Your favourite culture in warfare

**romeo_longsword** · 02-17-2005, 22:36

I most enjoyed the Mongol and the Chinese, while the Mongolian is my favourite at the moment (yes I seems to find that my idea changes as time goes by).

Mongolian being coming form such as wild (natural) area, and the live style was mostly herding, kind of peaceful but show ability in war at the same time, while the Mongol army at the time was able to go on without eating for a day or two, plus they taken from Korea to Poland in around 25 years, hard bastards they truly were.

Also, they were happy to have muilt cultures and religions within their management, because they were mainly interested in trading, that to me show freedom!

Not to mention that they were able to take down fully armed troops in full metal armour while the Mongol in leather armour/jacket only. That idea make them really attractive.

Whats your thoughts?

**Evil_Maniac From Mars** · 02-17-2005, 22:47

Mongols, followed by Medieval Germans.

**Spartakus** · 02-17-2005, 23:44

Favourite culture in warfare...well, I see the Mongols are admired by all. Yet I must admit I've never really been that keen on armies consisting mostly of horse archers and light cavalry, your typical steppe riders using hit-and-run tactics and feint retreats.

No, REAL warriors go hand-to-hand, I say!

That's why I like the knightly culture of warfare. I know charging in isn't always the smartest thing to do, not at all, but it is the most courageous. It takes guts to ride right into the heat of battle, willingly and intentionally putting your life on the stake, far more than firing an arrow from horseback and then galopping the hell outta there.

History bears witness to many hopeless knight's charges during the middle ages, where the knights charged in not because it was the most tactical manouver, but because their honour demanded it. I find that especially admirable.

So to me, it's not that important wether a battle is won or lost, but rather how it is fought. I think it is possible to lose a battle just as honourably as it can be won.

If I were to mention a particular people, it would probably be the Normans. They really owned Europe back then. Who didn't they defeat? Be it Franks, Anglo-Saxons, Bretons, Lombards, Greeks, Germans, Turks or Arabs, not one of them could stand against the Normans, who more often than not fought in far inferior numbers.

**Byzantine Prince** · 02-18-2005, 07:31

I love the Greek culture the most. Surprised?

Greeks had all, horses, thureophroi, spearmen, archers, and everything you might ever want, including the incredible phalanx.

**Dooz** · 02-18-2005, 10:19

This may be weird and worded or phrased innacurately, so I'll use quotation marks wherever necessary to cut myself some slack

. I enjoy the "barbarian" and "rebel" "cultures" the most in warfare. I don't mean just in the game or whatnot of course. I'm no historian so I don't know too much about specifics of regions and names of cultures or factions all that good stuff, but just from what I have seen on, oh say, the History Channel, readings, and movies and such, I enjoy all the stuff about those cultures (I know movies aren't the most historically accurate things, but there are some elements that are). They were usually the ones always fighting for their lives and freedom and so it meant a whole lot more to them and they fought a lot more valiantly. They also had to resort to more clever tactics and little tricks here and there to overcome great odds. And the whole looser setting of their "armies" as opposed to strictly uniformed more organized nations' armies is more appealing to me. Random weapons and armor wherever they could find or make it, random clothing. Good stuff. And the best heroes always come from those folks.

**TonyJ** · 02-18-2005, 10:33

For me it's definitely high Imperial Roman - the idea of massive disciplined armies, bringing civilisation to stinking barabrians, whether they want it or not: the route of choice for any empire builder

Yes the empire seriously lost it's way, but the sheer will and discipline of some
of the historical personlaities that made it what it was at its height demand respect

**Whoami88** · 02-28-2005, 05:46

I've always been interested in the Japanese Samurai culture. I don't know why but I always been so interested in Samurai, there's just something about them I like I can't describe.

Too bad they spent so much time fighting eachother instead of focusing on foreign countries

**repone** · 02-28-2005, 06:49

Northen People (from Sweden for exemple.. I know they were quite a numbers of tribes, but can't remember their names right now).
Let's summarize: they beat the crap outta everybody they ever encountered, including the terrible scots (several times I might add), even occupied all of Britany (main island) and just sat back and ransomed the city of London for a coupel of years before leaving... no battle, tons of cash ... brillant. They went far in the south, as far as Constantinople (as all players of MTW know already

) and were and elite force of Bodyguard for the Emperors for more than a century. They established long routes of trade, sending and expeditions form time to time to suqash any rebellions treathening the trades (and succeding each time, even against the notorious bad-a***** of the time). They had the finest craftmanship, especially in weapons and precious metal. They, apparently, were the first to set foot on the new continent, on Newfoundland .... I mean .. what more do you want?

PS If I forgot something or made some terrible mistakes, feel free to correct me, as I'm a) tired

b) not writing in my native langage .. some names elude me

**Watchman** · 02-28-2005, 14:14

Eh, the Vikings are overrated as warriors. They were fierce and belligerent like all "barbarian" peoples tended to be, true, but they mostly went after "soft" targets. Much of their success came from nothing else than their naval mobility - they could swoop in, pillage some town or monastery, and get out before the local army could muster against them in force. Like all raiders they preferred to avoid serious fighting if possible. After all, what's the point in risking your neck storming a fortified town or duking it out with the local army on the field if you can instead loot some defenceless monastery or persuade the local baron it's cheaper and more reliable for him to pay you off than fight you off ? Very few people went Viking to get killed; they did it to aquire fame and, above all, wealth (which bought you status and prestige) which were in fairly short supply back home.

'Course, Scandinavia was also running short of arable land at the time so no small amount of settlement and conquest was also done, and naturally such expeditions were more willing to take risks. Flat out greed could also inspire some downright foolhardy bravery, and no few forays found themselves in dire straits after trying to bite more than they could chew. The ones who succeeded in pulling off high-risk high-return gambles, though, could well sail home with enough loot and fame to literally make the leader a king and the rank and file rich for the rest of their lives, or find themselves the new masters of some nice plot of land.

**amritochates** · 02-28-2005, 14:36

I would say the Imperial German Armies in the Period 1870-1918, followed by the Wehrmacht in WWII and in more recent years the Israeli Defence Forces in 1956, and the 1967 Six Day war.

However historically speaking my vote would go to the Japanese, they being the only non-european nation to avoid any form of subjugation by any Europaen Colonial Power before 1945 and my personal favorites- the Byzantines for surviving so long against the odds with every factor against them.