Name a better general. Pro tip- you cant

>>3060262
Hannibal
Scipio Africanus
Julius Caesar
Agrippa
Marius
Nader Shah

what exactly were his great tactical feats, the more I hear about him the more I think it was just because of his father's investment in the army

>>3060262
Cyrus > Alexander

>>3060281
Hydaspes River for one. Where he was able to cross a large river, engage, and defeat a superior force. Or the many battles where he was outnumbers 3 to 1. 5 to 1 , even 6 to 1

>>3060279
Hannibal won some battles but lost overall and never capitalized on any of it. Scipio only ever really beat Hannibal. Caesar lost a good deal of battles- he was great at logistics and command though. While Agrippa and Marius were good generals they cannot hold a flame to what Alexander did.

>>3060309
No way Cyrus is not even close. Alexander conquered Cyrus's empire. and then some

Genghis Khan and Subotai

>>3060354
The only person who compares. But Genghis did what he did was a 300,000 man army. His targets were often weak (minus china) and he lost. Alexander never lost and did all that with only 50k men at the most.

Alexander Suvorov

>>3060262
Name a worse empire builder. Protip: you can't.

>>3060333
Keep dreaming Greekboo.

>>3060523
This.

>>3060364
Subutai butt fucked Rus and Hungary with 20,000 men.

>>3060364
Mongols at the time of Genghis Khan had around 100K. They expanded slowly once they started their rollouts.

They conquered the Middle East, the Chinese Empire, the Western Europe, central Asian tribes, etc

Meanwhile Alexander's conquered a dying Persian empire who could barely muster around 50K-70K or so in high stakes battles and minor Indians and the Greek tribes.

>>3060523
Yi Sun-sin
Ibn al-Khalid
Frederick the Great
Napoleon Bonaparte
Genghis and Subutai Khan
Belisarius
Flavius Aetius

>>3060562
Get Napoleon out of that list m8. In a few years after being emperor he revitalized the French economy.

>>3060582
>collapsed before he died

File: 1492281566661.png (284KB, 639x360px) Image search: [Google]

284KB, 639x360px

>>3060601
not his fault the perfidious anglo hates civilization.

>>3060631
Napoleon cried about how he was a failed Washington. If i recall he was Anglo

>>3060638
Washington only won because of french help who wanted to encourage Anglo infighting.

>>3060631
I find it funny that Mosley was such a blatant perfidious cunt that even we were willing to chuck rubbish at him.

Alexander was helped by aliens tho he was not so great, still a good general but not exeptional

>>3060653
Lel no The French only helped in the last battle

>>3060703
He was beyond exceptional. It's easy to wank about Subutai and Hannibal and Gustavus Adolphus, but you have to consider how many goddamn generals have existed throughout history. These threads are pretty much about the top 0.1% military commanders, because those are the commanders people care to study.

His father

>>3060717
Over a billion livres tournois were spent by the French government to support the war effort. That sum was double the normal annual income of the French government, making the finances of the French state in disastrous shape

France broke its own economy to counter the British and help the Americans.

Imagine if the US spend 30 trillion dollars in a war that Russia/China was fighting. And US supported, lets say China.

"US didn't do nutthin" "It was just last battles and only its navy helped a little"

>>3060262

Protip, you cant?

Find another board to shitpost on cunt, this is /his/

>>3060731
Nah, his father was a great general, but Alexander was better. Philip II was superior in every other aspect, though.

>>3060281
Gaugamela

50k vs 200k

>>3060281
He was a good tactician, crazy (spearheaded charges like a madman), and logistician.

I relate it similar to the Hamilcar Hannibal situation. Philip built the initial army, but Alexander was able to further exploit it. I wouldn't personally rate one above the others rather view the success as something more mutual.

>>3060759
Isn't it 1 million? Greeks sure do love to exaggerate their victories.

Modern estimate is around ~50K

>>3060717
>what are supplies

>>3060759
>200k
No way. I don't doubt the Persians had a numerical advantage but you don't take those kind of consecutive losses and keep having that much of manpower, those numbers are hugely inflated.

>>3060785
Hell they claim the Battle of the Persian Gate that Ariobarzanes had almost as many men as Alexander which is logistically impossible given the size of the area he held and the three major defeats the Persians already had at that point.

>>3060703
>A L E X A N D E R
>not exceptional

lol

you know we're discussing the best general when he is the default general to compare to, be contrarian against, and say X general was better

>>3060631
Success breeds jealous

>>3060562

>there will never be a mini-series about Aetius' rise and his role as the last defender of the west.
>networks are too busy with Dragon tits and we wuz stories

Why even live?

