Who would win among these ancient worriers?

[Genis-Vell]

Knights
Vikings
Samurais
Spartans
Jaguar
Zulu
Aztec



1,000 worriers. Opean Field. In day light. Standered (personal) equipment.

[Giovanni Rild]

Knights
Vikings
Samurais
Spartans
Jaguar
Zulu
Aztec



1,000 worriers. Opean Field. In day light. Standered (personal) equipment.

The Spartans knew a thing or two about formation. they shunned long ranged weapons because they saw them as unmanly.

The Mongol Horde was the most successful land army of all time. Why aren't they in here?

The Spartans win

[Gray Wolf]

Spartans because 300 of them held their own with more then 10,000 Persian warriors.

[Khamzul]

I think it is between the Spartans, Knights and Samurais.

I think that the Knights with their superior armor would win if they get horses without problem. Riding down the opponents would be win them the battle. Highest level tactical formations should also give them an advantage. The Samurais could win also win with (from what I know) their superior individual skill. Spartans are in the middle, good individual skill and good formations. However they lose with the worst armor of the bunch and therefore I don't see them winning.

So all in all I think the Knights win, if they get horses. If they don't I still think they win, with superior tactics and armor. Samurais would be better in induvidual skill, but the terrain favors a lancecharge and european tactics.

[Limit_Tester]

I think the Aztecs worried the most because they could be sacrificed at any time. Could be wrong though.

[Vicious]

its either the knights or Spartans.

[~Shin~]

Spartans or Knights

btw Id, i think u spelled warriors wrong

[Endless Mike]

Knights, they have the best defense and lots of strong weapons (swords, maces, javelins, spears, pikes, etc.)

[makeoutparadise]

Astec would Pwn !!

[Kuya]

Does Jaguar Paw get destiny on his side? If so then he wins.

Spartans have great military tactics. Knights have the best armor and and greatest attack force.

Between those two, but Knights would come out on top.

[Pintsize]

Samurai, they had the formations of spartans, and the discipline and individual skill of knights.

[Genis-Vell]

Don’t make me bring out my Aztec worrier up in this mother fucker!!!


As for Knights - they are the templar Knights.
http://fury-knights.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/templar_knight2.jpg

Samurai
http://www.twilightforest.net/sanada/images/lastsamuraicostumes035.jpg


Aztec Worrier
http://www.solarnavigator.net/history/explorers_history/aztec_warrior.jpg

Vikings
http://uashome.alaska.edu/~jndfg20/website/buliwyf.gif

[Genis-Vell]

Zulu
http://www.zulu-culture-history.com/zulu_t5.jpg

Spartan
http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:Da3-1p8ACL1nxM:http://www.elflady.com/legolasgreenleaf/orlando/troy/images/achilles.jpg

Arabian Knights
http://www.travelcitydirect.com/tickets/images/parks/other/arabian_nights2.jpg

[Vicious]

didnt the zulus have guns that they stoled or something?

[Genis-Vell]

didnt the zulus have guns that they stoled or something?

No fire arms what’s so ever.

[Limit_Tester]

didnt the zulus have guns that they stoled or something?

You are probably thinking of the Apaches lead by Geronimo.

[Genis-Vell]

Well I am going with Aztecs. (Gota represent a todo los Pizas:bang )
The only real reasons why they ware conquered by the Spaniards ware because the epidemic break known as small pox.

[Darklyre]

The battlefield favors knights. They had the best armor, best weapons, had formation and charge training, and were mounted. People have too high a view of samurai. Sure, their training may be great, but that was mainly for duels of honor, not battlefield warfare. On the battlefield you're more likely to get shot with a random arrow or run down by a guy on a horse than you are to go one on one with your opponent. The Spartans had the training and tactics, but lack the armor, and weaponry. Out of all the armies listed above only knights came naturally mounted.

[Limit_Tester]

Well I am going with Aztecs. (Gota represent a todo los Pizas:bang )
The only real reasons why they ware conquered by the Spaniards ware because the epidemic break known as small pox.

Well that and the Aztecs thought the Cortes was a god, and the Spanish had technology advantages, horses, much better armor and weapons, etc. Cortes also contracted the help of several aztec enemies who had been subjugated for centuries.

Overall Aztec technology was not very advanced and they did not really have serious strategic advantage over any of the other classes, nor were they as well trained.

[Vicious]

i was probly thinking about the zulus from the movie. not real life.
anyway, the cowboys and john wayne rapes them all.:P

[Genis-Vell]

The funniest part in Aztec history was when they drove out, Cortez and turned on their Current Aztec Ruler.
But never the less, small pox really devastated that nation that pride itself in war tactics.

