Who would win a real fight? Roman soldiers vs Spartan Soldiers?

Bears.

>>721074610
wtf ha

trump

>>721074772
Trump with the faces that looks like a fat dump?

The phalanx is too inflexible. Rome ftw

>>721074480

Well if history tells us anything, it would be the Romans. After years of political rise in Rome and decline in Sparta. Sparta is a good example of what a pussy subculture, like what we have in America, can do to a strong nation.

>>721074941
thats 1 vote for ROME!

File: Crusader 10.png (518KB, 536x400px) Image search: [Google]

518KB, 536x400px

THE GREAT CRUSADERS ARE NUMBER 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhqeNUFCyI0

>>721075038
nice excuse in trying to pretend sparta didn't get anal raped in war by the roman superior cock

>>721074480
I would guess Romans

>>721075038
Pussy subculture? Sparta went into decline because of failed military campaigns and the fact that they had to put down a bunch of helot revolts because their system of governance was fucked and bound to fail.

>>721075231

I am not pretending anything, they did get raped right in the pooper, tongue punched right in the old fart box, got their salad tossed harder than a Colombian trying to get cocaine out of a dead hooker. But at one time sparta was pretty cool.

#makespartagreatagain

>>721074480
I mean you're not exactly specifying numbers or conditions. If we're just assuming an equal number of men on both sides at their peak, i'd give it to Spartans. Roman soldiers were great at formations and tactics, but most of that was attributed to generals.

romans masacre the spartans in 2nd centuri BC

>>721075721
this is fucking awesome lmao, any more cool random stuff like this?

>>721074480
Roman

>>721074480
How is this even a question it was proven the roman formations could cuck the phalanx.

That's the nature of the real world 10000x folded honiribu spartan warrior culture doesn't matter when your enemy has superior numbers, tactics and tech.

>>721074480
thats really tough.
Nearly same tactic -> phalanx
Nearly same weapons -> shild , short sword and speer

but roman soldiers was most time normal civilians who did military service some time while spartans was trained to fight from child.

so i would bet on spartans.

>>721076405
how did they destroy the phalnax?

>>721074480

The success and brutality of the Roman soldier has been well noted many times over by historians throughout the empire at the time of their peak. Spartans are only know because of one story (probably a myth) that was from a single area of history. Also everyone knows greeks tend to blow things out of proportion in terms of their own history. So I'm calling bullshit on Sparta.

>>721076538
not same tactics, romans didn't use phalanx. Also romans had steel while spartans had bronze, and sparta fell because spartans refuse to adopt new tactics (or any other tactics that isn't phalanx) than means no cavarly, no ballistas, no archers, etc

File: TERMINATOR-WHEELCHAIR.jpg (87KB, 853x739px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 853x739px

who would win?

300 sparatans or minigun marcusl?

>>721077021
>not same tactics, romans didn't use phalanx
google it

> romans had steel while spartans had bronze
thats a gamechanger.

lets say its a 50 vs 50 man ight then i bet on spartans
when its an army vs army fight i bet on romans

>>721076720
Romans got fucked over when they were shown you could just flank the shit out of it.

They developed the 3 line legionary formation which proved it could easily outmanoeuvre the phalanx during a war with Macedon where the legion ran circles around it and fucked the shit out of Greece.

>>721074480
depends on what point in history, at the time of the height of roman empire, the romans took over everything in the mediterranean the alexander the great had previously conquered

File: 1481085860542.jpg (55KB, 800x606px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 800x606px

Sparta SURRENDERED to Athens during the peloponnesian wars.... Athens....

They sucked ass in reality.

/thread

Did Sparta take over the world?
>No
Did Rome take over the world?
>Yes

I'm gonna go with Rome on this. Results matter. The Spartans are most famous for LOSING a battle. I'm with the guy above calling shit on Sparta.

