Damn The title must be Roman legionaries OR US marines
Damn The title must be Roman legionaries OR US marines
So, this is Abram tanks vs Gladiuses yeah?
I can see that going either way...
Depends who'd be the leader. So like perhaps:
G.W.Bush vs Scipio Africanus?
no blood no foul
Well, the Romans oiled themselves up a lot- That goop might foul up the Abrams tank tracks after the bodies get caught in the gears...
Romans are gonna win
Texas is Gods country! - SFTS
SFTS =The rest =
We could give them kevlar armour and RPGs instead of slings (for the auxilaries). Ang lightsabres instead of gladiuses. That'd even it out a little.
The blokes with the machine guns and air support.
"I request permanent reassignment to the Gallic frontier. Nay, I demand reassignment. Perhaps it is improper to say so, but I refuse to fight against the Greeks or Macedonians any more. Give my command to another, for I cannot, I will not, lead an army into battle against a civilized nation so long as the Gauls survive. I am not the young man I once was, but I swear before Jupiter Optimus Maximus that I shall see a world without Gauls before I take my final breath."
Senator Augustus Verginius
well as in most cases when examining two different troop types from different eras, we must immedietly start making exceptions, clarifications, handicaps, and alot of other things that eventually make the exercise a pointless one because of all the variables.
so,
the marine: no sidearm, no rifle, no mechanized equipment, no offmap artillery, no nightvision goggles; only a uniform, flak vest, combat knife, and compass.
the roman: no elephant, no chariot, no horse, no phalanx, no ballista; with short sword, shield, and leather armor.
the field of combat must be level, no weather, no humidity, no wind, semi-grassy, ten paces apart.
with these conditions, making everything even, it's a toss up. but the marine would probably win becase he'd be the bigger man.
Soly, I have no clue how a compass is going to help in a close quarters fight.
Also the shield gives the Roman a bit of an advatage.
I'd like to see the marine use off-field artilery when he is 10 paces away...
Be a draw maybe.
no i say they all get their normal stuff so the marines can win
Formerly ceasar010
Gawain you were a Marine. How much training in hand-to-hand combat did you receive in boot camp?
GoreBag: Oh, Prole, you're a nerd's wet dream.
asuming the marines had gunsI pick marines
"And one should bear in mind that there is nothing more difficult to execute, nor more dubious of success, nor more dangerous to administer than to introduce a new order to things; for he who introduces it has all those who profit from the old order as his enemies; and he has only lukewarm allies in all those who might profit from the new. This lukewarmness partly stems from fear of their adversaries, who have the law on their side, and partly from the skepticism of men, who do not truly believe in new things unless they have personal experience in them."
~ Niccolo Machiavelli
Assume all guns had been disabled by nanites (argh too much Deux Ex). Then it's a marine with his bayonet vs a legionnaire with a shield and gladius...
Well the US would because Rome was full of homos...
“A day may come when the courage of men fails, when we forsake our friends and break all bonds of fellowship But it is not this day, an hour of wolves and shattered shields when the age of men comes crashing down, but it is not this day This day we fight” – Aragorn, King of Gondor
-=Allies & Axis Total War=-
Well, if they have the rifle, but no bullets with bayonet, I'd say that's far more fair than giving them only a knife.
The only way the Romans would lose is if the marines cracked the formation. That way the marines could use both the butt and the bayonet, as well as judo/other boot camp training.
Marines would get tired later, due to lack of armor. (which probably wouldn't help the Romans much anyway)
I bet a marine's pack and helmet and stuff weigh's more than the legionnaires, although the marine would be much better built and fed. I think the gladius would be much better than a bayonet though. Especially with the shield you can punch people in the face with.
Actually, if you were to level the playing field, it could get rather interesting. The Romans would be in far better phycical condition, because of their time period. For a Legionaire to get from Italy to Palestine, he WALKED, carrying all his own equipment. The Marines would fly. In spite of today's physical training, you just can't beat a primitive lifestyle for fostering strength and endurance. However, the overall conditioning could well be offset by the tremendous difference in size.
The Marines would also be at a tremendous psychological disadvantage. In spite of what some folks out there think, Marines do have a conscience and modern, Western ethics. The Romans had none. Their view of life was so vastly different than ours today. There would be absolutely no hesitation at any time for any Roman to fight, maim, and kill you by ANY means possible.
Now, if both sides were armed as the Romans--the Romans win. The had the close order tactical training that would be unthinkable to a Marine.
