Originally posted by Utrigita
Historical scenario. Templars Stomp.Based on movie feats etc. Spartans rip them apart.
I don't know. A bunch of naked men running up to a bunch of metal men sounds like a one sided battle to me. 🙄
Also how would they fight? Lucien raised a good question (especially considering the open plains of Nebraska).
I mean, hell, the Spartans were great fighters, but the battle of Thermopylae was what really put them on the map for intense warriors. I mean their physical conditioning was far more rigorous than any known army that I am aware of.
If we're talking about 600 men running from opposite sides of a field towards each other, then Spartans win every time. If we give each one war instruments of their time to take to the battle field, Templars reign supreme.
It's very hard to say. This battle's criteria is a little too vague to provide for a conclusive outcome.
The tests they ran on Deadliest warrior did not need rigorous testing to determine that the Spartan's shield, alone, provided quite a bit of deadliness.
It was one of the most versitile offense and defense weapon they tested. The standard "head strike" with the shield, alone, was enough to kill a human from blunt trauma.
They were so impressed with the Spartans that they said they could fair well with other warriors from centuries ahead.
Meaning...real world Spartans were still badasses compared to some of their later counterparts.
They were certainly MUCH more conditioned and "skilled honed" than most other military regulars from most time periods. Since their society was pretty much based around "the way of the warrior" from birth, it's easy to see why there were so successful.
That said....
I want to see crossbow testing against the highly equipped Spartans.
This is a battle more for the GDF than the MVF, really.
The "300" from the movie were not really that exaggerated. It was the enemies that were exaggerated. Sure, they tried to stylize the fighting from the Spartans a bit but their size and conditioning were probably close to being correct. The best of the best would be large and muscular. Spartans warriors were not "small" compared to their global contemporaries: among some of the largest and most muscular men on the planet of their time. That's very directly attributable to their selective breeding: they killed their weak and sickly babies out of "mercy." Even 100 years of doing this is enough to dramatically change the population demographics..much less 2 to 3 centuries.
Anyway, seems like I'm rambling. I want to see weapons testing against the shields of the Spartans. The Templars were among the very best equipped warriors of their time due to their money and financiers. It's hard to pit top quality steel against bronze age weapons.
The Templars used broadswords or greatswords. They used a very long lance, chainmail, a kite shield, and a bucket helm.
They were also MOUNTED warriors.
I believe all those weapons were scene in the movie. So we can use those, correct? 😄
Originally posted by dadudemon
The tests they ran on Deadliest warrior did not need rigorous testing to determine that the Spartan's shield, alone, provided quite a bit of deadliness.It was one of the most versitile offense and defense weapon they tested. The standard "head strike" with the shield, alone, was enough to kill a human from blunt trauma.
They were so impressed with the Spartans that they said they could fair well with other warriors from centuries ahead.
Meaning...real world Spartans were still badasses compared to some of their later counterparts.
They were certainly MUCH more conditioned and "skilled honed" than most other military regulars from most time periods. Since their society was pretty much based around "the way of the warrior" from birth, it's easy to see why there were so successful.
That said....
I want to see crossbow testing against the highly equipped Spartans.
This is a battle more for the GDF than the MVF, really.
The "300" from the movie were not really that exaggerated. It was the enemies that were exaggerated. Sure, they tried to stylize the fighting from the Spartans a bit but their size and conditioning were probably close to being correct. The best of the best would be large and muscular. Spartans warriors were not "small" compared to their global contemporaries: among some of the largest and most muscular men on the planet of their time. That's very directly attributable to their selective breeding: they killed their weak and sickly babies out of "mercy." Even 100 years of doing this is enough to dramatically change the population demographics..much less 2 to 3 centuries.
Anyway, seems like I'm rambling. I want to see weapons testing against the shields of the Spartans. The Templars were among the very best equipped warriors of their time due to their money and financiers. It's hard to pit top quality steel against bronze age weapons.
The Templars used broadswords or greatswords. They used a very long lance, chainmail, a kite shield, and a bucket helm.
They were also MOUNTED warriors.
I believe all those weapons were scene in the movie. So we can use those, correct? 😄
Originally posted by King of Blades
I don't know. A bunch of naked men running up to a bunch of metal men sounds like a one sided battle to me. 🙄Also how would they fight? Lucien raised a good question (especially considering the open plains of Nebraska).
I mean, hell, the Spartans were great fighters, but the battle of Thermopylae was what really put them on the map for intense warriors. I mean their physical conditioning was far more rigorous than any known army that I am aware of.
If we're talking about 600 men running from opposite sides of a field towards each other, then Spartans win every time. If we give each one war instruments of their time to take to the battle field, Templars reign supreme.
It's very hard to say. This battle's criteria is a little too vague to provide for a conclusive outcome.
Going by movie feats (which is what this forum concerns itself with) I'm having a very hard time seeing the templars from Arn or kingdom to heaven having the required feats to take on the 300 Spartans from 300.
Now historical speaking it's a entirely different matter, the Templars was basically the medieval version of the spartans, in the sense that they worked as the elite unit of their time. The key difference here is that the Templars is significantly better armed then the spartans in terms of equipment that and they are, given the code of the knights imo, more skilled in a one on one engagement. So if it's 600 men running against each other, I'm fairly sure that the Templars would win given that it would quickly turn into a melee. Now if the spartans fought like they actually would historically they would form a phalanx and move slowly towards the templars, but if we are to take the battle to that level, we would also have to equip the templars with their standard equipment, multiple horses and lances, as DD already pointed out, and well... The Phalanx was dropped for a reason, until it's "reintroduction" as Hedgehog with the Pike becoming common in the european armies in the 15th hundred.
Originally posted by Darth Truculent
The best trained Knights from the Mediveal period vs the 300 Spartans at Thermopayle. Battle site is neutral - plains of Nebraska (kinda wierd). Both are the same soldiers from the films Kingdom of Heaven and 300. Who wins?
Originally posted by Utrigita
Going by movie feats (which is what this forum concerns itself with) I'm having a very hard time seeing the templars from Arn or kingdom to heaven having the required feats to take on the 300 Spartans from 300.Now historical speaking it's a entirely different matter, the Templars was basically the medieval version of the spartans, in the sense that they worked as the elite unit of their time. The key difference here is that the Templars is significantly better armed then the spartans in terms of equipment that and they are, given the code of the knights imo, more skilled in a one on one engagement. So if it's 600 men running against each other, I'm fairly sure that the Templars would win given that it would quickly turn into a melee. Now if the spartans fought like they actually would historically they would form a phalanx and move slowly towards the templars, but if we are to take the battle to that level, we would also have to equip the templars with their standard equipment, multiple horses and lances, as DD already pointed out, and well... The Phalanx was dropped for a reason, until it's "reintroduction" as Hedgehog with the Pike becoming common in the european armies in the 15th hundred.
I agree with everything you said. All my posts were introducing the ambiguity of the first quotation. This can feasibly argue any position that is presented. My efforts were merely to illuminate this notion.
Originally posted by King of Blades
I agree with everything you said. All my posts were introducing the ambiguity of the first quotation. This can feasibly argue any position that is presented. My efforts were merely to illuminate this notion.
Cool, next time it would help if I actually read the opening post 😛