map-faction balancing

**Renown** · 01-12-2007, 05:53

ok, now your comparing a war fought in the 1960's-70s, not including the French, to warfare 900-500 years previously?

mmmm I think this says anything anyone needs to know about your credibility.

Try RESEARCH. Look at the People's Crusade, the first 'recognized' crusade into muslim territory. Led, kind of by no one, but theoretically Rainald & Peter the Hermit. Slaughtered. Slaughtered. Slaughtered. Oh, and converted to Islam to avoid SLAUGHTER.

I already mentioned the Field of Blood I believe, better trained, better equipped? Can you give me any sort of statistic or evidence? What about the fact that a drunkard was able to marshal the forces of Syria together to destroy half the norman contigent of crusaders? According to Kemal Al-Din, only 20 franks escaped, and only 20 muslems dead.

Balak, that guy i mentioned earlier? He was known as "the Raging Dragon", and filled many pages of Fulcher's writings. He managed to reconquer almost all of the crusading states. He died due to an arrow wound during a siege.

If you recognized known of the names above.. let me know and I'll simply stop arguing because it'll be pointless.

**mayhem87** · 01-12-2007, 12:48

You r realy funny I told you, my comparing in different age of warfare was only an example....
Look on single crusader with big shield spear and long sword.....and on poor arab with "stick and straw shield".
Yes, the crusader attack was based on charge, but that was very efective.
Crusader cavalry vs. Arab Cavalry in the same numbers..... that crusader charge will crush them to the ground.
Why crusaders hold Jerusalem so long? And invading those regions with much smaller numbers than the native wariors.
Before united Egypt with Saladin, the Crusaders were untouchable, and few thousands of soldiers cant hold the land against hundred thousands muslims ofcourse.

**Renown** · 01-12-2007, 14:38

ok, so I take it you do not recognize any of those names. Stick and straw shield! funny man, you are a comedian I take it?

Jesus, H. Christ.

**Orda Khan** · 01-12-2007, 15:24

Stick and straw?? It is a common misconception that Moslem factions were under equipped due to the fact they did not follow the European ideal and of course the determining factor, ie climate, is so willingly overlooked.

Kingdom of Heaven did at least portray the Moslems as cultured people and the so called 'Christian Crusaders' as a bunch of murdering scum. A certain element of accuracy

......Orda

**mayhem87** · 01-12-2007, 15:27

it was in double apostrophes ( quotation marks ) so it was ment metphorically
;-)

**mayhem87** · 01-12-2007, 15:37

and to Orda khan -

Yes, I know that egyptian culture was more civilised than european till 13-14 century. But holy fact is that european knights were better.
And they hold Jerusalem for a hundred years.

**Icefrisco** · 01-12-2007, 21:37

in my point of view the crusaders had better soldiers even though they were heavily outnumbered. this was proven in coutnless numbers of battles, though sometimes the muslims did have better soldiers.

however, in war it always comes down to who has the better commanders and the muslims had some of the best commanders in the middle ages. you cant deny the greatness of zengi,saladin, and baibars. so, the christains had better soldiers(man for man) but the muslims had more soldiers and better commanders. so who wins? like in history, the one with the best commander.

**mayhem87** · 01-12-2007, 22:11

I dont know where did you get those "better commanders"... it was only foolishness of fanatic crusaders like templars or Knights of st John ( hospitallers ) for their baldheaded attacks.