What's the best ancient/early medieval army?

>>2615969
only because the gauls were masters in gurilla warfare

>>2615969
Actual "Armies?"
Alexander the Great's or Hannibal's 218-202BC.
Runner up goes to Caesar in Gaul or Germanicus on the Rhine.

File: 1488722757903.gif (253KB, 540x300px) Image search: [Google]

253KB, 540x300px

>>2615994
This

File: 3rdcenturyromansoldiers.jpg (122KB, 700x943px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 700x943px

>>2615969
>but lots of germanics fucked them over again and again.
That happened like three times.

Ancient: Late Republican and Principate Rome
Early medieval: Tang dynasty China

File: British_old_infantry_uniforms.jpg (549KB, 2704x1832px) Image search: [Google]

549KB, 2704x1832px

British Army: ancient period, medieval period, and even in the present day. All throughout history.

Anyone who disagrees with this objectively true statement is French or from Saxony.

>>2616506
the infantry of the british infantry was pretty meh for most of their imperial days, and was mainly just a small voluntary army along with colonial troops raised in india

the navy was the main way they won wars, usually through cutting off supplies of european colonies in the west indies, india and SEA from their european masters

up until ww1, the main british infantry was spread very thin and was a fraction the size of most of continental european armies

>>2615994
>Runner up goes to Caesar in Gaul
it's neat, caesar in gaul was pretty effective, but as soon as caesar's army hit the british isles they got fucked around real good

rome's heavy infantry could barely keep up with the briton's in battle due to their use of chariots (chariot archers + quick deployment of light infantry from chariots, then quick escape by just falling back onto the chariots)