Q: What country sucks the hardest at war? A: Pic related

>>2414123
Liechtenstein

>>2414123
In terms of sheer win/loss ratio, Austria, sitting at almost a clear 50/50.

Other countries like France and Italy have around 61-62% win rates when accounting for all their wars.

and surprisingly Spain sits close to a 75% win rate, though that probably factors a lot of cleansing of the new world natives.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sggJWiqdICA

>>2414187
Spain always piggybacked on France though.

>>2414238
>Spain always piggybacked on France though.
Most Spanish victories came when France was its main enemie.And most of those victories were against France

>>2414123
How is Denmark worse than Italy?

>>2414302
They have lost like every single war since the XV century losing the same war twice in different sides for example

>>2414302
>Have equal or higher numbers of soldier most of the time
>have equal quality of gear and equipment
>Lose horribly anyway
>EVERY.SINGLE.TIME
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lund

File: hrerd.jpg (969KB, 2276x1260px) Image search: [Google]

969KB, 2276x1260px

>>2414187
You have to take in account what enemies were faced too
A French defeat at the hands of a huge european coalition shouldnt count the same as an Austrian defeat at the hands of Serbia
Just like a French victory over a huge european coalition shouldnt count the same as a Spanish/British victory over a bunch of uncivilized brown people armed with spears

File: 1436441334645.gif (2MB, 360x270px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 360x270px

>>2414325
danskjävlar btfo

>>2414308
>>2414325
At least they didn't lose to Ethiopia

>>2414331
A lot of French victories come from exterminating goat fuckers in North Africa,occupaying African shitholes with machine guns and gasing a bunch of chinks in Indochina in the XIX century.All colonial powers have abused a bunch of uncivilized brown people

>>2414331
Also considering things like WW2 as a French victory is overall a joke

>>2414371
Yeah, that'd be almost as dumb as considering the Napoleonic Wars as a Prussian victory

>>2414380
Some coallitions were succesful.Prussia was key in stopping Napoleon's constant chimp outs and cucked him in Waterloo ;)

>>2414386
>Prussia was key in stopping Napoleon's constant chimp outs
They weren't, you're confusing with Russia

>cucked him in Waterloo ;)
Waterloo was irrelevant
That's like claiming France was relevant in winning WW2 because of the Colmar Pocket

Prussia during the Napoleonic Wars was the exact same as France during WW2
They started a war, got conquered in 19 days and remained under French occupation for 7 years until they were liberated by Russian
Then they got on the allied bandwagon and claimed victory at the end

>>2414417
>Waterloo was irrelevant
Oh yeah defeating the chimper forever was totally irrelevant.Good to know.

>>2414123
What a retarded thread, and we see this every now and then aswell.
There isn't "sucking at war" there is only having technological edge and tactical edge.
The Great Men theory works well for this too, i mean Napoleon was ethnically Italian, what if Corse was still under Genoese control when he was born?

>>2414123
I never understood that, Denmark was strongest kingdom in the region for almost a millenia and yet they never ever accomplished anything

>>2414431
>what if Corse was still under Genoese control when he was born?

Then he'd have died a nobody
Napoleon was able to do what he did because of three essential factors
-his genius
-the opportunities offered by the French Revolution
-the raw strength of the French army