Who is the best Ancient Warrior

[Silver fox 117 49]

Okay I really have no idea where I'm supposed to post this, but whatever.

 

Who here has ever watched Deadliest Warrior, and not be satisfied in who wins.

 

Well I got a solution for you. This is supposed to a tournament that involves all the ancient warriors. I will describe their battle tactics, positions, weaponry, armor, and training. Then you decide who will win. 

 

 

 

Spartans

Knights

Vikings

Ninjas

Samurais

Apaches

Roman Centurions 

Mamluks

Mongols

Aztecs

Mayans

Gladiators

Persian Immortals

Rajput Warriors

Zulu Warriors

Xaolin Monks

Celtic Warriors

Koa Warriors

Pirates

 

This is the list of ancient warriors right now that I have. If you guys would want to add more that isn't on this list that would be fine. Remember I want to add as much Ancient Warriors as possible. These were just on the top of my head, so if you know anymore that will be nice. By Ancient Warriors I mean anything before guns, or that they just didn't use guns. Guns kind of will lead to a huge advantage, or do you guys think we should include guns to put pirates and French Musketeers here. Thinking about it, it might be okay to have old muskets and things because they weren't much better than crossbows at the time. 

 

Also this isn't a one versus one scenario. This is like entirety of these guys going at each other. I will also list the pro and cons of each match. Tomorrow after school I will make the brackets so you have that long to post which Warriors you want in at this tourney. Until then have a good day. 

 

I want this to be as friendly as possible. Smiles go for miles.

***********************Match 2 Round 2*****************************

 

I'm back and screw the non working poll. Through popular demand the pirates are out of tourney, so Apache wins by default. Now the big battle.

 

Ninjas versus zulu warriors

Before you vote I just want to say that zulu warriors defeated the british army which at the time was the strongest army in the early 1700s and without gunpowder

http://challonge.com/65o72zvx

Edited May 24, 2013 by Silver fox 117

[AstralDrip 67]

That's a really good idea but I got confused by the title! Greatest Warriors is a web series on youtube (I really like it- has the same animator as Adventure Time).

 

Unfortunately, I can only think of one warrior to add and that the Rajput warrior (India), and that's only because I just read about them. Other than that, I don't know anything about warriors and I'm pretty sure I would be awful at the game.

[Silver fox 117 49]

That's a really good idea but I got confused by the title! Greatest Warriors is a web series on youtube (I really like it- has the same animator as Adventure Time).

 

Unfortunately, I can only think of one warrior to add and that the Rajput warrior (India), and that's only because I just read about them. Other than that, I don't know anything about warriors and I'm pretty sure I would be awful at the game.

Yeah Maybe I should change the title, but Rajput warriors is already in the bracket. Also, you wont suck at this game because all you have to do is vote to see who you  think would win, when the brackets will be put up tomorrow. 

[AstralDrip 67]

Sorry. I didn't see it there. Well, if you start the game tomorrow I'd totally play.

You probably would get more people playing if you change the name, though.

[Silver fox 117 49]

Sorry. I didn't see it there. Well, if you start the game tomorrow I'd totally play.

You probably would get more people playing if you change the name, though.

Yeah about changing the name I don't know how lol.

Do you think you can tell me how to change the name of this thread please. to get too 100.

[AstralDrip 67]

Um... I'm not sure. I always check out the forums on my phone, but I think that if I click on my post, there's an option to edit it, and then I can change the thread title.

[Just some guy 1,070]

You should totally add the Koa Warriors from ancient Hawaii.They were pretty fierce war machines,possessing a martial arts system called Lua that basically an old Hawaiian version of MMA as well as an impressive arsenal consisting of throwing axes,trip cords,slings,stone maces,tons of daggers,and last,but not least,a spear.They were basically the badasses of the ancient Hawaiian world.

[Silver fox 117 49]

You should totally add the Koa Warriors from ancient Hawaii.They were pretty fierce war machines,possessing a martial arts system called Lua that basically an old Hawaiian version of MMA as well as an impressive arsenal consisting of throwing axes,trip cords,slings,stone maces,tons of daggers,and last,but not least,a spear.They were basically the badasses of the ancient Hawaiian world.

Okay cool I'm adding them now, thank you so much for adding more warriors I was starting to think that people won't be interested in this thread, and how about your opinions on guns being aloud in this tournament

[Just some guy 1,070]

Okay cool I'm adding them now, thank you so much for adding more warriors I was starting to think that people won't be interested in this thread, and how about your opinions on guns being aloud in this tournament

Anytime.