File: 7326213278_9931d13efe_h.jpg (611KB, 1600x901px) Image search: [Google]

611KB, 1600x901px

SPQR all the way

File: 85d9bf85a2da1e099f3a040d97bbf610.jpg (184KB, 736x542px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 736x542px

Rome

>>721074480
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iz1_UwD2Fw

Romans routinely defeated Greeks as their fighting style was much more flexible and adaptable.

If the Romans were veterans in testudo then yes. Sparta bred a warrior CULTURE not simply and army OF warriors.

File: ctr.jpg (68KB, 400x600px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 400x600px

>>721074894
Trump is a big meanie-weanie who said bad things about the brown people!

Roman soldiers from when, 200 BC? 100 AD? 300 AD? Not that it makes a difference. They are using steel weapons that will tear the Greek bronze armor to shreds. And Greek bronze weapons will break against Roman armor.

Rome steamrolled the Spartans at the Battle of Gythium. It was a joke as far as military history is concerned no contest at all. I'm sure the Roman soldiers at that time joked about it a lot while they were knee deep in all that defenseless Spartan/Greek pussy.

>>721078174
Sparta was part of Greece

Greece and Rome went to war around the same time Sparta existed. Sparta lost and left Greece.

File: 854856854852.gif (97KB, 600x399px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 600x399px

>>721074480
Rome, heavy infantry and much larger numbers vs light infantry......... just on that alone, not even getting into tactics

>>721077207
also the construction of roman armor made it not only stronger but more movile than what the spartans had

>>721074480
For some fucking reason, i read romans as "Russian" like a retard.

>>721078174

This. Has nothing to do with how badass you think Spartans were based on having see a comic book movie about them. Only factor that matters is superior tech. Roman steel vs. Spartan bronze or even iron is like an FN SCAR vs. Springfield Model 1861.

>>721078378

Juno's cunt, it's TItus Pullo.

>>721074480
it depends my man, it depends on what erra in history, it depends on how many legions vs how many spartans, it depends on the generals leading the men, etc. etc.

Hannibal Barca almost defeated rome with only 25,000 men passed the alps, about 25,000 recruited italians on home soil who were cast out by rome and denied citizenship and 20 years, the rest of carthage got cucked hard by rome, while hannibal with barely any men was considered at the time unbeatable by romes consoles and the method they devised to deal with hannibal was to simply avoid and contain him so that they would have to face him outside of fortifications

>>721078174

Exactly. It's Iron age soldiers vs Bronze age soldiers. That's like asking WW1 soldiers vs contemporary soldiers. The modern soldiers would slaughter the ancient ones like sheep.

I mean considering that Romans probably improved on spartan tactics, while introducing their own, then Romans.

>>721078932

>but I saw 300 and they were like superheros in that movie therefore they will win

>>721078524
who would win 10 shaolin or 10 roman soldiers .... armor isnt everything ....

>>721077679
No they didn't. You got it backwards.

Sparta beat Athens.

>>721079120
The shaolin wouldn't even be fighting unless the romans really pissed them off.

>>721077679
Got that mixed up
http://www.ancient.eu/Peloponnesian_War/
Also Rome will win 9/10 times.

File: 1485999392593.jpg (6KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 225x225px

>>721077207
the definition of contradicting yourself , your a fucking faggot who clearly knows nothing about this subject drink bleach inb4 edgy

>>721078174

yep, and this can basically be applied to the vikings vs. whatever meme too. whichever group existed later is the default winner because they have the overwhelming advantage of evolved tactics and evolved technology.

File: total-war-rome-2-army-screenshot_1600.jpg (944KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

944KB, 1600x900px

I'd be willing to livestream a battle over steam or whatever with another anon if they have Rome 2 and are willing to duke it out to the death.

When Rome really got going on its early expansion, it had an extremely dominant military. I don't think extreme martial discipline and ability declined with the decline of Sparta around 400-350 bc, it just evolved, to the point that aroudn the time Rome just defeated Carthage, the majority of greece was united under the achaean league (which included sparta) and thought the romans would be easy pickings. Greece was arrogant from years of being dominant on the battlefield for centuries, and used the hoplites in phalanx formation. At that time, Rome used a modified version, and whipped Greece badly.