>>3060786
Mean nothing if the people you give them to lose

George Washington

File: Lee.jpg (53KB, 559x700px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 559x700px

>>3060262
>black sea deluge

File: Sulla.jpg (3MB, 2391x4250px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2391x4250px

Based Sulla

>>3060952
>tfw no sequel mini-series about Majorian as he fights to restore the empire only to be betrayed by Ricimer.

Roman history has so much potential, goddamnit.

>>3060279
>Hannibal
>Scipio Africanus

Those two both agreed Alexander was a better general than either of them.

>>3061407
Scipio would wreck that Greek fuckboi's ass like none other.

>>3060281
>the more I hear
Try reading then. Alexander was phenomenal tactician, and had a fantastic grasp of logistics and strategy. And the army was not a static thing. He constantly innovated on what Philip gave him.
Also, read about his successor and compare their battles and campaigns to his. None of them ever displayed the ingenuity or daring that he did

>>3060309
t. John Green

>>3060540
Good argument, really convinced me.

>>3061419
Good argument, really convinced me.

>>3060346
>Cyrus defeats and humiliates three empires
>Alexander defeats Darius III
How does defeating a weak Persian King who has no experience leading armies equate to defeating a legendary Persian King who was famous for his generalship?

>>3061410
Quite possibly, but largely due to more advanced tactics and technology from the future. Pound for pound Alexander is a better general but he wouldn't have been able to counter well lead maniples on the spot, he never dealt with anything like what the Romans had developed in his time. The ability and accomplishments of the general are something different.

>>3061427
I mean, I can't speak for maniples, but the first time Alexander faced horse archers nomads from the steps, he won an astounding victory. Similar thing with elephants. He was always great at adapting to new foes.

Added to which, it's not like the maniples are a complete hard counter to a phalanx that never loses its match up. Even the Roman writers attest that a phalanx is invincible from the front, and their are plenty of examples of phalanx based armies defeating Roman armies (although more in the opposite). Plus Alexander had amazing, and Alexander's was first and foremost a cavalry general (although he was brilliant at everything else to).

>>3060785
>Modern estimate is around ~50K
I can tell you don't read much about greco-persian wars. The persians always put enormous numbers in front of the greeks, it was common. The number was most likely closer to 100k.

>>3061427
>Pound for pound
>Alexander is a better general
He's not though.

>>3061559
>keeping a 100k army together over the Zagros, through Mesopotamia, across Anatolia and the strait, and half of Greece
Come on man

>>3060952
I don't think I've seen it since it first aired, but I remember the Attila miniseries heavily featuring Aetius.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0259127/

>>3061559
And Greeks have a consistent streak of contradicting even within their own records.

Personally, I'd rather trust the Greek's own accounting failures than their accuracy as the former is more consistent than the later.

Great generals are so much more than the sum of their abilities, empires and exploits.

They are the personification of a moment in time. Alexander was the perfect storm. A man bred and raised for kingship. The inheritor of a kingdom ready to make war and an enemy next door who was just weak enough to conquer.

He died mostly at his peak, he didn't really have a chance for his story to dim as most other great leaders do.

File: sullastatue.jpg (14KB, 207x302px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 207x302px

>Sulla
Check your phalanx privilege before he crushes them

>>3060333
Think Alexander would have done better with the resources Hannibal had at his disposal? He would have gotten rekt in the first battle.

>>3061559
>100k Persian army
>after the Battles of Granicus, Issus, and Gaugemala
You are retarded. Also again look at the actual topography and area of the Persian Gates, the area is fucking tiny. There is no way Ariobarzanes could've had 10k men much less 100k men holding such an area.

File: Macedonian_battle_formation-en.svg.png (85KB, 1280x780px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 1280x780px

>>3061427
>Muh maniples
Maniples weren't that good, the Celts specifically exploited the thin line it often created and used their shock tactics to break it, Marius got rid of it by 107 bc.

Maniples were effective against the greeks because generals after Alexander started to only use phalanxes. Alexander was successful because of his combination of phalanx, heavy Calvary, and infantry (see hypaspists) who followed in the right flank. Only his phalanx was relatively non-flexible, but it didn't need to be, it's job was to anchor the enemy.

>>3062700
>Muh phalanax
>Muh Phalangites

>>3062727
>Muh argument

>>3060324
>Hydaspes River
You mean the weather had a great victory. With the pouring rain Porus's marksmen were unable to shoot, which crippled his strongest and main force. Asian arrow's were pretty OP and they were ripping right through the Macedonian shields and armor.
>superior force
Alexander had an army of 45,000 and Porus at 25,000.

