The New Jedi Order vs The Roman Empire

I'm being civil enough to avoid a ban. That's all that matters. I'm also tired of arguing the same points over and over with you. You will never accept defeat.

We both are (for now), but I'm asking you who's being more cvil, and that's me.

Oh, and you ignored the majority of my post. If you were to read it (and some of my earlier arguments that I made, including the list of problems the Romans would have with putting 1.4 million soldiers into one battle), you'd notice some good points that you can't effectively refute.

I WILL accept defeat IF you effectively come up with a valid way as to how the Romans get past that list of difficulties they'd had in fielding 1.4 million troops in one fight.

Again, I WILL admit defeat if you make a valid argument (and give me a chance to refute it) for this:

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
The one million extra legionaries have the food that the Empire is capable of supplying them given their resources.

To march 1.4 million troops into battle at once in ancient times presents these problems:

1. How do they feed all those troops?
2. How do they command all those troops? There has to be a centralized command or else the officers will start doing random stuff that don't coordinate well.
3. How do they fit that many troops in a battleground? It's possible that the troops could suffocate, which is has happened with smaller numbers before.
4. What if Luke uses Electric Judgment, or a Jedi uses a light side variant of Force lightning? That could chain to quite a bit of people.
5. How do they effectively maneuver? To give an order to a group that long would take quite a while; it may take over an hour just to get the group to move to a place, so how do they, say, protect their supply lines?
6. Wouldn't a mass Force push knock them over like dominos?
7. How do the individual troops maneuver when they might not be able to breathe?

And, last but not least.

8. How is this going to do jack against Stealth X's?

Number 8 might not apply though.

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall

I WILL accept defeat IF you effectively come up with a valid way as to how the Romans get past that list of difficulties they'd had in fielding 1.4 million troops in one fight.

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
Again, I WILL admit defeat if you make a valid argument (and give me a chance to refute it) for this:

Number 8 might not apply though.

Originally posted by One Free Man
Despite all the tactical disadvantages of such a group, they would still win via numbers.

Originally posted by One Free Man
see, continuing to debate this point with you would bring me down to your level. I'm going to be the bigger man and not debate this with you.

"continuing?" You've barely touched on this point at all, constantly avoiding it.

And why are you so desperate to not simply counter a few points? We can make peace if you just counter an argument that's a lot shorter than a lot of other posts.

Can't you realize that it makes no sense to suddenly not want to counter an argument that is shorter than ones you just countered?

With that point 8 not applicable, you just have to counter 7 points. Since you claim to be a much better debater than me (you didn't state this directly, but even you'd admit that you think this) it should be easy, right?

1. How do they feed all those troops? EDIT: it would require LOTS of supply lines, and these would have to be guarded by lots of legionaries, thus meaning that less would be able to fight the Jedi.
2. How do they command all those troops? There has to be a centralized command or else the officers will start doing random stuff that don't coordinate well.
3. How do they fit that many troops in a battleground? It's possible that the troops could suffocate, which is has happened with smaller numbers before (ie Agincourt).
4. What if Luke uses Electric Judgment, or a Jedi uses a light side variant of Force lightning? That could chain to quite a bit of people. EDIT: it would also make the Romans VERY scared
5. How do they effectively maneuver? To give an order to a group that long would take quite a while; it may take over an hour just to get the group to move to a place, so how do they, say, protect their supply lines? EDIT: also, if the Jedi attack the left flank of the Roman line, won't the middle and right side be sitting there waiting for an order while the left flank is being destroyed?
6. Wouldn't a mass Force push knock them over like dominos? EDIT: an it would also take a very long time for them to get back in formation.
7. How do the individual troops maneuver when they might not be able to breathe? EDIT: they will barely be able to move or breathe, and this along with a lot of these other points, in addition to the obvious, will reduce the Roman morale.

Also:

What stops the Jedi from using their superior speed to retreat if things go sour for them?

The above arguments and solid, valid points BASED ON COMMON MILITARY PROBLEMS THAT HAVE HAPPENED IN HISTORY IN SIMILAR SCENARIOS! Even if you disagree with them, you can see that they are indeed good points and do not warrant any insults or mockery. I am indeed a good debater.

