain, they would have a chance.

@psynyder

5 жыл бұрын

THIS IS TOO ON POINT.

@darking30

5 жыл бұрын

No, hes saying, that u have to take context in consideration, history isnt that simple like a video game where armies spawn from nowhere and dont feed etc etc. IF u read history u will find that like metatron explained most crusaders armies relied more on fanatism than in logistics, standarized gear, adaptation capability or strategy, meanwhile the romans are the full opposite, so in a context scenario, the roman army will be all full geared, most crusader wont, roman army will be well fed and healty, the crusader armies wont, and i can keep going on examples. Btw, the harrasment dosent even have to be from the romans, most medieval armies, since werent abel to fed their numbers, traveled in smaller groups, and smaller groups, are more likely to be assaulted by bandits, get in to traps, get lose etc etc, unlike romans that with better logictics travelled toghether, almost always ready to fight. Also most crusader armies were bolstered in numbers with fanatics peasants, unarmed or poorly, with 0 trainning, and in the otherside u have a trained seasoned profesional soldier, again if u check history most battles where 2 armies with this characteristics clashed the most organized, almost always won, so is a pretty safe bet here.

@erickolb8581

5 жыл бұрын

Mercenary maxim #47: "Don't expect the enemy to cooperate in your dream engagement." schlockmercenary.wikia.com/wiki/The_Seventy_Maxims_of_Maximally_Effective_Mercenaries And of course any one/many of these.... www.itstactical.com/intellicom/mindset/murphys-laws-of-combat-operations/

@td9250

5 жыл бұрын

An army of fanatics willing to die for God should an easy target for a civilization of luxury? If we are taking all the armies into account, let's count the militia and auxiliaries of Rome as well. Paid mercenaries too. Romans would be hungry as well, if they massed dumb, underdeveloped fanatics and wild folk. Romans vs Crusaders is like West vs Al Qaeda, if you'd not count the air force.

@nicholasavasthi9879

5 жыл бұрын

Logistics is one of the most important parts of warfare as we see time and again throughout history and as such any assessment of how good or bad an army was needs to take into account the efficacy of its logistical systems and its ability to maintain supply lines. The Crusaders were extremely bad at this and had several near brushes with starvation. The Roman legions by contrast rarely had such issues, especially to the extremes to which the crusaders had them. So yes this does assume that the crusaders were half starved, because in truth they often were, supplies being a problem for most of the crusade after the siege of Nicia especially during the sieges of Antioch and Jerusalem, arguably the most important battles in the crusade.

Yes. Please do Romans vs Mongols. Thanks! Great, informative video by the way.

A while ago you made a video about Date Masamune. Can you please do a sort of series maybe on famous generals/figures of the Sengoku era or events short after or prior, like a video on Yukimura Sanada? Thank you!

The classical 16 Century Japanese Army vs the 16 Century European Army... another one that would be interesting would be a Polish-Lithuanian Army ( - Cannons) vs a Greek Phalanx (classical, possibly Spartan.)

@alejandrosilva528

5 жыл бұрын

Canons would smash any pike or phalanx formations. Its an absurd fight

@lordkebab8898

4 жыл бұрын

Both of those suggestions are a bit stupid. The Japanese would be soundly defeated, with europeans taking very few casualties, and cannons vs phalanx, you can just picture how that would go.

@gerfand

4 жыл бұрын

@@lordkebab8898 its funny how both of you did not understand I said that they would be no cannons. Also, not really, specially if we talking about someone like Oda.

DEUS VULT!

@gorilla_go_stupid

5 жыл бұрын

WE WILL TAKE JERUSALEM

@fanta4897

5 жыл бұрын

*DEVS VVLT

@DeusVultBellator

5 жыл бұрын

DEUS VULT INTENSIFIES

@lars9925

5 жыл бұрын

In medieval latin it's DEUS LO VULT. Why does the English-speaking world always forget the "LO"? DEUS VULT is classical latin.

@caper963

5 жыл бұрын

Lars Deus lo vult ? This sentence even doesn't exist. Deus lo volt*. And both Deus Vult and Deus lo volt are latin.

Great video, video suggestion with the new faction coming to For Honor who would win in a war Samurai or the Wu-Lin?

I hoped that you would also discuss the Third Crusade. In fact, give them Commanders. It would be interesting to discuss Caesar versus Richard the lionheart

Agreed with logistics. You missed the Navy. That would make the difference. Rome navy was significant in wars against Carthage, cutting supplies, etc and would be decisive against these seafaring Crusaders.

What is your main in for honor?

@namelessman8097

5 жыл бұрын

Deus Vult?!

@sebastianmartin4704

5 жыл бұрын

I think he mentioned some time ago it was Kensei (this was back before Kensei's rework).

@templarking6819

5 жыл бұрын

Valk 😢

Mi permetto di scriverti in italiano dato che condividiamola stessa nazionalità! Mi piacciono tanto i tuoi video; prova a rendere questi scenari concreti inventandoti una campagna militare ed una battaglia. Non so come spiegarlo: prova a creare situazioni in questo scenario che possano anche creare discussioni, insomma prova ad andare avanti oltre le conclusioni che trai. Comunque sia ottimo lavoro, continua così!

