Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Loud Whispers]

By "medieval Europeans", I meant contemporary with Eastern Roman Empire ones. Medieval European cavalry was better than Eastern Roman one, by a long shot. The Roman cataphracts were actually unable to charge and were basically just a mediocre phalanx with horses, while medieval European knights were unleashing infantry-destroying charges, kicking asses and taking names, only stopped by awesome huge-ass castles of insane strength and durability that would be single-handedly able to stop the entire Western Roman army from doing anything; after all, castles stopped Mongols.

medieval europe >>>>>>>>>>>>> roman empire

Spoiler: Rome Shit (click to show/hide)

Ok, sorry to drudge up the rome thing again but WHAT THE FUCKING SHIT.
KNIGHTS AND CATAPHRACTS WERE NOT FUCKING CONTEMPORARIES.

Do you know what Cataphracts were? They were knights BEFORE THE INVENTION OF THE STIRRUP. So they were basically the same thing, but more likely to slip off their horses if they went too wild.

And when the stirrup was invented guess who got them? CATAPHRACTS. Because the Byzantine Empire was actually pretty good at what it did.
Cataphracts were basically treated as extra mobile heavy hitters yeah, and you know what they had backing them up? HORSE ARCHERS.
So Cataphracts held the line while the skirmishers busted people up from a distance.

Oh, and THATS NOT ALL. You know what the Eastern Romans/Byzantines invented? Napolean era artillery doctrine. With fucking ballistae! They would have chariots cart around mini versions of siege engines like mobile goddamn artillery support.

So NO medieval europeans didn't have JACK FUCKING SHIT on the awesomeness of Roman strategy. Basically all they had in their favor was better metalworking techniques. And that took like 300-400 years.

And on the subject of siege warfare, Romans could've beat castles like nobodies business. Their siege weapons were straight up BETTER then anything conceived of till the Renaisance when cannon started to get gud. You know they had fucking NAPALM? THEY HAD FUCKING NAPALM. THEY MADE A GODDAMN FLAMETHROWER BITCH.

And as noted earlier they had better doctrine for using siege engines as well. So yeah Romans >>>>>> Medieval Shitlords

Spoiler: Rome shit (click to show/hide)

What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little Seljuk? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Varangian Guard, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret raids on the Tigris, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and I’m the top hoplite in the entire Roman armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another green. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this sacred Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over messenger? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the Holy Land and your homeland is being charted right now so you better prepare for the storm, silkworm offal. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You’re fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that’s just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the Neorion and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the civilized world, you little pleb. If only you could have known what holy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. You’re fucking dead, kiddo.

[ChairmanPoo]

By "medieval Europeans", I meant contemporary with Eastern Roman Empire ones. Medieval European cavalry was better than Eastern Roman one, by a long shot. The Roman cataphracts were actually unable to charge and were basically just a mediocre phalanx with horses, while medieval European knights were unleashing infantry-destroying charges, kicking asses and taking names, only stopped by awesome huge-ass castles of insane strength and durability that would be single-handedly able to stop the entire Western Roman army from doing anything; after all, castles stopped Mongols.

medieval europe >>>>>>>>>>>>> roman empire

Spoiler: Rome Shit (click to show/hide)

Ok, sorry to drudge up the rome thing again but WHAT THE FUCKING SHIT.
KNIGHTS AND CATAPHRACTS WERE NOT FUCKING CONTEMPORARIES.

Do you know what Cataphracts were? They were knights BEFORE THE INVENTION OF THE STIRRUP. So they were basically the same thing, but more likely to slip off their horses if they went too wild.

And when the stirrup was invented guess who got them? CATAPHRACTS. Because the Byzantine Empire was actually pretty good at what it did.
Cataphracts were basically treated as extra mobile heavy hitters yeah, and you know what they had backing them up? HORSE ARCHERS.
So Cataphracts held the line while the skirmishers busted people up from a distance.

Oh, and THATS NOT ALL. You know what the Eastern Romans/Byzantines invented? Napolean era artillery doctrine. With fucking ballistae! They would have chariots cart around mini versions of siege engines like mobile goddamn artillery support.

So NO medieval europeans didn't have JACK FUCKING SHIT on the awesomeness of Roman strategy. Basically all they had in their favor was better metalworking techniques. And that took like 300-400 years.

And on the subject of siege warfare, Romans could've beat castles like nobodies business. Their siege weapons were straight up BETTER then anything conceived of till the Renaisance when cannon started to get gud. You know they had fucking NAPALM? THEY HAD FUCKING NAPALM. THEY MADE A GODDAMN FLAMETHROWER BITCH.