So there is an example of Rome actually defeating Sparta while teamed up with all its allies in Greece.

Another point, probably more important, is that Rome was made of professional soldiers, at least after the late republic (iirc) whereas greeks were always a levy army, i.e. people were drawn from the citizenry when they needed troops. Rich(er) spartans were the ones who could afford the swords, shields, and maybe horses, and they would leave their farms and houses when required to go on campaign to earn some spoils. Rome, on the otherhand, had professional standing armies which drilled often and had plenty of civil wars to fight each other and gain experience fighting actual trained soldiers rather than conscripts.

Equipment wise, I think Rome (at any point during the late republic or empire) fighting Sparta at its prime would be like a modern US army fighting the revolutionary us army. Metal, tactics, and the diversity of auxiliaries and foreign cavalry made Rome extremely formidable even in the contemporary times, consider for example how easily it conquered Greece and Macedon.

Source: The Gladiator by Ridley Scott

>>721076014
name a battle where romans were beaten by a phalanx

>>721078932
the standard ww2 german army rifle k98 was from ww1.

>>721074480
Not enough information to go on...

Who are the Commanders?
Where are they Fighting?
How many troops are on each side?
What kind of troops (The Romans while they loved their cohorts had a great deal of variety.)
What's the Weather Like?
How well fed is everyone?
How well rested is everyone?
Anybody sick?
Anybody local to the region they are fighting in and thus better protected against diseases?
Is this a single skirmish or a major campaign?

>>721079577

look faggot, do you want him to squeeze all that shit into the meme so your stupid ass can arrive at an answer? Just pick one and shut the fuck up.

>>721079116
this

https://youtu.be/gI6sARmxEuc

>>721074480
Rome ftw

>>721079781
This
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Roman_army

>>721079577
Continuing on...

Anyone Ambushing? If so who?
Which era of Romans are we talking about?
Which era of Spartans are we talking about?
Is artillery involved in any way?
Are archers involved in any way?
Is cavalry involved in any way?

File: 1481691048039.jpg (109KB, 720x540px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 720x540px

>>721080081
>>721079577
Or someone could do this>>721079411

File: Cannae.png (23KB, 737x567px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 737x567px

>>721079726
See, it's that kind of thinking that gets you Cannaed

>>721074480
and the winner is

https://youtu.be/TPhAznUeipY

>>721079577
jesus christ Autismo - assume: same everything
its down to tactics, training, weapons and ferocity

"what commander" and "what is the weather" is your response? have trouble with deciding between standing or sitting when you have to take a shit?

well army A ate duck for dinner, while army B ate goose. How the fuck does that impact your thinking?

>>721080081

Every single one of those factors could be in Sparta's favor and Romans would still slaughter them because technology.

>>721078058
From the mid-empire onwards, Rome was essentially a military with a citizen base as an afterthought. Before that, Rome shocked every single Meditteranean and near-asian culture, including Sparta, with its martial prowess. At its inception, (according to legend) Rome began as a collation of brigands and rogues who waged wars as a wildly successful warband against their established, organized, and (then considered) civilized neighbors the Etruscan, and established a six hundred year empire, encompassing most of the western world. Whereas Sparta dominated Athens for about 9 years after the Peloponnesian war then lost to Thebes, at the "height" of their power.

>>721080293
>Fully maxed out late game elite Spartans
>Early game Hastati
wew lad

>>721080317
What commander, the weather and yes diet makes a massive difference in warfare, war is about logistics more than almost any other factor. If two armies arrive and one of them are starving, the other one will probably win.