 

As for the guns,I don't see why you shouldn't allow them.I mean,if it's part of their arsenal,they should be able to use it.Besides,having guns doesn't always mean a secure victory for them.

[Silver fox 117 49]

I did it, i figured out how to change the name of this post heck yeah. I am like super duper happy lol.

 

Anytime.

 

As for the guns,I don't see why you shouldn't allow them.I mean,if it's part of their arsenal,they should be able to use it.Besides,having guns doesn't always mean a secure victory for them.

Also I meant to allow warriors that used guns like pirates etc.

[Just some guy 1,070]

I did it, i figured out how to change the name of this post heck yeah. I am like super duper happy lol.

 

Also I meant to allow warriors that used guns like pirates etc.

Oh.Well,still,I don't see why not to add pirates and the like.Modern day soldiers,on the other hand,might be tad too crazy since our tech is vastly superior in every conceivable way possible.But for soldiers who used the more vintage guns like the musket and flintlocks and whatnot,I don't see any harm in adding them in.

[Silver fox 117 49]

Okay the first match has started people. I don't really know how close this is going to be, but the seeds were completely randomized.

[Starshine 16,330]

You didn't include the Chinese? Especially the warriors of the Han Dynasty era? Preposterous!

From ten deadliest wars in history, seven are fought in China. There were a lot of bloodbaths in that region during the ancient times.

 

Oh, and almost everything the public knows about Ninjas nowadays are dead wrong. There is even a chance that they never really existed at all.

 

For the vote, I go with Romans. Mayans couldn't do anything when the Europeans came and ruined their days, while Roman Centurions... Their numbers alone can easily steamroll everything Mayans ever hold dear. Guerilla tactics can only work when you're not being outnumbered like 40 to 1

 

And... Gorilla warfare?

[Evilshy 5,089]

Sadly, most of these comes down to armor, not exciting battles.

Different regions and different cultures had different armor, different weapons, and different tactics. For example, a samurai might be highly skilled, and train more than a knight, but a katana can't get through plate armor faster than a knight with a long sword could kill the samurai.

 

Anyway, in this case, centurion wins an all out battle, or 1 on 1. Early mezoamerican cultures generally favored many individual warriors, who all fought for their own honor, and didn't use much team work. Even if the centurions had no armor, they'd win simply because no group of individuals could defeat such a well oiled machine of battle tactics. But they do have superior armor (and weapons), so they just steam roll.

In a 1v1, the armor and weapon advantages shine more.

[Silver fox 117 49]

Whoa Romans won huh. Well I cant say I'm not surprised like at all.

 

Sadly, most of these comes down to armor, not exciting battles.
Different regions and different cultures had different armor, different weapons, and different tactics. For example, a samurai might be highly skilled, and train more than a knight, but a katana can't get through plate armor faster than a knight with a long sword could kill the samurai.

Anyway, in this case, centurion wins an all out battle, or 1 on 1. Early mezoamerican cultures generally favored many individual warriors, who all fought for their own honor, and didn't use much team work. Even if the centurions had no armor, they'd win simply because no group of individuals could defeat such a well oiled machine of battle tactics. But they do have superior armor (and weapons), so they just steam roll.
In a 1v1, the armor and weapon advantages shine more.

Well that isn't the case in fact armor can be more hindering than helping. Right now we have a perfect case how armor is actually hindering than helping. Knights advantage waned because how much their armor weighed, and reduced their mobility. Also their is always spots where you can armor and it comes apart. Like the joints for example. Also i don't know the knights swords were very heavy and really slow to swing so I don't think a samurai would get hit that easily. Wait what am I doing the its not even the Samurai's match yet. Lol. 

[Evilshy 5,089]

Whoa Romans won huh. Well I cant say I'm not surprised like at all.

 

Well that isn't the case in fact armor can be more hindering than helping. Right now we have a perfect case how armor is actually hindering than helping. Knights advantage waned because how much their armor weighed, and reduced their mobility. Also their is always spots where you can armor and it comes apart. Like the joints for example. Also i don't know the knights swords were very heavy and really slow to swing so I don't think a samurai would get hit that easily. Wait what am I doing the its not even the Samurai's match yet. Lol. 

 

Have you ever done medieval re-enactment? They use accurate armor, and accurately weighted weapons (they obviously don't use real swords and stuff, just things that weight similarly), and they can move pretty damn fast. Yeah, they're no acrobats, but they can run and dodge fairly quickly. Also, they have shields. A knight in armor would easily beat a samurai. And even though plate armor does have weak points, they'd have chainmail under it. Katana's are honed to a very fine point, and are made for cutting through fabric, maybe leather, and flesh, as efficiently as possible. They'd just dull against European armor before doing much damage.

