>it wasn't like the video games, cataphracts were rarely totally draped in armor
and your source is?
2 years ago
Anonymous
oh you're right, I was lying, I'm making shit up because I'm a hack fraud, I concede that 100% of all parthians were completely covered in scale mail in the subtropical heat just like in the video games
parthians were invincible to arrows and could pepper infantry with arrows from a distance, they were unstoppable killing machines that conquered their way to rome to frick your mother in the ass
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Persia >Subtropical
> You have to be actually moronic to read about IIlerda and Ruspina and not Consider Caesar as the greatest general of antiquity
this
motherfrickers obsessed with memes like Alesia and Pharsalus, but what Caesar did in Spain and Africa is nothing short of tactical perfection of the era.
Nobody comes even close, not Khalid, not Subotai, nobody else comes close to that, purely from a troop positioning standpoint.
All other generals had advantage in battles themselves, by troops or direct engagement(hur dur massive cavalry charge x100) and that's it.
Whereas Caesar really touched it all with a needle,
fricking superb
If they actually employed a huge number of foot archers, wouldn't they just ram them with cataphracts as soon as they started taking casualties? As the more mobile army, they hold all the cards.
>Was Carrhae winnable for the Romans
No Surena was a pretty good commander. If he wasn't killed afterwards then maybe the parthians could have taken and held onto syria. But he was and the King and his son took over the campaign against the romans and they sucked at military affairs
Crassus took essentially every wrong move on his campaign trail. He could have stuck by the rivers. He could have got different guides.
>If he wasn't killed afterwards then maybe the parthians could have taken and held onto syria
This is an utterly absurd proposition considering that both Caesar and Pompey were superior generals to Crassus and had access to what was literally multitudes more manpower than Crassus.
>Caesar and Pompey were superior generals to Crassus and had access to what was literally multitudes more manpower than Crassus.
Caesar was very reliant on luck. Pompey loved taking other people's accomplishments. Agrippa was the only truly great general of the Late Republic.
Yes, literally just removing Crassus from command would have done wonders.
You have to be actually moronic to read about IIlerda and Ruspina and not Consider Caesar as the greatest general of antiquity
2 years ago
Anonymous
> You have to be actually moronic to read about IIlerda and Ruspina and not Consider Caesar as the greatest general of antiquity
this
motherfrickers obsessed with memes like Alesia and Pharsalus, but what Caesar did in Spain and Africa is nothing short of tactical perfection of the era.
Nobody comes even close, not Khalid, not Subotai, nobody else comes close to that, purely from a troop positioning standpoint.
All other generals had advantage in battles themselves, by troops or direct engagement(hur dur massive cavalry charge x100) and that's it.
Whereas Caesar really touched it all with a needle,
fricking superb
2 years ago
Anonymous
> of the era
Of any era til Napoleon really.
You could throw Caesar into a battle of the 30 years war or any 16th century battle and he would likely win.
Even change slightly anything to Khalid, Subotai, Alexander and the rest, and they are lost in time and space
yes, foot archers defeat horse archers, Crassus had little experience fighting that kind of enemy and didn't listen to military advisors
Thing is Romans had no good foot archers at the time.
closest was israel
>closest was israelite meme
Did your face landed in poop yard?
crassus wiener land in your throat for fee or free homosexual?
they had ample access to auxiliaries from across the empire, in a subsequent campaign they used archers and slingers and won
it wasn't like the video games, cataphracts were rarely totally draped in armor and if they were they would get exhausted pretty quickly
>it wasn't like the video games, cataphracts were rarely totally draped in armor
and your source is?
oh you're right, I was lying, I'm making shit up because I'm a hack fraud, I concede that 100% of all parthians were completely covered in scale mail in the subtropical heat just like in the video games
parthians were invincible to arrows and could pepper infantry with arrows from a distance, they were unstoppable killing machines that conquered their way to rome to frick your mother in the ass
>Persia
>Subtropical
This
>foot archers
how would to do against the cataphracts
If they actually employed a huge number of foot archers, wouldn't they just ram them with cataphracts as soon as they started taking casualties? As the more mobile army, they hold all the cards.
testudo shield wall. from parthia to mongol lance/cata:mountedarch is like 1:5 levels
Definitely. I won it in Rome Total War all the time.
18+ website
siege up the town wait for son da
>Was Carrhae winnable for the Romans
No Surena was a pretty good commander. If he wasn't killed afterwards then maybe the parthians could have taken and held onto syria. But he was and the King and his son took over the campaign against the romans and they sucked at military affairs
Crassus took essentially every wrong move on his campaign trail. He could have stuck by the rivers. He could have got different guides.
>If he wasn't killed afterwards then maybe the parthians could have taken and held onto syria
This is an utterly absurd proposition considering that both Caesar and Pompey were superior generals to Crassus and had access to what was literally multitudes more manpower than Crassus.
>Caesar and Pompey were superior generals to Crassus and had access to what was literally multitudes more manpower than Crassus.
Caesar was very reliant on luck. Pompey loved taking other people's accomplishments. Agrippa was the only truly great general of the Late Republic.
Yes, literally just removing Crassus from command would have done wonders.
You have to be actually moronic to read about IIlerda and Ruspina and not Consider Caesar as the greatest general of antiquity
> You have to be actually moronic to read about IIlerda and Ruspina and not Consider Caesar as the greatest general of antiquity
this
motherfrickers obsessed with memes like Alesia and Pharsalus, but what Caesar did in Spain and Africa is nothing short of tactical perfection of the era.
Nobody comes even close, not Khalid, not Subotai, nobody else comes close to that, purely from a troop positioning standpoint.
All other generals had advantage in battles themselves, by troops or direct engagement(hur dur massive cavalry charge x100) and that's it.
Whereas Caesar really touched it all with a needle,
fricking superb
> of the era
Of any era til Napoleon really.
You could throw Caesar into a battle of the 30 years war or any 16th century battle and he would likely win.
Even change slightly anything to Khalid, Subotai, Alexander and the rest, and they are lost in time and space
no, but mainly because they were caught out of water
Crassus was a moron
If they used another guy, they might have won