If both sides are armed as Marines--the Marines win. It's really slow going trying to drag armered vehicles around with mules and horses, and cartridges just ain't that effective when launched from a sling. Besides, an M16 with bayonet doesn't have near the throwing balance as a pilum.
Bottom line? It's really a moot point, isn't it?
Our greatest glory lies not in never having fallen, but in rising every time we fall. Oliver Goldsmith
They could probably do quite a lot of damage with an air-conditioning unit and a catapult though...
Almost daily. We had karate ju jitsu and almost any other kind of hand to hand combat you can think of so if both forces were unarmed I don't think it would be much of a contest as the Marines would be much larger and stronger with more actual hand to hand training than the Romans.Originally Posted by [b
I think you fail to understand the physical training regiment of the Marines. When in the field they carry 60 to 80lbs of equipment and I guarantee you can force march with any army in history. Also the diet has a lot to do with this and as you say the Marines will be much larger.
This is one of the problems with war. Once the killing starts your ethics pretty much go out the window. Believe me from one who has been there the Marines can be just as ruthless as anyone in history. First thing you are taught in boot camp is never fight to hurt someone. If you are going to fight fight to kill by any and all means necessary. They teach you to bite peoples nuts off, gouge out eyes and anything else that can help you win.
The only way you can really have them fight is unarmed as otherwise as stated it is whoevers weapons we choose to use that will win and here the Marines slaughter them.
By the way I think something like this,although this one would be to stupid to use, would make a fainting series for the history channel. You know Romans vs Greeks. Medieval army vs Romans. Just about anyone vs Romans in fact before the age of gunpowder.
Fighting for Truth , Justice and the American way
I don't think that unarmed fighting would be much use against someone in armour and with weapons...
It might happen Discovery did a show about what a fight between a alligator and shark would be, using virtual reality. I think they've also done sharks vs hippos, tigers vs lions etc.
Yes thats what gave me the idea. Call it Rome verus the ancient world.
Excuse me? I believe unarmed means no weapons or armor. This goes for both sides. I really dont know where you came up with this. Can I have some of what you are smoking?
Fighting for Truth , Justice and the American way
The org is the only place that such a topic could ever give birth to a semi-serious conversation
Αξιζει φιλε να πεθανεις για ενα ονειρο, κι ας ειναι η φωτια του να σε καψει.
http://grumpygreekguy.tumblr.com/
Considering they are 2000 years apart its hard to compare the two. In the areas you can compare the two:
---Romans would be more skilled in hand-to-hand combat. That's how wars were fought in their day
---The average Marine would be more physically fit. His physical training routine is more demanding than the Romans, and he carries more weight when he humps (thats a yomp for you Brits)
---Romans would be more naturally resistant to disease
---Marines train more often than the Romans
---Marines overall have superior leadership, from junior NCOs to the General staff
---Marines overall would be more intelligent than the Romans. All Marines have at least a high school education & must pass pre-requisite intelligence tests. The average legionary was poorly educated and illiterate before joining the Army. This in my opinion, means the Marines would have a greater ability to improvise, or act prudently in the absence of orders
---Romans are better able to live off the land
---Marines have better medical skills (really the Navy Corpsmen & doctors assigned to them)
The scenario used the Marines, but I think the comparisons would be the same if using any Western military unit.
Only if you consider hand to hand combat to be using weapons held in the hand. In true hand to hand combat, that being unarmed the Marines have more training.
Fighting for Truth , Justice and the American way
Good point.Quote[/b] (Gawain of Orkeny @ June 24 2004,13:49)]Only if you consider hand to hand combat to be using weapons held in the hand. In true hand to hand combat, that being unarmed the Marines have more training.
“A day may come when the courage of men fails, when we forsake our friends and break all bonds of fellowship But it is not this day, an hour of wolves and shattered shields when the age of men comes crashing down, but it is not this day This day we fight” – Aragorn, King of Gondor
-=Allies & Axis Total War=-
in an unarmed battle, the Marines would win, because they are better trained at hand2hand. seriously, Marines knows karate, and would kill you 10 times before you hit the floor.
No poor bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making other bastards dying for their country.
The draft is white people sending black people to fight yellow people to protect the country they stole from red people.
why would anybody want to touch a girl's butt? Bart Sim
Most of the Romans would probably have been in lots of bar fights though, and melee is melee with weapons or not. They would have been much squatter too which may have been an advantage.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks