300 run the Gauntlet

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



braz
300 Spartans from the movie, 300 with their standard weapons/armour.

Fighting at the Hot Gates.



1. 300 Native Americans

2. 600 Natives

3. 300 Roman Legionnaires(movie-The Last Legion)

4. 600 Legionnaires

5. 300 Samurai from The Last Samurai

6. 600 Samurai

7. 300 Cowboys

8. 600 Cowboys

9. Master Chief-Energy Sword and Mark VI armor.

BlaxicanHydra
They lose at the cowboys

Guns> People without guns.

boriquaking55
AFAIK, Bronze ain't gonna much against bullets.

JasonK4
Originally posted by BlaxicanHydra
They lose at the cowboys

Guns> People without guns.

braz
Idunno, the Spartan shields in the movie were able to stop explosive fragments. shifty

C. C. Cowgirl
It would not matter if they could stop the fragments with their shields or not smile

A part of the 300's defense were their skills in hand-to-hand combat and there would not be much of that against a bunch of cowboys, since it is quite tricky to fight a bullet of with a sword stick out tongue

Hannibal-Lector
im pretty sure they stop at samuri, kitanas can easily cleave through 300s weapons shields... and costumes

C. C. Cowgirl
They will get to the cowboys and stop there smile

The movie Samurai's appeared good but not near as good as the movie Spartan's appeared to be big grin

Of course for some reason I go from the point that the Spartan's got their little mountain passage to fight from stick out tongue

braz
Cowboys it is.

C. C. Cowgirl
Damn straight raver

braz
stoned

Darth Martin
Originally posted by C. C. Cowgirl
They will get to the cowboys and stop there smile

The movie Samurai's appeared good but not near as good as the movie Spartan's appeared to be big grin

Of course for some reason I go from the point that the Spartan's got their little mountain passage to fight from stick out tongue Uh, meybe that's cuz the whole movie the Samurai were fighting against people with guns(not to mention they were outnumbered in every fight). Samurais metal is better than the Spartans as someone above stated. Besides Katsumoto and Ujio were bad***. cool

gogogadgetgo
i see them stoping at no 4. 600 Legionnaires

roman legionnaires fight in a simillar manner as the spartants. they two use the same phalanx formation (spelling?)

they are also well trained soldiers. during the roman's reign as the supreme power, their armies were considered as the best. their soldiers were freared for their fighting skills and strategies.

if they were to fight in an open field, the spartants are going down...
if they stay in their mountain paths, the romans arent stupid as to just go dashing in..

braz
Originally posted by gogogadgetgo
i see them stoping at no 4. 600 Legionnaires

roman legionnaires fight in a simillar manner as the spartants. they two use the same phalanx formation (spelling?)

they are also well trained soldiers. during the roman's reign as the supreme power, their armies were considered as the best. their soldiers were freared for their fighting skills and strategies.

if they were to fight in an open field, the spartants are going down...
if they stay in their mountain paths, the romans arent stupid as to just go dashing in..

Yeah, but this is the Spartans from the movie, who were badaaaaaaaasssssss..Plus, what other choice do the Romans have but to go str8 into the mouth of the Hot Gates? erm
They dont know the terrain or the goat path that outflanks them.

Dgw2007

gogogadgetgo
Originally posted by braz
Yeah, but this is the Spartans from the movie, who were badaaaaaaaasssssss..Plus, what other choice do the Romans have but to go str8 into the mouth of the Hot Gates? erm
They dont know the terrain or the goat path that outflanks them.

true true. those spartants were something else.

but whats stopping the romans from using their chariots, catapults, and balistas? they do have those (i think...not so sure about the balistas though)

braz
Originally posted by gogogadgetgo
true true. those spartants were something else.

but whats stopping the romans from using their chariots, catapults, and balistas? they do have those (i think...not so sure about the balistas though)

Yeah, my bad I shouldve went into detail about all the weaponry for each, I just didnt feel like it lol. The Romans have their long spears, those hugeass shields, swords, they got archers and 10 chariots per 300 Legionnaires. No catapults or balistas.

gogogadgetgo
Originally posted by braz
Yeah, my bad I shouldve went into detail about all the weaponry for each, I just didnt feel like it lol. The Romans have their long spears, those hugeass shields, swords, they got archers and 10 chariots per 300 Legionnaires. No catapults or balistas.

awwww sad ah well, and i'm guessing that the samurais get their standard katanas and, speers, bows and horses. hmmm...with this in mind, the spartans stop at the cowboys laughing

Ptr_Grifin
Originally posted by Hannibal-Lector
im pretty sure they stop at samuri, kitanas can easily cleave through 300s weapons shields... and costumes

That only happens in the cartoons. It is much harder to cut through bronze than you think.

grey fox
Originally posted by Ptr_Grifin
That only happens in the cartoons. It is much harder to cut through bronze than you think.

Have to agree.

There was a 3 page debate on Samurai versus Spartans in the History forum and it eventually concluded that while the Samurai MAY be more skilled then a Spartan in certain forms of sword-play, their inferior armour and useless sword style would give them the defeat.

SevenShackles
Originally posted by grey fox
Have to agree.

There was a 3 page debate on Samurai versus Spartans in the History forum and it eventually concluded that while the Samurai MAY be more skilled then a Spartan in certain forms of sword-play, their inferior armour and useless sword style would give them the defeat.

useless? in what way?

grey fox
Originally posted by SevenShackles
useless? in what way?

It has multiple problems which render it useless in this particular battle.

A. The katana is a singular edged weapon, meaning from the get go your odds of wounding your enemy are halved.

B. The blade has very little point thus stabbing attacks (even on unarmoured flesh) were difficult, thanks to this it can't penetrate even low-grade chainmail. The swords would have to compete with (reasonably) high grade Bronze armour.

C. The blades can be shattered quicker and easier , then the rougher weaponry used by the spartans

SevenShackles
Originally posted by grey fox
It has multiple problems which render it useless in this particular battle.

A. The katana is a singular edged weapon, meaning from the get go your odds of wounding your enemy are halved.

B. The blade has very little point thus stabbing attacks (even on unarmoured flesh) were difficult, thanks to this it can't penetrate even low-grade chainmail. The swords would have to compete with (reasonably) high grade Bronze armour.

C. The blades can be shattered quicker and easier , then the rougher weaponry used by the spartans

ahhh thanks for the info. knowledge truly is power eek!

Hercules
Japanese steel sucks, which is why there are so many folds in a Katana blade, to stengthen it, their armour is leather due to the way Samurai fight and they use no shields due to their style of fighting. For a long period in Japan the Yari (spear) was the weapon of choice for infantry.

The legions didn't use the Phalanx after 500BC and the legions of the Republic were split into Equites (cavalry), Velites (light infantry), Hastati (heavy infantry, young troops), Princeps (heaby infantry men in their prime) and Tiarii (veterans and the last line of defense) all heavy infantry apart from the Tiarii who uses spears would be equiped with pilum and Gladius.

As for chariots, they were not used by Romans in battle, mainly for recreation, chariots were really outmoded by cavalry.

The armies of the late republic/early empire were different again after the Marian reforms and the armies of the late empire different once more.

So you need to specify which Roman legionaries you are talking about, a Roman legion of the late republic/early empire would have ground a phalanx up and spit it out.

Hercules
Originally posted by braz
300 Spartans from the movie, 300 with their standard weapons/armour.

Fighting at the Hot Gates.



1. 300 Native Americans

2. 600 Natives

3. 300 Roman Legionnaires(movie-The Last Legion)

4. 600 Legionnaires

5. 300 Samurai from The Last Samurai

6. 600 Samurai

7. 300 Cowboys

8. 600 Cowboys

9. Master Chief-Energy Sword and Mark VI armor.

Looking at the list again, I take it 600 Natives = Native americans, what are they armed with?

Are they a particular tribe? (some were much more warlike than others) from what time period are they from as they could concievably be armed with rifles themselves.

SevenShackles
Originally posted by Hercules
Looking at the list again, I take it 600 Natives = Native americans, what are they armed with?

Are they a particular tribe? (some were much more warlike than others) from what time period are they from as they could concievably be armed with rifles themselves.

sort of hoping natives = Vikings

Hercules
Originally posted by SevenShackles
sort of hoping natives = Vikings

But that would mess up the order, as it seems to go 300 to 600 of the same type?

SevenShackles
Originally posted by Hercules
But that would mess up the order, as it seems to go 300 to 600 of the same type?

yeah but vikings would be better than native Americans.. their weapons sucked. i mean they talk about the samurais swords falling short, but these people used spears easily broken by metal, and arrows that couldnt do much of crap. at least a horde of vikings would look scary.

tomohawk vs battleAxe.
who do you think is a better pick?

Hercules
Originally posted by SevenShackles
yeah but vikings would be better than native Americans.. their weapons sucked. i mean they talk about the samurais swords falling short, but these people used spears easily broken by metal, and arrows that couldnt do much of crap. at least a horde of vikings would look scary.

