__________________ I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species that I realized you aren't actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with its surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply, and multiply until every natural resource is consumed. And the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague, and we...are the cure.
__________________ I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species that I realized you aren't actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with its surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply, and multiply until every natural resource is consumed. And the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague, and we...are the cure.
They where Ants that were given Human form by Zeus himself. They were created to be just as hardy as ants, meaning they possibly had some degree of super strength and durability. They were also highly trained. If you take that into consideration and the fact that Achilles is a great warrior and leader there is no reason why the Myrmidons should lose.
You also can't compare poorly trained Persians to Highly Trained Greeks with basically the same training as the Spartans. And the Trojan Army (Who The Myrmidons Fought) were no push overs much like the Persian Army.
__________________ I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species that I realized you aren't actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with its surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply, and multiply until every natural resource is consumed. And the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague, and we...are the cure.
Good post, however, Greeks at Troy didn't use the same tactics as The City States, no Phalanx for one thing.
They technicaly wouldn't have the same training as Spartans, who even by Greek standards were a lot better than any other city states at the time.
Only the levy were poorly trained for the Persians, the Immortals for instance were rightly feared and very highly trained and well equipped.
Their were also Greek troops fighting with the Persians. You are spot on about the Myrmidons though, they arn't human and Achilles is virtually invulnerable if you take Homer's version or an awesome fighter capable of slaughtering dozens of highly trained soliders without taking a scratch if you use the film version.
Again though, the Myrmidons in the film were just highly trained soliders not the mythlogical version and their weapons and armour would be inferior to a Spartan Hoplite.
So if it were the mythlogical Achilles and Myrmidons I would give it to them, the film version would lose based on the Spartans being just as good but with superior tactics and better weapons and armour.
Last edited by Hercules on Mar 17th, 2007 at 08:08 PM
All the Greeks used Phalanx Formation. The Spartans are just known as one of the ones that mastered it. Another thing that added to the successful use of the Phalanx Formation for the Spartans was mainly their location and the Persians mistakes and incompetence.
The Myrmidons weren't real so they weren't compared too Spartans. One is actual History the other is Myth.
In history the Immortals weren't all what they were cracked up to be like in the movie. They were arguably well trained but they were actually slaughtered by the Spartans.
We don't know if the bulk of those Troops even saw battle with the 300 Spartans, let alone any. But if they did they failed and they don't represent the Myrmidons in any way.
Not only was he invulnerable in the Iliad but he was the greatest warrior and fastest warrior, meaning he has a great deal of speed and agility. He also very likely had some super strength too. One thing about Achilles that most people don't know is that he was a Demi-God much like Heracles but with different attributes.
They won't be inferior by much. It's not like there was a revolutionary discovery over the past 6 hundred or so years. Everything is pretty much the same. It's not like that will matter anyway...
That's Arguable
It depends on who is leading the troops and Achilles has WAY more experience in leading troops then King Leonidas. The 300 Spartans also seemed to just consist of nothing but Hoplites while the Myrmidons seemed to have Peltasts, Hoplites & Archers which is a huge advantage.
Also, the movie version of the Spartans didn't have Armor and Troy was basically a watered down and remix version of the Trojan War. The Trojan War took ten years, not seventeen days. That's just ONE thing about the movie that was changed...
I agree that the fictionalized Spartans in 300 defeat the watered down movie version of Achilles and his Myrmidons. But the Mythological Achilles and Myrmidons defeat the Fictionalized Spartans in 300.
The Phalanx as the Spartans and Greek City States used it wasn't used at Troy, it was developed later on, is what I was saying in essence, it would not have been used.
Yes I realise this, my point being that if you are to debate this fight, you have to draw a line in the sand, if were taking it literaly, the Myrmidon's lose because they didn't exsist.
They were still very capable troops, and way above the levy troops, it is a testament to the Spartans skill, rather than the incompetence of the immortals that they were slaughtered.
Just pointing that out as your intial post made it seem the reverse.
No and we don't know that they didn't either, fact is they were there, again, just pointing out that all the forces there were not badly trained levy.
Agreed, however I was pointing out that movie Achilles, only seemed invulnerable because of his skill.
Hoplite shield and bronze armour, over the mostly leather that would have been worn at Troy, not light years ahead but a greater degree of protection.
I know all about the Trojan war, I have read the illiad, my opinion is the same as yours which I highlighted bold, archers however didn't give the Persian's an advantage but it would be very dependent on terrain.
achilles was a demigod don't forget his mother was the sea goddess silver feet Thetis he also had superstrength,speed,reflexes,agility, and was nigh invulnerable to both the weapons of gods and men except for his heel he was also the greatest warrior of his time or maybe all time
Well, they wouldn't lose because there wouldn't be anyone to defeat.
But that wasn't my point.
This is irrelevant
I know.
I've already admitted that they all weren't badly trained but a lot of them were.
Which Spartans are you basing this off of?
300 or the Actual Spartans?
There is a difference.
The ones from 300 were portrayed more skillful then their real world counterparts. And unlike their real world counterparts they do not have a complete armor set nor do they have more then one of the same weapon, which is going to be required if they even start to think they can defeat the Myrmidons.