Really nice video, I've been kinda using this and your Roman vs Medieval army as some inspiration for a tabletop I'm working on and off on. I liked the humans being inspired by Rome and how that worked, but was uncertain if they could hold up in medieval times, then the new world it takes place in is inspired by South-East Asian (mostly Japanese, some Chinese and occasional other areas) mythology and folk stories. There just aren't too many organized armies like Rome had if you don't want to move too far into the renaissance or even later I feel. Which is a problem since my group don't want to have guns in their fantasy...

DUES VULT HERITIC

@videtowitelpavo

5 жыл бұрын

DEUS VULT

@juanfranciscocosta5387

5 жыл бұрын

Let me send you a couple of Allahu Akbars

@Sawtooth44

5 жыл бұрын

*comes in with the Lion King and the Knights of the Round Table* Lion King: Rhongomyniad! *blows away both factions and builds Camelot where Jerusalem was*

@darkdawnbringer

5 жыл бұрын

We shall take Jerusalem, DEUS VULT.

@ArthaxtaDaVince777

5 жыл бұрын

BrownBricks DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULTDEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT DEUS VULT

Roman Army vs. Mauryan Empire (India) or perhaps Gupta Empire I know so little about Indian history even though it's ridiculously bloody. Anyone who wages so much war must have really good warriors, no?

@babiecathegreat163

5 жыл бұрын

Yaldabaoth I would explain why The Gupta Empire would fall to Rome but I'll just say this; Out of Almost every Foreign Invasion that has happened in India, the Invaders were successful. The Indian subcontinent has a Historically poor Military record. Hell the Gupta empire would fall at the sight a few Legions, because It was built like a Haphazard House of Cards. Thats a good analogy for most Empires Based in India, Be it the Guptas, the Delhi Sultanate, or the Mughals .

@daksheshghildiyal

5 жыл бұрын

Babieca! Maybe you've forgotten that Alexander the great gave up on conquering India.

@babiecathegreat163

5 жыл бұрын

Dakshesh Ghildiyal because his Soldiers refused to go any further

@daksheshghildiyal

5 жыл бұрын

Babieca! His soldiers wanted to go home after they heard of the hundred of thousands of warriors and thousands of war elephants the Indian kingdoms had, who had united against Alexander at that point.

@daksheshghildiyal

5 жыл бұрын

Babieca! To return to your original post, it seems you have little to no knowledge of Indian military history. Whenever a strong empire ruled India, we have never been conquered. In fact, the country's borders went upto Afghanistan, and at time Indochina. You said that any major invasion against India has been successful, which is untrue as every time they country was invaded, there was no central authority in charge and the country was comprised of weak, squabbling kingdoms. Italy was similarly weak, being invaded and ruled by the Greeks, Normans , the Muslims, ostrogoths etc. In fact, Rome itself was sacked many times during the existence of the Roman empire.

Metatron, thanks for making history interesting and FUN!!! And not just this video, of course!

I think this series would benefit from picking specific legions with specific generals to go against specific opposing armies with their own specific generals, because you spent a lot of time outlining what a generic composite force of each would be, and pretty much concluded that it would be a toss up favouring one or the other depending on variables. I'd suggest something like William the Conqueror vs Julius Caesar, both with the forces they brought to invade England.

Legion ftw. I find those who fixate on medieval knights, their armor and longsword as an argument for how the cruaders > the Roman legions to be rather funny. An analogue to medieval crusader army could include the armies of Armenia during the times of the Roman Empire. I mean they had extremely heavy cavalry for the time and had solid infantry. But the Romans still would prevail though. Mid- late Roman legions would be familiar fighting against heavy cataphracts and horse archers like those fielded by the Parthians and Sassanians.

@SuperGman117

5 жыл бұрын

Being disciplined and adaptable on the strategic scale doesn't make it easy to defeat full armor.

@Neion8

5 жыл бұрын

There's also the fact that when you're talking about the tech gap, there is such a thing as crossbows; not something that was often deployed in the medieval period as their use on Catholics was banned by the pope, but a Crusader army that's unsure of the religious background of the army they're facing would have them and likely use em, and then you're talking about a fairly decent proportion of the army wielding long-range weapons that would slaughter the out-ranged auxiliaries and, depending on which crusade, either seriously hurt, or downright puncture the lorica segmentata and kill any soldier it hits, while messing up the arm of any shield it hits (especially if volleys of fire hit multiple times per man). This, combined with the threat of a cavalry charge, would slow any attempt to close the gap to a steady walk under a testudo , making any kind of advance slow, harrowing, and demoralising. This not even mentioning the golden rule of combat; out-ranging and out-manoeuvring the opponent is key - so unless they're guarding some kind of fort (in which case, they have an even greater advantage, I shouldn't need to say why), they'll likely adapt to the Roman formation and use their superior range and superior mobility to harass, retreat and wear down the legion; only committing an attack with their armoured knights once their foes are exhausted. Also, Parthian horse archers are a bad comparison, as not only are their shortbows less powerful than a standard infantry longbow, but they are nothing compared to the crossbows which have more power and range than anything the Romans have ever faced outside of siege engines. Moreover, any general or war-leader of those time periods would have studied Roman tactics and learnt/figured out counter-plays, nullifying Rome's tactical advantage. And that's not even mentioning how a combination of billhook/halberds and spears would affect a roman formation.