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
It's not just small tactical disadvantages; the Romans might even suffocate with those numbers,

"continuing?" You've barely touched on this point at all, constantly avoiding it.

And why are you so desperate to not simply counter a few points? We can make peace if you just counter an argument that's a lot shorter than a lot of other posts.

Can't you realize that it makes no sense to suddenly not want to counter an argument that is shorter than ones you just countered?

It's boring. I do this for entertainment. It's not like its my job.

Originally posted by One Free Man
NO. THEY ARENT IDIOTS IN A MOSH PIT. STOP BEING RETARDED..
Duh, how many can be within sword range at one time? jeez that was an easy question to answer.
Ill admit I got pretty ****ing bored of you constantly copy/pasting the same points and therefor got bored of debating and therefor don't want to debate this anymore.

It's boring. I do this for entertainment. It's not like its my job.

Ever heard of the Battle of Agincourt? The French knights numbered FAR less than 1.4 million and yet they were suffocating. If the Romans use a shield wall like you claim, they won't be able to surround a group as small and fast as the Jedi. Trust me; I'm pretty knowledgable in military tactics.

In this one very famous battle called the Battle of Cannae, Hannibal beat the Romans by using this tactic. He enveloped them, causing the larger Roman army to squish together. Squished tight, the Romans were unable to move and some probably suffocated as well.

The Roman army had 86,000 troops and got squished. 1.4 million would get even more squished.

A 1.4 million man army would stretch for several miles. Have you ever walked a mile before? Imagine walking several miles while in armor and trying to stay in a tight shield wall. That would be very tiring AND would take possibly hours, while the Jedi would've pwned a portion of the Romans while the other 99% are busy walking.

Also, although you've argued many other points, you have NOT refuted all of those 7 points that I made yet.

Dude, you have to admit that it's a bit suspicious when you are suddenly very reluctant to refute 7 points (that you have NOT refuted yet) when you've already spent more time refusing to do it. In your past few posts you could've already refuted (or tried to) those 7 points. Get it? You try and avoid refuting these points apparently because you don't want to spend the time, but you spend more time refusing to do so. Logically you can be nice and refute 7 points. Given how lowly you think of my debating skills, it would be easy for you, right? But it won't be, and you know it. That's why you're willing to refute my other points but for some reason don't want to refute these points, which are shorter than the others that you refuted. I backed up my claims with historical proof of the Roman army getting pwned due to congestion.

Also, the Roman legions would be spread out across the Empire. Nero would have to send messengers to gather up the forces, assign a general and other commanding officers, provide food and water and then actually find the Jedi.

The messengers would have to travel FARTHER than the Jedi would and the messengers don't have Force enhanced speed. Combine that with the other things needed to be done to even assemble an army, and by that time the Jedi would've been at Rome.

What I think that you don't understand is that there's more to war or a battle than "omg numbers!!!!" The Romans have to assemble an army, deal with the logistics and effectively coordinate it. In this case, the former would take a long time, the second would take a long time as well and the third one is virtually impossible without at least telegraphs or telephones.

(sorry for triple post)

I'll admit though that, in a hypothetical situation that's far less likely than any of the one's I've came up with and even less likely than yours about Jar Jar Binks, the Roman Empire somehow magically brought together it's entire army, fed and supplied it, found the Jedi, had instant communication, surrounded the Jedi and somehow magically prevented the Jedi from simply using their FAR superior speed to retreat, then the Romans might win.

But even then, Luke could create an illusion that lures the Romans away, or cloak the Jedi (he's cloaked even larger stuff before) and the Romans would be stabbing at air while the Jedi kill them.

But I suspect that you'd go like "nu uh!" and say that, since it's hypothetical, it's somehow false, despite the fact that it involves using a known Force power that Luke has used (Force cloak) and is no less valid than the Romans throwing their javelins.

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
Ever heard of the Battle of Agincourt?

The French knights numbered FAR less than 1.4 million and yet they were suffocating.

