| |
|
| |
|
|
| 06 Sep 2013 09:26 PM |
| nobody likes you extreme lol |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 06 Sep 2013 09:26 PM |
| romans because romans have thick armor, shield, good spears, and organization, while the mongols' main weapon is horse archery, which is easily countered by the roman empire's tactics |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Reaven
|
  |
| Joined: 17 Jun 2008 |
| Total Posts: 9181 |
|
|
| 06 Sep 2013 09:26 PM |
| Depending on what period of the Roman empire, and considering the mongols being from the 1200s, I'd probably go with the mongols. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 06 Sep 2013 09:26 PM |
mongols.
cause they had rocks and bows and horses.
romans had shields that cant protect against pebbles. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 06 Sep 2013 09:27 PM |
@reaven how about i narrow this down
one century of men under Julius Caesar 100 Mongol horse-archers |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Reaven
|
  |
| Joined: 17 Jun 2008 |
| Total Posts: 9181 |
|
|
| 06 Sep 2013 09:28 PM |
| The Romans could probably just shield wall through things for a while, and the Mongols would leave when they run out of arrows because they're raiders and pillagers, and not obligated to actually win anything. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
wildnick7
|
  |
| Joined: 01 Feb 2011 |
| Total Posts: 7600 |
|
|
| 06 Sep 2013 09:28 PM |
@extremelystupic
reported for bullying tala |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 06 Sep 2013 09:30 PM |
damn reaven you're smart i mean i knew that but wow
@wild hahahahahahha |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
KILGO65
|
  |
| Joined: 09 Oct 2009 |
| Total Posts: 2126 |
|
|
| 06 Sep 2013 09:45 PM |
Let's just allow Deadliest Warrior to settle this.
Back to the grind. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 06 Sep 2013 10:00 PM |
deadliest warrior is
1. canceled 2. inaccurate |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|