Who would win the battle...?

Question

1) If there was an equal battle between 100 Celtic Warriors and 100 Roman Legionniers, Who would win?

2)If there was an equal battle between 100 Samurai and 100 Persion Immortals, who would win?

3)If there was an equal battle between 100 Viking Berserkers and 100 Spartans, who would win?

4)If there was an equal battle between 100 Ghangis's Mongolian warriors and 100 English LongBowmen, who would win?

What 4 out of 8 armies would survive?

Answer 1

1) Romans have better armor, training and discipline. As long as they thre their pilla and then maintained unit cohesion they would win. If the celts broke up their formation and they were forced to fight man vs. man the celts would have the upper hand with their longswords and greater mobility due to lack of heavy armor. (I assume these Roman Legionaries are from the early Imperial era)



2) Samurai for sure if were talking about the classic samurai we all know (lamenated armor, steel katanas, compositie bows). Their weapons and armor tech is far above that of the immortals, and they are the better sworsmen ( the immortals carried spears and bows anyway)



3) Spartans most likely, if they were in phalanx, if not ill give it to the berserkers. The Spartans at their height during the Persian wars would have the better armor (heavy bronze). Berserkers tended to fight without armor on or even clothing, although they would generally have steel weapons that would be technically superior to the bronze/and or iron weapons of the Spartans. However they were wild and undisciplined and the Spartans disciplined formation and the 8 foot reach of their spears, combined with their legendary toughness, would give them the advantage.



4.) The Mongolians. As much as I love the English longbow, the Mongols could simply run rings around the English on horseback, peppering them with arrow fire at range from their excellent composite bows.

Answer 2

1) the romans no doubt, they played that game more than once, and the romans were normally worth 10/1 versus the primatives.

2) would definitly depend on the situation of battle ,however with a small group 100/100 I favor the samurai, due to much better swordsmanship,archery and discipline.

3) The spartans the beserkers wouldnt be able to break the Phalnx and the discipline of the spartans (or the romans either for that matter)

4) the small scale favors the Mongols, not enough long bowmen to form rank and efficently cover the feild vs the highly mobile mongal calvary,the long bow is a great weapon at distance ,but very limited up close and harder to track a fast moving opponent.

So in the end, my 4 would be the romans ,the samurai,the spartans and the mongols...all due to superior weapons,tactics and discipline

Answer 3

The Romans, Samurai, Spartans, Mongolians

Answer 4

Rome's legions almost always were vastly outnumbered, but their tactics, weapons, and training allowed them to win, at up to 10-1 ratios. There was noting equal about the two forces. The Legions had only one decisive loss, to Germanic troops in a clever ambush, in the Tuetoberg Forest.



About questions 2 & 3, who knows. Probably the Persians and Spartans due to their discipline and tactics. Samurai fought individual battles, although they had much better armor protection. Any disciplined unit always defeats an uncoordinated attacker. It is much more probable that Spartans would beat Vikings because armor and spears are superior to leather with swords or axes, discipline beats berserk attacks, and Spartans too had their fearsome appearances.



4. Easily the Mongols.Their (recurved) compound bows had double the range of the longbow, and half-again as much power. Mongol soldiers are reputed to have had a range up to 1.000 yards, equal in distance to a modern combat rifle. More decisively, Mongols preferred to fight on horseback, running circles around their enemies, and attacking in ebbs and flows in order to disrupt enemy positions/units. It would be a slaughter of the English to attempt such a contest.



Results: Roman armies, elite Persian units, Spartans, and Mongols would prevail--as they did in their own battles, mostly.

Answer 5

For me there are circumstances that devil does win, yet he does not and could not win the main severe battles in existence.this happens each time a Christian sins and devil delights each time it happens...each time somebody does some -element that motives an early loss of life this is sin and devil in touch....each time somebody chooses to persist with evil extremely than God ..devil wins. yet that doesn't mean devil wins constantly.that's a brief win. If a individual asks for forgiveness from God and potential it then devil has lost yet another conflict.and of direction the ultimate win would be on judgment day whilst Jesus locks the door of hell locking up devil and his followers ceaselessly!! definite we will pray and could deliver it to church the following day... Please make your useful new child properly if that's your will and supply potential to those that look after the son. Glory!

Answer 6

1 - the romans - better trained and equipped



2 - the samurai - better swordsmen



3 - the spartans - better trained and equipped



4 - the mongolians - cavalry on horse would close on the bowmen and sweep them

Answer 7

If all things were equal it would be a case of four draws.



None would therefore survive.