Even if they did have armor it might not even matter seeing that they are basically going up against superhumans. You also have to look at the fact that the Spartans are all pretty much Hoplites (Heavy Infantryman) going up against not only other Hoplites but Peltasts (Light Infantryman) who have enough skill to take on possibly 2 Spartans. History has already proven that Peltasts can defeat Hoplites. The Athenians decimated a Spartan Phalanx during the Battle of Lechaeum using Peltasts. But this also depends on terrain/location which we don't have.
Yes it depends on Terrain but when you have individual guys with bows & arrows in the middle of battle then things aren't going to look good for a guy with his back turned...
if you know about achilles then you know about his problem with Menis... if the myrmidons were to actually die...which is probably not gonna happen, achilles is fully capable of getting pissed and solo'ing the 300.
__________________ Cap was my hero
Fanboys i PwNXoRZ!: A.W.,Riceroost,Rewmac,Mr HeavySilence,Rotiart....
Achilles was not invulnerable in the Iliad....he died before the Trojan war ended...just as it was prophesied. We know he died based on Homer's Odyssey. The story about Achilles' heel was not really widespread until around the 1st century A.D. when a story of Achilles was represented in a poem.
In a sense, most people in the Iliad had some sort of invulnerability...which is better stated as fate or destiny. When a god wants to protect some warrior in battle...a spear or sword will not touch him until the appointed time...as we see with Hector, Aeneas, and others in the poem. When the gods can no longer protect him...his destiny is fulfilled and that warrior ends up dying in battle. So, the only invulnerability in the Iliad actually stems from the protection of the gods themselves...not from personal invulnerability that the warrior may own. Achilles was a demi god and was highly skilled...but without the protection of the gods...he could have and probably would have been struck down in battle much earlier.
As for the winner of this fight...it is hard to say. In myth...the Myrmidons would have had the protection of the gods...so, they would more than likely defeat the the Spartans...if it is what fate had intended. In a real life fight...it could possibly go either way. The Spartans lived to fight....their sons were trained to be the best from childhood...and no other fighting force in the ancient world had that kind of discipline or pure skill at the time. So, it's hard to say who would win a real battle.
Well this is where I tend to fall back on history and the way they would be armoured but again even armoured I agree against the Myrmidons of myth, they lose.
Terrain plays a huge part in how effective a phalanx is, its easy to out flank and its not overly manuerable, on an open battlefield, with no missle support from Peltasts or archers they die and die badly.
Agreed though this is a factor we don't have, to be honest, If were talking the Spartans from the film compared to Mrymidons of myth then again your spot on, they die.
Its actually just refreshing to get to debate someone who has your knowledge so I was having a little fun.
Archers make a great deal of difference yes, agreed, but with the right terrain or even weather conditions they lose their effectiveness, but this is data we don't have.
Even using the two movies as a comparison neither side have it easy, on the open plains, the spartans would have to close and get peppered and Achilles was a beast even in the movie.
At Thermoplyae then the advantage swings the other way, I think we are agreed on most points however so I will just tip my hat and say it was a fun discussion, for me at any rate!
That depends on what myth you believe. So myths say he was stabbed in the back while visiting Polyxena and some say Apollo empowered and guided Paris's arrow. But he was indeed dipped in the river Styx.
I wouldn't normally come in here since I'm not to much of a comic book fan nor do I know much about the characters but when I seen the title from the main forum page I thought this might be an interesting debate.
I think that if we didn't have this discussion everyone would be Pro-Spartan. Spartans are good but compared to Mythological Figures they aren't so tough
Exactly...that's my point though....Achilles was not invulnerable...else he could never die via battle wounds. Even if his heel was the only vulnerable spot....that still means he was vulnerable. The only reference to Achilles being dipped in the river Styx comes from the Roman poet Statius.
In the Iliad, Asteropaeus challenged Achilles by the river Scamander. He cast two spears and one of them grazed Achilles' elbow...drawing blood. "Invulnerable" means that one is incapable of being wounded, hurt, or damaged.
So, in essence, Homer never intended Achilles to be invulnerable. Achilles only survived until the gods agreed that it was time for him to die. Later myths implied that Achilles was invulnerable...but the later myths contradict Homer in several aspects.
I rarely comment in the 300 threads but when I saw your post I saw an opportunity to debate someone who had some knowledge on both the myth and the history.
The thread starter didn't state anything so we can only speculate on the conditions of this battle, which we are doing. You can't say he isn't because Crease didn't mention anything on which myth to follow.
Also, just because he has a weakness doesn't me he isn't invulnerable. We've seen Superman bleed from hard enough punches. That doesn't mean he is not invulnerable, it just means he is invulnerable to a certain extent. The same may be with that myth about Achilles, maybe in that myth if he gets shot in the head with an arrow it breaks and falls to the ground and the only thing that can kill him is a blow it his weak spot do to some curse from the Styx for not completely being dipped. We can only speculate.
KMC Community Forums
Mar 17th, 2007 04:36 PM
this is a very entertaining thread
Cap was my hero