 

And slow swords? lolno

Contrary to what most people think, in this case at least, it matter more about who is swinging the sword than what type of sword is. Sure, a katana will be a bit faster since it's a bit lighter, but a long sword can still be swung pretty damn fast. And good luck blocking a long or broad sword with a katana more than a few times without tiring out or damaging your blade. Quite a bit more mass, and therefore momentum and power, in a knight's swing.

[Starshine 16,330]

You have already voted in this poll

 

Welp. Seems like I can't vote anything since I already voted in the previous match

+1 vote on knight

 

---

 

Medieval warfare re-enactment you say?

 

Yeah... Other than the serious lack of mortality and bloodbath, they can move quite fast, I give them that much.

 

Katanas are excellent at cutting through steel pipes and thin steel plates, so I'm pretty sure they can cut through chainmails, albeit I'm also sure that the katanas themselves won't survive the battle. It's rather easy to break them with heavier swords. Katanas also would have a hard time trying to leave a scratch in solid plate armors and Knights' shields.

Edited May 17, 2013 by Starshine

[--Eve-- 351]

It depends what type of knight you're talking about, although in reality I think knights not only have better armour, but look at least 10 times cooler.

[Aaramus 449]

Definitely going to have to go with the Roman Centurions, out of all of those types of soldiers the Romans were by far the most successful. The Roman armies were a huge machine that just battered their opponents and especially with the Marius reforms the legions were almost unstoppable. 

 

As for the whole discussion on the Knight vs Samurai, while individually skilled warriors the Samurai weren't particularly good against armies. Also western Knights and especially those from Medieval England/Europe were incredibly effective not only as individuals but in groups.

 

Source: Playing a lot of Total War games

[Evilshy 5,089]

Katanas are excellent at cutting through steel pipes and thin steel plates, so I'm pretty sure they can cut through chainmails, albeit I'm also sure that the katanas themselves won't survive the battle. It's rather easy to break them with heavier swords. Katanas also would have a hard time trying to leave a scratch in solid plate armors and Knights' shields.

 

 

You have to remember that Chain Mail is flexible, though. That seriously reduces cutting power, since the target will absorb a lot of the swing and disperse the energy. Might hurt the one wearing it, but a fully equipped knight had plate armor over chainmail over strong leather over cloth, so he wouldn't be that worse off.

 

As much as I love samurai, their battlefield, culture, and tactics are very ill-suited for fighting a western knight.

 

 

And yes, I've expressed my desire to the tech admins for a "clear poll' option, because changing a poll doesn't change the votes already given.

Edited May 17, 2013 by Evilshy

[RWB 229]

Knights vs Aztecs is a cruel matchup.

 

One side has fantastic defenses, the other weapons liable to break against it.

 

 

. Funny thing is when they did wear it their advantage in the battlefield greatly waned. The armor greatly lowered their vision, and drastically made them slower, and with the rise of new technologies the armor became more of a decoration then used in actual combat. 

 

Wrong. The armor made the shield superfluous(outside the buckler, which was more of a metal boxing glove with some more defensive ability), was light enough to allow a knight little to no slowdown, and wouldn't even prevent a skilled knight from making flips- it also allowed for swimming. A knight on foot could outrun unarmored archers due to superior physical training.

Plate armor was one of the reasons the gun rose and the bow sank.

 

 

Knights used heavy double bladed swords that wore not really meant for cutting, but to smash the other opponents armor.

 

These "heavy" blades weighed about 3 pounds(4 in some cases), and where made for stabbing(which has more fatal effects than slashing), not smashing(which they would do by grabbing their swords upside down and using the weaponized pommel as a war hammer). The knights also utilized fast grabs, punches and were very agile.

 

 

 

The only one of your arguments that really hold up is the vision.

 

 

The main issue for the Knights will always be the weather- it was hot as **** in that armor- and for those that wore protective clothing underneath? Even hotter.

 

 

 

[Evilshy 5,089]

Oh... Knights vs Aztecs?

Knights win so hard it isn't even funny.

 

I actually studied the Spanish invasion of the Aztecs for a project in highschool.