You've chosen the wrong topic to lie to me about. I wrote a college term paper on medieval tactics with agincourt as a centerpiece.

If the Romans use a shield wall like you claim, they won't be able to surround a group as small and fast as the Jedi.

Trust me; I'm pretty knowledgable in military tactics.

In this one very famous battle ( although I forgot the name) Hannibal beat the Romans by using this tactic. He enveloped them, causing the larger Roman army to squish together. Squished tight, the Romans were unable to move and some probably suffocated as well.

A 1.4 million man army would stretch for several miles. Have you ever walked a mile before?

Imagine walking several miles while in armor and trying to stay in a tight shield wall.

That would be very tiring AND would take possibly hours, while the Jedi would've pwned a portion of the Romans while the other 99% are busy walking.

Also, although you've argued many other points, you have NOT refuted all of those 7 points that I made yet.

Originally posted by One Free Man
Henry V? once more into the breech, dear friends, once more? 150 english against impossible odds? nope, never heard of it. what is that?
Oh, how can i put this. hmmmm
YouTube video they failed because of a few factors:
1. They were cavalry in deep mud, their heavy armor was not a helper when they dismounted either.
2. The english had a great weapon at their disposal (see english longbow)
3. The french were unable to outflank the english.
4. The archers were protected from cavalry by their palings.
5. The french HELMETS restricted the infantry's vision and oxygen, exausting them in the two-hundred yard dash they had to make to reach the archers, while the archers constantly shot them with arrows and they trod through mud wearing heavy armor.

1. Yes, and when they got knocked down many knights were unable to get back up. In this case the huge congestion that 1.4 million soldiers would cause supplements the mud problem; getting up can take quite a while when 20 people around you are on top of you, and they'd be getting knocked down a lot by Force pushes.
2. Blasters are even more deadly, as are lightsabers and the Force, so I don't see what you're getting at here.
3. And the Romans won't be able to outflank the Jedi because the Jedi are FAR faster and more maneuverable AND it would take a long time to relay orders to the Romans.
4. Jedi are protected from cavalry by a number of things, including repeating blasters, a more advanced version of a weapon (the machine gun) that made horse (and other animal) cavalry OBSOLETE in almost all cases.
5. The Romans would have to dash even harder while congested and keeping in formation to catch up to Jedi that can move pretty fast, who would be performing Force pushes and blaster fire, both of which are far more deadly than longbows.

See?

Argument 1 about the mud was mostly valid, but the others were ridiculous. You are claiming that the French lost largely due to them having to charge at protected longbowmen, yet the Jedi have the Force, lightsabers and blasters, all of which are very deadly. Blasters closely resemble a weapon that made cavalry charges obsolete, so your claim about my example being invalid because the French failed due to "a few factors" is wrong.

Basically, this battle would be like the the Battle of Thermopylae only with even more epic pwnage as the Jedi would pwn legionaries more than the Spartans would pwn Persians (Spartans were tough but didnt' have supernatural powers and space age technology like the Jedi do), but without some secret flanking route.

Originally posted by One Free Man
You've chosen the wrong topic to lie to me about. I wrote a college term paper on medieval tactics with agincourt as a centerpiece.

I didn't lie about it, but apparently you think that longbows caused the French problems that would outweigh the problems blasters, the Force and lightsabers would cause for the Romans.

H, you make a thread because you don't know who will win. This is as spiteful as the Empire vs Earth thread.

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
[B]1. Yes, and when they got knocked down many knights were unable to get back up. In this case the huge congestion that 1.4 million soldiers would cause supplements the mud problem; getting up can take quite a while when 20 people around you are on top of you, and they'd be getting knocked down a lot by Force pushes.

2. Blasters are even more deadly, as are lightsabers and the Force, so I don't see what you're getting at here.

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
I didn't lie about it, but apparently you think that longbows caused the French problems that would outweigh the problems blasters, the Force and lightsabers would cause for the Romans.