And as noted earlier they had better doctrine for using siege engines as well. So yeah Romans >>>>>> Medieval Shitlords

Spoiler: Rome shit (click to show/hide)

What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little Seljuk? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Varangian Guard, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret raids on the Tigris, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and I’m the top hoplite in the entire Roman armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another green. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this sacred Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over messenger? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the Holy Land and your homeland is being charted right now so you better prepare for the storm, silkworm offal. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You’re fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that’s just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the Neorion and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the civilized world, you little pleb. If only you could have known what holy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. You’re fucking dead, kiddo.

Spoiler: Rome shit (click to show/hide)

 I don't know who you are. I don't know what you want. If you are looking for tribute, I can tell you I don't have money. But what I do have are a very particular set of skills, skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for people like you. If you let it go, that'll be the end of it. I will not look for you, I will not pursue you. But if you don't, I will look for you, I will find you, and I will kill you.

Best Regards
Hassan i Sabbah

[Parsely]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

*reads response message*

Good luck.
Good luck.
Good luck.

[smjjames]

I know Turkey isn't QUITE Europe, but is inextricably linked...

http://www.politico.eu/article/turkish-prime-minister-ahmet-davutoglu-to-resign/
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/80890590-120c-11e6-91da-096d89bd2173.html#axzz47k0g1826
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/05/ahmet-davutoglus-future-turkish-prime-minister-balance

Sounds like it's due to a power struggle and possibly Erdogans ambition to turn Turkeys Parliamentary system into a Presidential (or Federal) system.

[Sergarr]

By "medieval Europeans", I meant contemporary with Eastern Roman Empire ones. Medieval European cavalry was better than Eastern Roman one, by a long shot. The Roman cataphracts were actually unable to charge and were basically just a mediocre phalanx with horses, while medieval European knights were unleashing infantry-destroying charges, kicking asses and taking names, only stopped by awesome huge-ass castles of insane strength and durability that would be single-handedly able to stop the entire Western Roman army from doing anything; after all, castles stopped Mongols.

medieval europe >>>>>>>>>>>>> roman empire

Spoiler: Rome Shit (click to show/hide)

Ok, sorry to drudge up the rome thing again but WHAT THE FUCKING SHIT.
KNIGHTS AND CATAPHRACTS WERE NOT FUCKING CONTEMPORARIES.

Do you know what Cataphracts were? They were knights BEFORE THE INVENTION OF THE STIRRUP. So they were basically the same thing, but more likely to slip off their horses if they went too wild.

And when the stirrup was invented guess who got them? CATAPHRACTS. Because the Byzantine Empire was actually pretty good at what it did.
Cataphracts were basically treated as extra mobile heavy hitters yeah, and you know what they had backing them up? HORSE ARCHERS.
So Cataphracts held the line while the skirmishers busted people up from a distance.

Oh, and THATS NOT ALL. You know what the Eastern Romans/Byzantines invented? Napolean era artillery doctrine. With fucking ballistae! They would have chariots cart around mini versions of siege engines like mobile goddamn artillery support.

So NO medieval europeans didn't have JACK FUCKING SHIT on the awesomeness of Roman strategy. Basically all they had in their favor was better metalworking techniques. And that took like 300-400 years.

And on the subject of siege warfare, Romans could've beat castles like nobodies business. Their siege weapons were straight up BETTER then anything conceived of till the Renaisance when cannon started to get gud. You know they had fucking NAPALM? THEY HAD FUCKING NAPALM. THEY MADE A GODDAMN FLAMETHROWER BITCH.

And as noted earlier they had better doctrine for using siege engines as well. So yeah Romans >>>>>> Medieval Shitlords

Spoiler: Rome is shit (click to show/hide)

1) Cataphracts were not "knights before the invention of stirrup", they were infantrymen with spears who were uppity enough to get on horses. Seriously, their main tactic was to hold their spear in both hands and poke their enemy while slowly riding towards the enemy. This is, like, complete garbage. Medieval knights were actually game-changing, with their ability to crush infinite amounts of infantry by charging, cataphracts were just losers invented by people who didn't know jack about proper cavalry.

Also lol on "skirmishers busting people up from the distance". Even thought why skirmisher weapons, like javelins, went out of style with the advent of Medieval Europe? Because they're garbage. Literally useless garbage against knight cavalry.

2) Roman artillery was, comparatively speaking, shit. No seriously, it was. Even thought why people unlearned how to make all these fancy ballistae and catapults? Because they were actually useless in medieval siege warfare. I can't believe you think that these dank little machinas:

are better than these MASSIVE TECHNOLOGICAL CONSTRUCTS:

against typical Medieval European fortifications.