>>721076538
Sparta had a reputation sure, but they also were very careful to make sure they were rarely called on to prove their prowess. They always made sure they faced the weakest enemy units (traditionally on the left side of the line); at the battle of Leuctra the Thebans instead placed their best troops on their left side, and massacred the supposedly superior Spartans. The Spartan myth of military prowess never recovered, and for the very good reason that it was exposed as a myth.

>but roman soldiers was most time normal civilians who did military service some

True during the Punic wars, but not after the Marian reforms. Recruits signed a 20 yr service contract, soldiering was a full-time job done by hardened professionals. Sometime around the time of Marius they also stopped using the greek phalanx and switched to a more flexible formation that leveraged their weapons and training better. This is also when the now-iconic Gladius and Pilum were adopted. This was the army that conquered the empire.

>>721074480
Spartans of course. Their spear gives them a huge reach advantage. Remember the pilum is designed for throwing and the gladius is a shortsword. Other story when the romans bring siege weapons or something else they can break the phalanx with.

>>721080327
Not necissarily, OP never specified numbers, if we're talking ten Romans against a million Spartans it really doesn't matter on technological advantages.

>>721080636
>pilum is designed for throwing
And it's exactly what they will do with it before they charge or the Spartans charge. This will break their formation and there shields and render them unusable, Spartan shields were not as tough as they look like.

>>721080503

look faggy, you're not supposed to question things like commanders or their diet. It's an army. Assume they have their shit together and are led and fed. Assume that it's just regular ass weather and not a hurricane. Assume neither group has any kind of geographical advantage. Assume the fucking troops are rested. I mean shit, do you really expect the meme to clarify whether or not one, both, or neither groups are rested. Here, let me remake it for you and I'll put in at the bottom that the Spartans got an average of 6 hours of sleep the night before and the Romans got an average of 4.6 hours of sleep. Think you can make a decision then?

Germany wins.

>>721080327
Not if usual legionaries fight hoplites.... it's more like modern soldiers with ars against ww2 tanks. Still useless. A phalanx is not really what you want to engage with throwing spears and shortswords.

>>721074480
The Spartans are mostly famous for being in the right place at the right time and taking advantage of the terrain. The Romans would just use ballista and skewer the Spartans. The Persians only have the shortbow, which was ineffective against a light, metal shield. Ballista aren't stopped by the shield.

>>721079411
Second this

>>721079507
One of the most famous battles of Roman history, and of world history, one known by a common phrase used to this day, is called the Battle of Asculum, fought by a greek general named Phyrrus, and is the basis for the phrase Phyrric Victory. Actually, during the Phyrric war, there were several battles the greeks won, using phalanx formations. Thats just one example, but there are more I believe.

Though I do agree with you on one thing. Romans would beat Spartans handily.

>>721080657

Obviously we're not talking about a million spartans any more than we're talking about a trillion spartans. We're talking about equal and realistic sized forces. God damn people stop trying to throw in these retarded "what if's".

>>721080976
>>721080976
>Thats just one example, but there are more I believe.

Many. Rome could lose an army and simple raise another one. No other countries could suffer such losses. Impressive shit.

File: 1479450968069.jpg (673KB, 2281x1576px) Image search: [Google]

673KB, 2281x1576px

>>721080657
Historically the largest the spartan Army could ever be was 10,000. Meanwhile the Legions of Rome could be close to double of that.
>>721079411
I'm up for this
http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198092539684/
If anyone wants to do this we can settle this fucking dumb as debate.

File: guro--Black-Widow-SHIELD-2996445.jpg (575KB, 1600x998px) Image search: [Google]

575KB, 1600x998px

OP here
Rules are
REALISM

Real time Roman empire vs Real time Greece

Sparta did lose, but why? Was it all lies?

Did Sparta really win? How can 300 win vs 1 million niggers, but lose to less number of romans.


Is this proof in history it self
White> Niggers?

>>721080840
Well since army isn't a UNIT of anything I still really can't. Since an army isn't a specific number of any sort.

Also in the conditions you've described the commanders almost certainly would be the deciding factor.