The main Aztec weapon was the Macuahuitl, which was basically a sword shaped piece of wood with small obsidian blades in the sides, to form the sword "blade". It's great against unarmored opponents, but when the Conquistadors invaded, the weapons couldn't even get through the armor. In fact, almost all Aztec weapons had obsidian or flint blades. They did sometimes use stone or copper topped maces, but still, those wouldn't do a lot to plate armor.

[Sky Warden 2,243]

Hard to determine which is the best since everything is based on the situation. Their battle tactics and equipments are different. I will say that Shaolin monks were awesome. Their play in Qi, etc, but they didn't wear any armour and that made them very vulnerable in a war. Also, they didn't like to kill.

 

Mounted cavalry against footmen? How am I supposed to say which one will win? I can say that Roman Centurion or Spartan Hoplites will die against Mongolian Mangudai, since they will outrun them in a grassland, but what if they fight in a mountainous landscape? Those Mangudai will die in minutes.

 

Centurion and Spartan Hoplites wore heavy armours. Don't mention 300. They actually wore thick armour. That movie is just... too masculine.

 

Pirates are only good at sea, seriously. Not every pirates fought like Capt. Jack Sparrow.

 

Rajput warriors are cool as well, but won't stand a chance against archers. Ninja too.

 

Mamluks were tough. Marching in the burning desert. What a badass. They even defeated the Mongols in Ayn Jalut, but that was merely because of the climate.

 

The point is, we must choose them by their versatility. The best must be able to fight good at as many situations as possible. Centurion wears heavy armour and complete equipment, but they're footmen. Their ranged weapon is only their pillum. Not so good. Also, their effectiveness is in their formation.

 

I will cast my vote on Mongolian Mangudai. They're superior with their horses, and bows. Imagine aiming your arrow at enemies while furiously riding a horse in an insane maneuver. Their archery skills help them to fight unmounted. They can fight in close combat, and their armours are decent. Stealthy or not, they're good at killing.

 

Mongolian Mangudai is the most effective and efficient military unit in the history of humankind, before firearms.

 

For today's vote, the knight. Seriously? Knight with full plate armour and bastard sword (and maybe a horse) against a traditional Aztec warrior? What a fair battle.

Edited May 18, 2013 by Sky Warden

[~Lawful Jordo~ 2,064]

Predicting my winners already.

 

 

If it's a one on one, either Samurai or Knight. You can't argue with steel armor and weapons. I think the Samurai would win out however, considering they focused on one on one engagements. 

 

ONE ON ONE CHAMPION (My humble opinion):

 

Samurai

 

 

If we're talking army on army, the popular choice would be the Spartans, but I will choose the Roman Legion. History has already proved that the arrival of the Legionnaire rendered the hoplite obsolete. Legionnaires are just a lot more flexible of a unit that the traditional 'Shield wall' Hoplites. 

 

ARMY ON ARMY CHAMPION:

 

Roman Legion

 

 

 

 

Knight absolutely stomps Aztec by the way. Knight has better training, weapons and armor.

Edited May 18, 2013 by ~Lawful Jordo~

[Sky Warden 2,243]

 

 

ARMY ON ARMY CHAMPION: Roman Legion

Sounds good. They're probably indeed the best infantry, but saying that they're the army on army champion is too much. Roman Legionaries were shot to pieces by Parthian horse archers during the reign of Antoninus Pius. There are so many other records where Roman Legionaries got crushed by cavalry, especially cavalry archers. They're slow, and their testudo formation isn't completely impenetrable. Even in the picture you posted above, you can see the hole of their shield formation. That's enough for arrows to pass through and kill the shield bearer. Not to mention that this formation doesn't recover in a second when one dies.

Two of Rome's worst defeats were caused by enemy horsemen. The battle of Carrhae and the battle of Adrianople. Not only against cavalry archer, but also charging cavalry with sword and lance like Germanic horsemen. Sarmatian Cataphracts as well. Here, have a painting:

 

That's only Parthian. Remember the Hun? See the legitimate best horse archer in the world. Mongolian Mangudai. What will happen if both army meet each other?

I don't know, but katana against knight's full plate sounds ridiculous to me. Katana is good for slashing, not chopping. I would prefer Dao (broad saber) to handle such things. One example of slashing-weapons against Europe's knight full plate is the Arabs. Their scimitar had no chance against the crusader's armour. The Arabs only killed them using their weak points, where their armour didn't cover them.

Katana is similar, even though it's better forged than Arabian scimitar. The only sane way to defeat those tick armours in a sword fight is by blunt trauma, and Dao serves that thing well.

Edited May 18, 2013 by Sky Warden