Page 1 of 2

who would win?

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 1:09 pm
by nix
heres one for you, with all these modern computer game senarios extar that are out ther and all the discussions we have which army would win....

roman
vicking
WoR
norman
hunn


wouldnt go up to muskeet level in tec but its just some thing i wondered, tech seems to be countering the problem behind it by one step but not two or 3, which army would you inploy in a pithced battle, a seige(att and deffence) things like that, feel free to think of more or better examples or more specific

i just think that a for exampl a roman army (not that clued up on dates, but think lorica and big square shield) would be quite sucsessfull against the wor, but lose against vike, and vike lose againt wor..ect ect

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 1:23 pm
by zauberdachs
:)

I think the Roman's would clear the field with everyone apart from the Huns.

Asides from that I think the Norman's would spank the Vikings, as they have all that the Early Medieval armies would have plus good cavalry and archers.

The WOTR would probably spank the Vikings for the same reason and would probably spank the Norman army as they would have longbows, better cavalry, and more heavily armed and armoured infantry.

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 1:36 pm
by Jim
The answer is:


300 Spartans.



Taxi!

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 2:01 pm
by Gyrthofhwicce
zauberdachs wrote::)

I think the Roman's would clear the field with everyone apart from the Huns.

Asides from that I think the Norman's would spank the Vikings, as they have all that the Early Medieval armies would have plus good cavalry and archers.

The WOTR would probably spank the Vikings for the same reason and would probably spank the Norman army as they would have longbows, better cavalry, and more heavily armed and armoured infantry.

So basically your saying the Vikings are sh**e :twisted:

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 2:06 pm
by Type16
Normans to win :D
Co-ordinated, disciplined, ruthless, not too much bickering,

Oh, and just nice people really :lol:

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 2:17 pm
by Gyrthofhwicce
Type16 wrote:Normans to win :D
Co-ordinated, disciplined, ruthless, not too much bickering,

Oh, and just nice people really :lol:
So if the Normans win, that means the Vikings win by default? :D

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 2:32 pm
by nix
im sensing someone out there is deferently a secrete vike supporter lol.

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 2:36 pm
by nix
didnt think norman archers were that great(is in i dont no better) and latter medi heavy infantry is just not frettonend as much by cavaly, on a open battle feild the normans have got a nice bit of diversity, but if a vik or dark age army breaks your segie lines , or generaly fighting in built up areas there going to do some serious damage(just to help there cause)

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 2:49 pm
by Jim
Well really, the army with the archeryness is gonna win hands down. The WotR army would massacre everyone from a distance.

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 2:52 pm
by Gyrthofhwicce
nix wrote:im sensing someone out there is deferently a secrete vike supporter lol.
the clue is in the fact im in the vike :wink:

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 3:23 pm
by nix
i do vik occasionly aswell ill have you no,
and JIM we no away round archers.......

WAR WAGONS, BRING ON THE HUSSITES!!!!!!!!!!

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 3:27 pm
by zauberdachs
nix wrote:and JIM we no away round archers.......
Does this mysterious strategy involve jumping back on the longboats and heading off to raid a monastery which is only defended by unarmed monks? ;)

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 3:41 pm
by Type16
Gyrthofhwicce wrote:
Type16 wrote:Normans to win :D
Co-ordinated, disciplined, ruthless, not too much bickering,

Oh, and just nice people really :lol:
So if the Normans win, that means the Vikings win by default? :D


Hmmmmmm........
Hadn't thought of that
Draw back to every theory :lol:

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 3:41 pm
by Gyrthofhwicce
zauberdachs wrote:
nix wrote:and JIM we no away round archers.......
Does this mysterious strategy involve jumping back on the longboats and heading off to raid a monastery which is only defended by unarmed monks? ;)
Quite right to, with their silly haircuts and unearthly religeous practises, they deserve it

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 3:42 pm
by Type16
zauberdachs wrote:
nix wrote:and JIM we no away round archers.......
Does this mysterious strategy involve jumping back on the longboats and heading off to raid a monastery which is only defended by unarmed monks? ;)
Rangoon ? :twisted:

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 3:50 pm
by nix
im sorry if the first time i bumped into a bunch of monks and werent to sure what they are i think military think about it

a large group of men, uniformly dressed, living in dorms/barracks, same hair cuts, all carrying the same symbol and running things with the iron rule in a easyly defendable position...,

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 4:04 pm
by Jim
nix wrote:im sorry if the first time i bumped into a bunch of monks and werent to sure what they are i think military think about it

a large group of men, uniformly dressed, living in dorms/barracks, same hair cuts, all carrying the same symbol and running things with the iron rule in a easyly defendable position...,
So the complete lack of weapons, armour and fiery temperament wouldn't make you reconsider? :wink:

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 4:06 pm
by Jim
nix wrote:i do vik occasionly aswell ill have you no,
and JIM we no away round archers.......