Depends on the time period, Native Americans used rifles bought, traded and taken from European settlers.

Also the primary weapon of the Native American would have been the throwing spear and later the bow and arrow not the tomahawk, although both had a relatively short range.

Once they aquired Horses they were a more mobile force and would shoot from horseback, so really, depending on the era Native Americans could put up more of a fight than you think.

SevenShackles
Originally posted by Hercules
Depends on the time period, Native Americans used rifles bought, traded and taken from European settlers.
cowboys win cuz of guns.. so if he was talking bout native americans with rifles which i dont think is the case, since most just give them their stereotypical gear. shouldnt the Spartans end at 1 or 2?

sort of sucks the fun out of it dont you think?

Hercules
Originally posted by SevenShackles
cowboys win cuz of guns.. so if he was talking bout native americans with rifles which i dont think is the case, since most just give them their stereotypical gear. shouldnt the Spartans end at 1 or 2?

sort of sucks the fun out of it dont you think?

Look at my edit above, stereotypical doesn't = factual.

This is why the OP should be more specific about equipment etc, he didn't specify so it is concievable that these Native Americans could have been a raiding party of Plains Apache armed with Winchesters and on horseback.

SevenShackles
Originally posted by Hercules
Look at my edit above, stereotypical doesn't = factual.

This is why the OP should be more specific about equipment etc, he didn't specify so it is concievable that these Native Americans could have been a raiding party of Plains Apache armed with Winchesters and on horseback.

Winchesters take the spartans.. yeah you have a point here and im starting to wish the OP would clarify. even tho im sure since they are so low in the gauntlet itself they wont be given such weapons.

btw i only brought up the tomahawk as something to compair to an battle Axe. i honestly find the stereotypical native American depiction to be abit tastless.

humm talking bout Native Americans and Vikings makes me think of the movie Pathfinder.

Hercules
Originally posted by SevenShackles
Winchesters take the spartans.. yeah you have a point here and im starting to wish the OP would clarify. even tho im sure since they are so low in the gauntlet itself they wont be given such weapons.

btw i only brought up the tomahawk as something to compair to an battle Axe. i honestly find the stereotypical native American depiction to be abit tastless.

humm talking bout Native Americans and Vikings makes me think of the movie Pathfinder.

I agree, that if he has put them 1. and 2. on the list then I doubt they would have anything but basic armament native to them but loopholes like not specifying leave it open to say that they wouldn't get past 1.

Huscarls with their two handed axes would give the Spartans trouble imo, it was said those things could cleave a horse in two with one shot and the men that wielded them were huge and very skilled.

It makes me think of 13th Warrior! big grin

SevenShackles
Originally posted by Hercules
I agree, that if he has put them 1. and 2. on the list then I doubt they would have anything but basic armament native to them but loopholes like not specifying leave it open to say that they wouldn't get past 1.

Huscarls with their two handed axes would give the Spartans trouble imo, it was said those things could cleave a horse in two with one shot and the men that wielded them were huge and very skilled.

It makes me think of 13th Warrior! big grin

ah! Huge men with axes said capable of cleaving a horse in two! i wonder where that would fall in the argument of 'attacks VS bronze shields' . someone might also raise the point of the Spartans defeating that giant troll like immortal in the novel/movie, but as you said a huge difference is that giant was a brute, and the axe using Huscarls is an actual skilled warrior. that is really interesting.

think they can break spartan battle formation?

lol yes! 13th Warrior! better movie choice big grin

braz
Native Americans from around the 12th century have: bow and arrow, tomahawks and spear. Werent they still using stone weaponry then? Thats why I put them at the beginning. And its just some random tribe, Idunno which lol.

SevenShackles
Originally posted by braz
Native Americans from around the 12th century have: bow and arrow, tomahawks and spear. Werent they still using stone weaponry then? Thats why I put them at the beginning. And its just some random tribe, Idunno which lol.

next time throw vikings into the mix! thanks for clearing that up btw.

Hercules
Originally posted by braz
Native Americans from around the 12th century have: bow and arrow, tomahawks and spear. Werent they still using stone weaponry then? Thats why I put them at the beginning. And its just some random tribe, Idunno which lol.

Well Tomahawks had stone heads that were sharpened tradtionally and the arrow heads would have most probably been flint or some kind of sharpened stone.

I've never seen the film Lost legion but I think the Spartans would be hard pushed to beat 600 Legionaries, if they were from the late republic/early empire.

braz
Originally posted by SevenShackles
next time throw vikings into the mix! thanks for clearing that up btw.

Yeah, that would be good. wink

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.