[Limit_Tester]

Which was biological warfare on the account of Cortes. He sent out blankets ridden with smallpox in order to weaken the Aztecs.

[Genis-Vell]

Yeah, well in ware fare everything and anything is fair game I suppose.

[Limit_Tester]

Especially if you only have 100 knights to conquer an entire nation.

[Genis-Vell]

Especially if you only have 100 knights to conquer an entire nation.

They ware idiots. They could have lived as Gods.

[Limit_Tester]

They did. Do you know how much gold they plundered?

[Genis-Vell]

They did. Do you know how much gold they plundered?

They did not have to leave, that’s ware they fucked up (I would have stayed).
Any how, no I have no idea how much Gold they took off with. Spain sure as hell isn’t going to admit how much they really took. But there is more then enough evidence that state their was an abundance of fine minerals (gold and silver) back in those days.

[Limit_Tester]

It probably wouldn't have lasted considering when the prophecies and shit didn't actually happen, the Aztecs might have wised up.

[Genis-Vell]

Speaking of, if the Aztec calendar is as exact as they claim to say (among the most accurate colanders to date).

The world is suppose to end in the year 2012 I believe.

[Limit_Tester]

And yet, somehow I'm not too worried.

[Genis-Vell]

And yet, somehow I'm not too worried.

Me neither, yet the Aztec calendar itself is interesting. Its not just a calendar that measures years, months, and days.

Its also a clock. Gota love the devotion to mathematics.

[Limit_Tester]

You can thank the Mayans for that.

[Genis-Vell]

You can thank the Mayans for that.

Yeah, an improvement over the Mayan calendar.
Although it’s a bit different.
It’s a shame, to this date they still haven’t deciphered the entire calendar.
But I remember reading that one of the ancient rulers was worried, that their language might be lost. So he made a dictionary to help decipher such artifacts (and their language) if it ever came to that.. Sadly that dictionary was lost.

[The Nameless Pharaoh]

Arabian Knights FTW.

[Spy_Smasher]

At their best, they have the same level of tactical sophistication and training as any group on the list with FAR superior weaponry and armor. European knights only ever lost when they were out-thought by a superior General or outnumbered. All things being equal in that regard, they take this handily.

[Goodfellow]

I think that the samurais are the the greatest worriers. I mean, they did poetry, didn't they? They would have to worry about SOMETHING to do poetry.

[Kazuma the Shell Bullet]

Viking Berserkers FTW

[Jikoo]

I'm gonna take a serious crack at explaining what I think will be the case here.

A Spartan hoplite (warrior) in the phalanx formation is a force to be reconed with, bearing in mind that the Spartans trained from age 7 to age 30 in military camps outside "normal" society. The phalanx formation was very difficult to engage head on due to the masses of spears, but was vunerable from the sides. Spartans moved slowly due to their thightly packed formation.
The problem in a fight versus say knights they have weapnry that are almost 2000 years older. They sure know their way around a battlefield, but mounted knight templar can outmanouver them.

Same goes for astec warriors. Clubs made from volcanic ash are far inferiour to spanish steel (and guns obiously) Astecs did not use horses or have advanced battle tactics. Agains the spanish they use guerilla warfare, as that is all they could do. In a predtermined battlefield with a thousand soldiers on each side, they would have very little chance.

The samurai were skilled but not more so than say a knight or a spartan hoplite. They were all great warriors but the bushido has made the samurai into demi-gods in peoples minds today. Actuall most samurai used yaris (a sort of spear) from the back of a horse in battlefield combats. It's much more effective than a katana. Against knights I say it's pretty even with the knight having better armour. The katana is a cutting weapon, ill suited to take on a knight in plate mail. But the knight sword were heavyer and more cumbersome, making they slower, but having massive hitting power.

As for the vikings, I hate that most people just think of them as mindless berserkers. Being norwegian and a history student for 4 years I know a thing or two about it. Vikings around year 1000 had advanced tactics, but limited use of horses. Round shields and axes were very effective, and their individal skill were considerable as they as both samurais, knights and hoplites trained their entire life.

In the end I say knights win due to the fact that they are more modern than everyone else besides the samurai. And in a battlefield the knights have superiour tactics and good mobility. I say the aztecs draw the short sraw as their sivilisation was behind Europe and Asia when it came to technology and the fact that they did not have as advanced tactics as others.