Originally posted by One Free Man

I didn't say they'd use the shield wall, stop misquoting me. I said that they wouldn't go in in waves, but rather as an entire show of force, because their primary tactic was a shield wall. Can't do that, you just misquoted me and lied about Agincourt. how can I trust you?

You stated that the Romans would be using the shield wall. And again, I didn't lie about Agincourt.

wow, you're rather uneducated. You don't know the battle, and you claim that "some probably suffocated." I'm supposed to accept this as a point?

Maybe it's not definite that the Romans suffocated, but it IS definite that they could barely maneuver.

yes. I walked 20 miles straight once. shut up.

And how long did it take?

roman armor consisted with an open-face helmet, a breastplate, and a loin cloth thingy. it wasn't that complicated. Also, I said that their favorite tactic, the shield wall would make them err on the side of attacking en masse, not that the shield wall would be what they used.

Still, the armor, weapons and shield would weight them down while they have to wait for a messenger to come, walk over to perform the order, and then realize that the Jedi aren't where the messenger said they would be because the Jedi moved.

they'd still have to have the energy to fight 1.4 million romans. Also, shield walls arent just a straight line. They have more than one layer.
not interested. I just did this to correct you on some minor points that you oh so very failed to get right on the battle of agincourt.

You still haven't answered how the Romans catch the Jedi if the Jedi decide to retreat. While retreating they can fire blasters and do Force pushes at the Romans (whose archers would not have the range to fire back, at least when the Jedi are using their blasters from a very long range). The Romans might try and pursue, but only their cavalry would be fast enough, and you probably know that cavalry would not fare well against blasters, the Force and lightsabers, just like how cavalry got pwned by machine guns.

Originally posted by One Free Man
this is a Falacy, often made by people in regards to armor. If armor fits, it's not hard to move around in at all, it's just heavy. When you get knocked down, you're not a tin can and still have complete flexibility of your joints. Also, the legs on roman soldiers are not armored. And breastplates, something that has a high tensile strength and covers the chest, where breathing occurs, would not be impacted by being layed upon. You'd be able to breath perfectly because your chest would have just as much room as if you were standing up.
IM CORRECTING YOUR IDIOTIC OPINION OF THE BATTLE OF AGINCOURT. IM NOT EVEN ****ING DEBATING STAR WARS. I thought this was clear?

1. I understand that plate mail isn't as constricted as some stereotypes may make it seem, but when when knocked down in the mud it is very hard to get up with plate mail on.

2. Even without armor on, being side by side with 1.4 million soldiers (if the Romans somehow assembled an army that large IN ONE BATTLE while dealing with the logistics, which you refuse to explain) in a formation as tight as the ones that Romans use is not all that great.

3. Strawman. Your justification for how the Romans would not lose like the French would be that they wouldn't have longbows being fired at them, but actually they'd be facing even more deadly and advanced ranged weapons.

Ouch. After stating multiple times that he wasn't debating SW, you still harrass him. Goat-penetrating hypocrite. I bet you will twist this against him too, and bring this up in 2 weeks time, assuming REX puts an end to this debacle.

EDIT: lol nice edit

Originally posted by Shoes
Ouch. After stating multiple times that he wasn't debating SW, you still harrass him. Goat-penetrating hypocrite. I bet you will twist this against him too, and bring this up in 2 weeks time, assuming REX puts an end to this debacle.

EDIT: lol nice edit

"that he wasn't debating SW"

What? What forum do you think this thread is in?

"harass"?

Did you see how he insults me (and this includes before I started getting mad at him; look back and you'll see that I was being MUCH more civil than he was)? You're the hypocrite.

"hypocrite"?

LOL

See? You fail to look at the big picture.

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
"that he wasn't debating SW"

Since you simply skimp over his posts and post fellacious arguments against whatever your cursor highlights, I assume you didn't see when he said that you weren't worth his time.

What? What forum do you think this thread is in?

ya hewho why are you arguing about romans?

LOL

See?

Your pathetic attempt to blanket your frustration with that overused acronym is transparent. You're the one taking everything personally, and then pretending to laugh it off.

See?

You fail to look at the big picture.

The "big" picture is Romans v SW, which is horribly spiteful.