WAR WAGONS, BRING ON THE HUSSITES!!!!!!!!!!
Well of course we'd hand everyone their arses.

Five crusades and we're still here, doodah, doodah
Five crusades and we're still here, doodah doodah day.

etc.

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 4:31 pm
by nix
monks not having firey temperments! and regardles what anyone says a bunch of blokes living together in the period, how many axes, hoes, sickles ect and simple staves can be leathal. i no against trained fighters they had a less than fair chance, but im having one or two off them put up a fight, and your not going to no that there wernt till to late. why waste the surprise. im not a murder or a thief but these were hard times and lagetimet tactics, raiding was a way of life.

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 4:32 pm
by Mr Dreadful
Who would win? Chuck Norris.

I'll get me coat....

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 4:40 pm
by nix
we love chuck,
he was on telly the other day, hes been addopted as the mascot of god nos how many american units in iraq and afgan, something to do with the rules/ laws of chuck, it was a program about 100 top enternet artists or something on sky channel,
could we start the chuck norice reanactment socity i wonder......

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 4:42 pm
by Alice the Huswyf
Nice Nigel Vs Death the Norman-Hating Guano-Pig: Nige loses.

Death the N-H Guano-Pig Vs Chuck Norris: Chuck runs screamin' towards DtN-HG-P and force feeds it broccoli and cuddles like a soft lickle girlie.

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 4:47 pm
by Hobbitstomper
Gyrthofhwicce wrote:
Type16 wrote:Normans to win :D
Co-ordinated, disciplined, ruthless, not too much bickering,

Oh, and just nice people really :lol:
So if the Normans win, that means the Vikings win by default? :D
When did the Vikings beat the Normans?

Or do you just mean that Vikings are like the Normans but just less civilised?

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 4:56 pm
by zauberdachs
Hobbitstomper wrote:
Gyrthofhwicce wrote:
Type16 wrote:Normans to win :D
Co-ordinated, disciplined, ruthless, not too much bickering,

Oh, and just nice people really :lol:
So if the Normans win, that means the Vikings win by default? :D
When did the Vikings beat the Normans?

Or do you just mean that Vikings are like the Normans but just less civilised?
Probably referring to the fact that the Norman are descended from Vikings.

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 5:11 pm
by nix
and i fort everyone new that when a viking got old and dull and couldnt handle ale or mead any more he moved to france and became a norman....

(time to run and duck)

Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 12:45 pm
by Gyrthofhwicce
Hobbitstomper wrote:
Gyrthofhwicce wrote:
Type16 wrote:Normans to win :D
Co-ordinated, disciplined, ruthless, not too much bickering,

Oh, and just nice people really :lol:
So if the Normans win, that means the Vikings win by default? :D
When did the Vikings beat the Normans?

Or do you just mean that Vikings are like the Normans but just less civilised?
The clue being Norman is bastardised from Norseman, Viking, ergo, Vikings win. :wink:

Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 1:16 pm
by Marcus Woodhouse
Five crusades and we're still here...but the Hussites were beaten. Thsi is like the English who forget who actually won the 100years war. Anyway as long as it isn't football or rugby the Irish'd give the lot of youse a doing. It might take 800 years but we;re patient see. :wink:

Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 3:14 pm
by nix
cough splutter cough... irish... win....cough splutter... hussites lose...cough spluter, we never lost we just meturedi to a dosile form.
irish win what when ahhh, never....

Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 3:23 pm
by nix
any way between the english(all parts of mainland britain) whales scotland and cormwall (and a fair cunk of northern france) we're all the same gene stock and culture, we've just different schooling telling us who to hate most....

i can live with any of the above(well maybe not the french) its just americans who tell me that there great great great grans cats, ex owners sister inlaw was irish/scot/welsh/ inpovereished, bastard son who ever..

god, what have foroners ever done for us,

apart from.....

population, culture, languge, half the breeds of animals, tecnology,history and future, trade, polotics...... :oops:

Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 5:08 pm
by Alice the Huswyf
Speak for yourself, Nix, Nigel says I am so special that I have my own, separate planet!