[Neji]

i'd say spartans

[Darklyre]

The thing is, a Spartan phalanx formation is quite possibly the worst opponent for a lance of knights. No mounted unit is going to be crazy enough to charge into a bunch of raised spears and shields. There's no way for a charge to change it's direction fast enough to hit the side of the phalanx before it can protect it's flank.

[SharinganKakashi16]

Spartans because 300 of them held their own with more then 10,000 Persian warriors.

well with allies there were about 1-2k people also the battle was fought in a valley on the only road up the mountain. It was also set up to where very few people could come up at one time during the battle.

in the battle of changban zhang fei fought off 10,000 men by himself but you want to know how? he was on a bridge where they could only come 2 at a time

no one type of warrior is better than the other, all that matters is the skill of the warrior, when england came to china they curb stomped china into submission, when america came to japan they forced japan to open it's harbors.

again no one warrior is better than the other, 2 grand masters going against each other, one with a claymore the other with a katana who will win the fight? there is no answer to the question, because if 2 warriors are truly grandmasters they will recognize eachothers skills, and not fight. because the fight would end in a draw.

now that I have read the rest of the posts here is what I have to say

samurais, mostly they use their katana, since this is the weapon that was usually passed down from family member to member, since japans were big on ancestor worshipthey would use their katan more than any other weapon at their disposal, yari were used when upon horseback, the naginata however was a lightweight spear with a curved blade, essentially it was a wakizashi with a 4 foot handle. the way that a battle was taken place in ancient japan is, the samurai would act as commanders, meaning their would be a handful of samurai on a battlefield. the ain part of the fighting were done by thousand upon thousands of peasants, with sharpened sticks, and sometimes a rusty blade. But the few katana that did fight had superior weapons, their weapons were forged using a method known as damscus process, which means that the weapon is folded, meaning while the weapon is being made the blacksmith will completely flatten out the metal and then fold it over, this allowing the metal to become durable yet bendable, as well as incredibly sharp, and an amazing ability to keep an edge.

[Genis-Vell]

The fold method for making Katana’s was invented to make decent weapons out of the crappy Iron and steel. they ware working with.

Knights have access to much better quality of iron and steel.

Also, the open field does give the advantage to the Knights.
But if you change the terrain you would see how each culture gets an advantage.

Rain forest - the Aztec’s
Sahara Desert - the Arabian Knights
Savanna Desert - the Zulu worriers
Etc…

[Sasori]

Shit I didn't even realise this thread until now :confused


Ok, so there is suffiient evidence that Knights would win this matchup.

I want to know what competition Knights have, ie. In their timeline...?

Or were Knights the best of there time?

[SharinganKakashi16]

The fold method for making Katana’s was invented to make decent weapons out of the crappy Iron and steel. they ware working with.

Knights have access to much better quality of iron and steel.

Also, the open field does give the advantage to the Knights.
But if you change the terrain you would see how each culture gets an advantage.

Rain forest - the Aztec’s
Sahara Desert - the Arabian Knights
Savanna Desert - the Zulu worriers
Etc…

it is not the weapon that one wields it is the skill of the user, I have beaten an unskilled opponent using a sword with my barehands.
yes the knight did have access to more iron,but they woud not use steel because only higher knights would have steel
the problems samurai had was not only bad iron it was also a scarcity of iron. but as you said this was to oversome the bad iron that the japanese were forced to use, but you know what, it worked it would make a katan able to cut through several bodies in a single stroke.
Full plate mail, which is what it seems these knights are using is very heavy, had many places to where a thin blade could fit through. because of the weight of the armor a knights movement would be slowed actually making a battle royale such as this disadvantageuos to this situation.
interesting point though the rapier was actually invented so it could pierce through the spots in a knights mail.
also another point steel is just superior iron, using ultra hot air to blast away impurities in the iron making steel.
probably in this situation the spartans would use their, box position, in which they would form a box using phalanxes with their tower shields down into the ground a,d their spear ready for a quick lunge, on the inside they would have either archers or sowrds man would wait for on of the phalanxes to fail before they kill anyone to breach the gaps. But the problem with this is that a tower shield was made from wood. as well their spear tips would be made from bronze as well as their spear tips, which is a softer metal than iron. however the spear tips would be able to pierce through the chinks in plate mail,
however if one of the choices were the german knights, (considering england did not rely on knights as much as people think) then the odds would be in their favor considering, german mail was known to be able to stop crossbow bolts.
also what do you mean by knights, you realize that knight was just an honorary title as well as samurai
well that is all I will post for now.

