The Roman Conquest

[Eucarionte]

Mmmm... romans being defeated in a 1 on 1 combat vs. elite warriors...maybe, but wars aren´t fought by elite warriors.

In fact, a roman legionaire was equipped for individual combat, while a Spartan, for instance, was not. Spartans excelled in close-formation combat, but when the phalanx broke out, they were dead. The same problem that the macedonian phalanx had; this was clearly demostrated in pydna and magnesia, for example (20-25000 macedonians dead, vs. less than 1000 romans in pydna).

The individual average roman legionaire was far better than the average barbarian warrior, no need for special and smart tactics. This is a fact, and is the reason why Caesar´s legionaires survived Alesia´s site. 200.000 Gauls vs. 30.000 romans show the superior quality of the roman infantry, which was the best by that time.

Also, if we consider the manpower that Rome fielded during the punic wars, specially the second one, putting more and more legions into combat to feed Hannibal´s ego, we can have as a conclusion that even after heavy losses, it could recover in a relatively short time period.

Better average soldier + Impressive manpower = Potential world dominator indeed