Also assuming they have their shit together and are led and fed is a big assumption. I mean logistics of war is really hard. We still screw it up often and that's with almost two thousand years of technology on these guys. (Or 600 if you're counting the Byzantines as Romans since we haven't established which Rome we're talking about.) Are we talking about the Byzantines? Because they had rudimentary firearms at the end. I think the Byzantines would win, but then the Ottomans would beat them, but then the Russians and Serbs and British will beat them and then we're at WW1... My bet is on the WW1 troops against the Spartans.

>>721081322
If I'm not mistaken, any battle they fought against pre-romanized greeks would have been against phalanx armies. And I know they lost several before greece was annexed, not that it mattered, like you said.

Not so much for your benefit but just for discussion, it is very interesting that early Rome made extensive use of the phalanx, until fights against mountain barbarians had them re-think and adapt. By the time the greeks came knocking with centuries-old tactics, Rome was already on the next level, and it wasn't even their final form.

>>721081440
Because 300 is a comicbook based on a legend and not accurate. Also roman generals are not idiots who throw their men against a phalanx in a chokepoint. You beat a phalanx by outmoving and flanking. Roman formations were much more agile than greek phalanxes also they had superior weapons like the ballista to break the formations.

>>721080289
except for the fact that sparta never used horse archers...

>>721081596

leave the thread immediately.

>>721074480
Considering the Romans conquered Sparta...I'd say the Romans.

>>721081440
Actually the Spartans lost at Thermopylae, the Persians weren't African... they were Persian, and the Spartans actually were part of a Greek Coalition that had around twenty thousand men at that battle, the three hundred were just to hold off the retreat.

Maybe don't get your history from Zack Snyder movies.

the romans wiped out the greeks and turned them into a vassal state wtf is this thread

>>721076101
Again, teenage faggotry proves that people no longer know what 'random' means.

>>721081324
Check out this battle to see what kind of armies the Romans were fielding.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lugdunum

To save a click, there were two Roman armies of around 150 thousand each fighting each other in France.

>>721081830
I meant more on the "Don't sweat the details." In warfare line of thinking. More as a general overarching statement.

File: wut.png (279KB, 653x496px) Image search: [Google]

279KB, 653x496px

>>721076101
Leave this site now

>>721080636
Mind explaining how this supposed advantage never materialized when Rome fucking conquered Greece including the Spartans?

In practice, the long greek spears turned into a huge hindrance against the romans, they made it too difficult to adapt to lateral threats. The Romans would cut a channel into the phalanx by throwing their pilae en-masse into a narrow section, then they would charge into this beachhead and establish a fighting line inside the phalanx at right angles to it, and start the serious killing, working their way down the phalanx. If the phalanx managed to turn their spears to face the new threat, the rest of the Roman front would charge the phalanx from the original direction.

Either way the Greeks and their "superior" spear were fucked, because they just weren't flexible enough compared to the shield-breaking power of the pilum and sheer killing efficiency of the gladius, and maneuver tactics of the roman army.

File: guro--Black-Widow-SHIELD-2996446.jpg (720KB, 1175x1600px) Image search: [Google]

720KB, 1175x1600px

>>721082060
look at this beta cuck think hes older than everyone here lawls

>>721074480
>Roman soldiers
What the fuck do you not know history? Fucking retard.

How about Alexander vs Ceasar? That's a better one.

>>721074480

Spartans practiced eugenics and would euthanize the ones that where weak. They trained to be incredible warriors. Romans where pretty basic in terms of training.

100 Spartans would take out 100 romans with losing less than 10% i would say.

>>721074480
Considering the romans beat sparta...

File: diesellegionnaire.jpg (231KB, 1032x1496px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 1032x1496px

PAX ROMANVS

>>721074480
>romans vs Spartans
Kill yourself shitskin, they need to focus their efforts on eliminating muslim terrorists like yourself.