Like, there's a fucking reason why Constantinople was mugged by Medieval Europeans, and not in reverse. Actually, there are multiple reasons here, but one of them was definitely the fact that Romans were shit at contemporary siege tactics and so were unable to even take over a single Medieval Europe castle.

As for "better doctrine for using siege weapons", proper Medieval European cavalry make Roman field siege engines a prey to be slaughtered, and proper Medieval European archers/crossbowmen are literally better at the job of fire support that them. For one, they could actually do significant damage to knights in certain circumstances.

And for "flamethrowers", Medieval Europeans had fucking several stories high walls for a reason, you ain't doing jack to these with your puny flames.

EDIT: Also, btw, EU to fine countries 'hundreds of millions of pounds' for refusing to take refugees.

I've generally been on the side that having immigration, when your native reproduction rate is low, is good. However, the way EU handles immigration as of now is complete catastrophe.

[Orange Wizard]

Rome is shit

Why yes, Roman technology was less advanced than European technology hundreds of years later.

[Calidovi]

Can miniature siege engines still be considered siege engines? Also, Constantinople has always been butfugged by regional powers, many of whom derived a lot of the same technologies from the original Romans and developed alongside the Byzantines. Perhaps it is not the technology at fault, but the tactics and resources at hand.

Rome is shit

Why yes, Roman technology was less advanced than European technology hundreds of years later.

That's why the debate is there. Because there are those who think otherwise.

[Teneb]

Spoiler: Rome is shit (click to show/hide)

By that logic, Third Rome is also shit. Checkmate, serbs!

[Sergarr]

Rome is shit

Why yes, Roman technology was less advanced than European technology hundreds of years later.

Dude Eastern Rome was also way less advanced than contemporary European technology. Proof: Fourth Crusade.

[smjjames]

Can miniature siege engines still be considered siege engines? Also, Constantinople has always been butfugged by regional powers, many of whom derived a lot of the same technologies from the original Romans and developed alongside the Byzantines. Perhaps it is not the technology at fault, but the tactics and resources at hand.

Well, that and their over-reliance on thick walls, which worked until someone came along with a massive cannon that could pratically qualify as a howitzer.

[redwallzyl]

Rome is shit

Why yes, Roman technology was less advanced than European technology hundreds of years later.

Dude Eastern Rome was also way less advanced than contemporary European technology. Proof: Fourth Crusade.

that better be sarcasm. thems fightin words!

[Baffler]

Rome is shit

Why yes, Roman technology was less advanced than European technology hundreds of years later.

Dude Eastern Rome was also way less advanced than contemporary European technology. Proof: Fourth Crusade.

that better be sarcasm. thems fightin words!

They were literally inside Constantinople when they decided that they would just take it for themselves, and the Empire had bankrupted itself by paying them. It would've been impressive if they'd managed to lose, tbh.

[Sergarr]

Rome is shit

Why yes, Roman technology was less advanced than European technology hundreds of years later.

Dude Eastern Rome was also way less advanced than contemporary European technology. Proof: Fourth Crusade.

that better be sarcasm. thems fightin words!

They were literally inside Constantinople when they decided that they would just take it for themselves, and the Empire had bankrupted itself by paying them. It would've been impressive if they'd managed to lose, tbh.

look the very fact that Eastern Romans has actually invited all these fighting people to fight in their stead, despite the danger of heresy (catholicism vs orthodoxy is srs bsns), means that Medieval Europeans were very, very much better at warfare than contemporary Romans. Enough to risk heresy, at least.

[redwallzyl]

the only invited crusade was the first one the following ones just went to fight the Muslims on their own volition. and the ERE didn't want what they got in the first place. they asked for some mercenaries and stuff from the pope and he sent hordes of peasants and army's of brigands. please actually read up on the events you are using to prove your points. and the split wasn't that bad it was mostly a political thing about the popes primacy they weren't heretics.

[Sergarr]

the only invited crusade was the first one the following ones just went to fight the Muslims on their own volition. and the ERE didn't want what they got in the first place. they asked for some mercenaries and stuff from the pope and he sent hordes of peasants and army's of brigands. please actually read up on the events you are using to prove your points. and the split wasn't that bad it was mostly a political thing about the popes primacy they weren't heretics.

ERE asked for mercenaries == ERE were shit at military. Q.E.D.

As for "split wasn't that bad" whoo boy you don't really know anything about Eastern European history, right? There were more than one conflict that was basically all about "the heretics must be all killed".