[Darklyre]

On an open field, there are few things that can stand up to a unit of charging knights besides pikemen.

[Giovanni Rild]

People are forgetting that Samurai used much more than Katana and Wakizashi
They were master archers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samurai#Weapons

[Spanish Hoffkage]

mmm, those spartans were the real son of a bitches.

My fanboyism says samurais :( but I think a good formation of spartans is nearly invincible.

Also this fight is supposed to be in equal terms of amount of peole so...

[SharinganKakashi16]

People are forgetting that Samurai used much more than Katana and Wakizashi
They were master archers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samurai#Weapons

well the funny thing about that is they never aimed, they would always fire shots of volleys, and hope to hit which yeah is some a good tactic if you have higher ground, or some sort of other protection

[Giovanni Rild]

The Mongol Horde would destroy them all

[SharinganKakashi16]

damn straight russia was the only one to be able to tie them

[Sasori]

Do the spartans get Achilles?

But then that means the samurais would get Cruise :headscrat

[SharinganKakashi16]

no I do not think they do, and then I would rather have alexander the great

[Spanish Hoffkage]

Do the spartans get Achilles?

But then that means the samurais would get Cruise :headscrat

and the vikings have Kirk Douglas

[SharinganKakashi16]

and the vikings have Kirk Douglas

fuck kirk douglas the viking get thor son of the all father

[Fenix]

I dont think this is an entirely fair fight

The knights here are far more modern than the others and the field favors them as well.

[Limit_Tester]

The Aztecs should get Mel Gibson.

[Goodfellow]

Pity no one added "commoners with longbows", if we are actually talking about warriors. The long bow was the ulitmate weapon during the middle ages, adn I can say, without doubt, that mass bowmen would have owned all of the others (the spartans might stand a little chance, becouse of their tactics). How do I know this? Well, becouse during the one houndred year wars, longbowmen practically killed the old tactical agenda, and forced commanders to remake their whole thinking.

[Giovanni Rild]

Pity no one added "commoners with longbows", if we are actually talking about warriors. The long bow was the ulitmate weapon during the middle ages, adn I can say, without doubt, that mass bowmen would have owned all of the others (the spartans might stand a little chance, becouse of their tactics). How do I know this? Well, becouse during the one houndred year wars, longbowmen practically killed the old tactical agenda, and forced commanders to remake their whole thinking.

Spartans had tactics made just for Archers

[Darklyre]

Pity no one added "commoners with longbows", if we are actually talking about warriors. The long bow was the ulitmate weapon during the middle ages, adn I can say, without doubt, that mass bowmen would have owned all of the others (the spartans might stand a little chance, becouse of their tactics). How do I know this? Well, becouse during the one houndred year wars, longbowmen practically killed the old tactical agenda, and forced commanders to remake their whole thinking.

No such thing as commoners with longbows. Longbowmen were professional soldiers, most working for the English king only. It took years of training to properly use a longbow compared to a regular shortbow (longbows are 6 feet long). If a commoner was an archer, he'd more than likely be using either a shortbow or a crossbow.

[SharinganKakashi16]

Spartans had tactics made just for Archers

but the problem is an arrow would be tipped with steel which with the help of the pressure from the longer string of the long bow, would splinter and pierce through them like a knife through butter.

@darklyre
that would be the longbows that peasants used, funnily enough though the crossbowwas outlawed in england because it gave a peasant the power an ability to kill a knight.

[Machinesister]

Don't worry, be happy.

[Goodfellow]

No such thing as commoners with longbows. Longbowmen were professional soldiers, most working for the English king only. It took years of training to properly use a longbow compared to a regular shortbow (longbows are 6 feet long). If a commoner was an archer, he'd more than likely be using either a shortbow or a crossbow.

Wasn't it so that the english commoner practised with the long bow, and then spent a his time with a few campaigns before returning back to the common life?

[Darklyre]

Wasn't it so that the english commoner practised with the long bow, and then spent a his time with a few campaigns before returning back to the common life?

Considering a few campaigns would be nearly a decade or more, I don't think you can really call them simple commoners anymore. By that time they'd be professional soldiers. If you're talking about a drafted peasant army, then they'd be packing 4-5 foot shortbows that they mainly used to hunt with. True longbowmen were too expensive in terms of training costs to let go after only a campaign or two.

Peasants were banned from using crossbows, yes, but during times of a castle siege, any peasants inside the castle would be drafted into becoming crossbowmen, since it required the least training on how to use them.