Spartans would have won, depends on where the battleground would be... all the romans had was numbers

>>721081863
They would use mustard gas and biplanes!
Heavy machine gun fire!
Early Tanks! They would totally have the advantage!
The Spartan's just wouldn't be able to adapt against firearms!

>>721082393
No, Romans were not basic in terms of training. They were professional soldiers, and the Spartans were not. If you think the Spartan's warrior culture was impressive, you should read into Rome's warrior culture. As I said earlier, Rome was a military with a country tacked on.

>>721082342
Explain what you mean here.
>>721082393
>Romans where pretty basic in terms of training
>Basic
http://www.roman-empire.net/army/training.html
tlder; They used gear to practice that was twice as heavy as what they wore in combat.

>>721082597
wrong

>>721078378
Hollywood likes rome

>>721081440
i guess non phalanx (persians) vs. phalanx (greeks + spartans)
its like rushing with horses against modern tanks

>>721078932
Are you actually joking or what, the equipment they used is fine, bolt actions work really really well for killing things. They'd slaughter soldiers from WWI simply because of mass charges being the tactic of the time.

>>721082399
After Sparta had been defeated by Thebes and Athens. Then there was Alexander. But that's beside the point.Rome turned the Greeks against each other. That's why they lost anything.

>>721082818
>Explain what you mean here.
Nevermind retard. I didn't know you didn't understand basic history.

>>721081324
>>721079411
Anyone up for this? Honestly It seems like a good idea.

>>721082575
The Spartans loved the Persians though. The Macedonian s not so much though.

>>721082976
I just can't tell if you are pro sparta or pro rome here you dumb dyke.

Stupid question.
How many? Where? When? Led by who?
Put a Spartan against a Roman in a wrestling match, the Spartan wins. Anything past that is hard to discern.
The Romans defeated any number of sarissa phalanxes with their flexible tactics, and those same sarissa phalanxes crushed the united Greek forces in the 4th century, including the Spartans, but that doesn't necessarily determine a matchup like this.
But anyways, yeah, stupid question.

>>721082709
>No, Romans were not basic in terms of training. They were professional soldiers, and the Spartans were not

You're right, Spartans where life long soldiers who started training before the age of 10. Romans would enlist at late teens and only do terms of a few years.

The romans where like the Army and the Spartans are like the Marines in terms of quality.

>>721083203
I'm both. The romans where awesome and so where the spartans. But the romans won so idc.

>>721082195
You explained it yourself. The romans had superior tactics. Also it worked out sometimes.

>>721081596
You're such a massive fucking idiot I dont even know how to respond to that shitpost

>>721079252
Nigga that's not drinking bleach, it's inhaling it.

>>721076101
do you really really really like this image?

>>721083230
Alexander's army, flat ground in Attica, Height of both Empires technology and glory vs One Legion by Octavian.

>>721074480
considering the roman army in its earliest stages used the Hellenic phalanx and then developed the maniple system to specifically defeat that system... Romans.

>>721082597
and better tactics, calvary, armor, weaponry and training. Besides that Sparta has em whipped

>>721083299
That's pretty autistic. The Marines also start in their late teens and do terms. Not to mention more Marines go Army than the other way around.

>>721083605
Bingo. That's the real deal. If the Greeks stayed strong and united they would've had time to develop counter measures.

>>721083598
In that case, the Spartans are going to be one contingent in an otherwise sarissa equipped formation. The Romans will win hands down as they did over and over again throughout history.
What would be interesting is if you took some of those battles Greece maybe shouldn't have won during the Persian wars, and you make the aggressors a Late Republican legion instead of Persians.

>>721076720
So simple Nigga the niggas literally just moved that's all it takes spartans btfo

>>721084073
the Hellenic phalanx was good against loose formations and horde tactics (like germanic barbaians and persians and many middle eastern cultures) and would stall forever against other phalanxes. so the Romans developed the maniple system to be able to exploit the lack of mobility and rigidity of the phalanx. so yes, Romans