@LoyaltyasHonor

5 жыл бұрын

Neion8 you can't nullify Rome's tactical advantage by saying medieval commanders would have studied them. That breaks the entire thought experiment. You have to assume that the two warring factions exist at the same time without prior knowledge of each other. Basic logic in a thought experiment.

@theholyinquisition389

5 жыл бұрын

Depends in the commander, e.g Richard the Lionheart or Barbarossa against someone like Bibulus or Varus would be a stomp for the crusaders.

@HolyknightVader999

5 жыл бұрын

You obviously didn't study the arms and armor of the Crusaders. Crusaders were covered in full-body chainmail, whereas Roman Legions only had torso plate armor. Crusaders also have crossbows that can puncture through plate armor. Heavy cataphracts had scale armor which was nowhere near as good as the chain mail armor of the Crusader cavalry, who have stirrups that can allow them to charge at full gallop. Also, Medieval warlords and military leaders have also studied Roman tactics and warfare extensively, so they already know most of the moves that the Legionnaires will pull. In fact, Roman war manuals were a must-read for many Medieval nobles and kings.

Imagine a legion of Romans vs. The Great Heather Army

It would have been interesting to include a post 1st Crusade army aswell and to consider how the general lack of discipline (when compared to Roman Legions) could be balanced out by sheer fanaticism and professionalism of the knights of the different knightly orders (Templars, Teutons, Hospitallers, St. Lazarus). It is reported from contemporary sources that even smallest contingents of these orders were able to turn the outcomes of battles around.

Amazing :D

Do Roman Legion vs Spanish Tercio!

@heretical_cuttlefish

5 жыл бұрын

Federrrrrrico Hmm... classical era warriors with spears and shields vs a formation of pikes and firearms which revolutionized military formations... I wonder who will win? Sarcasm aside, I feel like these comparisons have different criteria from video to video and KZreadr to KZreadr. It seems like a lot of people like to compare warriors one on one (which is not how battles are fought) or put them in broad categories and go “all else equal,” the former of which isn’t fair (because factions change with time and location) and the success of an army depends on many things which can’t really be taken into account with “all else equal.” For example, the Mongols were very successful in open fields where their horses and archers could maneuver and attack as need be, while the American minutemen were perfectly adapted to the hit and run tactics in the mountainous forests of New England. Put either of those factions in the other’s territory, and they will have a rough time, but it’s one of those details that I feel are needed, amongst others, to make a good comparison. It’s easier with warriors that are somewhat similar (the notorious knight vs samurai comparison comes to mind, but it suffers that umbrella term problem I mentioned) but even then there are details that people just don’t take into account when they initially ask the question. That’s why I feel it is important to get perspective from multiple sources who have different priorities in what they study (Metatron, Skallagrim, Shadiversity, Invicta; all have different focuses on what they present to us)

@HolyknightVader999

5 жыл бұрын

That's not fair. Spanish Tericos have actual guns. If the Romans weren't skewered by the long-ass pikes, they'd be running for the hills when the gunfire starts cracking.

Romans vs zulu army

@morte2504

5 жыл бұрын

Robert Kalinič Romans easy win.

@mig-stallion1359

5 жыл бұрын

Kaiser Morty , but Zulus will keep coming, wave after wave, and when the sun sets they’ll keep coming, wave after wave. Brothers from the south attack! Wave after wave of sweaty men

@robertkalinic335

5 жыл бұрын

+Kaiser Morty Yes if you look only at technology, however from what i have learn abount Zulu wars, their tactics, fast army movement and concealment played huge role in victory over british in first battle. They not only went against modern rifles, but also cavalry and artilery. They used short spear similar to sword in lenght instead of full size spear like romans did. I doubt they would win on enemy ground but if romans invaded, zulu's adaptation to terrain and similarity to romans in tactic and concept of infantry would make interesting fight.

@morte2504

5 жыл бұрын

Well Romans had superior training, and You have to keep in mind that if these two nation would fight with each other, Zulus would be even less advanced, probably at the level of cavemen or so. Romans were good at adapting too, they also had large numbers.

@robertkalinic335

5 жыл бұрын

+Kaiser Morty British forces underestimated them too, but if both sides had competent command and eaqual numbers, yes romans are in big advantage. BUT they cant guard every corner in their land, so i think based on how zulu wars progressed, zulu can make some nasty surprises.

Please do a Carolingian Cavalry VS Sassanid Cataphract. That has NEVER been done before.

Interesting video as always. Don't you mean to say triarii at @8:55? Edit: Would you sometime do a video about shock cavalry? There's little available on KZread on this topic