>>3060952
Dragon tits?

File: based napoleon.jpg (109KB, 959x639px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 959x639px

>>3060582
>>3060601
>>3060638
Anyone can win on easy mode. Alexander took on one enemy - an empire that was heavily in decline - and won. Napoleon faced off against all of Europe and even if he lost in the end, he won repeatedly against their combined forces. 7 to 1 win-loss ratio.

>>3062750
>Muh non-argument

Patton

>>3063008
Correcto

>>3062700
This is my argument

>>3062727
This is the non-argument rebuttal I was mocking

>>3060601
>look at this empire that collapsed after being at war with the entirety of Europe for its entire life and even before it was created yet still managing to hold off the greatest powers in the world, wow how weak

>>3062874
It's a colloquial term for Game of Thrones

>>3063026
Yeah, and you were being mocked for being an apologist. Go figure.

>>3063106
How am I being an apologists?

The argument is that maniples would counter Alexander, due to the maniples flexibility vs the phalanxes lack of.

I was assuming that argument was based off of the maniples effectiveness against generals after him, the Greek city states and successors. I'm just saying these generals after Alexander used a different non-combined arms military setup (i.e for more reliance of the phalanx) which made them vulnerable to maniples.

None of this is controversial.

File: 111031_eightbit.jpg (449KB, 960x1629px) Image search: [Google]

449KB, 960x1629px

>>3060262

>>3063163
>How am I being an apologists?
Please stop butchering my language.

>>3063170
>Add an s at the end by mistake
>Butchering "your" language

Nice to see you have nothing to actually contribute.

>>3062843
According to a legitimate Greek source, Porus had 5 Billion elephant soldiers and 10 billion horse cavalry.


Like always, Alexander has outnumbered and out gunned.

File: Austerlitz1.jpg (361KB, 1719x1126px) Image search: [Google]

361KB, 1719x1126px

>>3060262
Alexander Suvorov

Napoleon Bonnaparte

Frederic II

File: 8e5840cc82c53275b349c23e59599a.jpg (517KB, 1000x679px) Image search: [Google]

517KB, 1000x679px

>>3063243
Billions ?

Bernard Montgomery of course.

No one even comes close.

Alexander was obviously much better tegen genghis because the mongol conquest was over a couple generations, while Alexander did it in a couple years.

File: 5.3-Mongol-Empire.gif (131KB, 800x495px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 800x495px

>>3060262

Ghengis Khan.

>>3063552
>Ghengis

File: MongolEmpireGenghisDeath1227.png (54KB, 1644x959px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 1644x959px

>>3063552
24 million km^2 by 1227 CE (Genghis Khan's death)
vs
5.2 million km^2 by 323 BCE (Alexander's death)

4.6X larger empire.

>>3060262
Hannibal

Khalid

Subotai

>>3060717
>unironically takes The Patriot for historical fact

>>3063599
you might be giving Egypt too much credit, but then again it's fucking Egypt and Persia btfo at the same time by big Al.

didn't he get the Indus Valley too?

Real shame about the whole Tamerlane thing.

>>3063266
>market garden
>best general ever

kek'd

>>3063196
t.Gigopaulos.

>>3063666
His descendants would've conquered Egypt too if not for Islamic conversion of the Golden Horde. Golden Horde waged war against the Ilkhanate and actively aided the Mamluks.

File: 1380307363385.jpg (32KB, 550x343px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 550x343px

>>3060262
Subutai and Khalid ibn al-Walid

>>3063855
Top five generals
1. Subutai
2. Khalid ibn al-Walid
3. Alexander the great
4. Tran Hung Dao
5. Marcus Agrippa

File: Zapata.jpg (145KB, 588x914px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 588x914px

here is a much cooler general

ok

File: FabiusCunctator.jpg (1MB, 808x1625px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 808x1625px

>>3060333
>Scipio only ever really beat Hannibal.

>>3063901

wow that's actually a really beautiful statue

i find most classical (classic? idk the right word to use) boring as shit. All just trying to convey the same thin impression of stoicism. This one is great. Maybe it's just because of the number of curves going on... His arms and legs are bending in neat places

>>3063873
Why all the love for Alexander but nothing for Phillip II, creator of the hammer and anvil and the main reason Alexander had such a well trained army

>>3063915
Kek, that statue is a 18th century work by Hagenauer.
It's not exactly classical sculpture.

>>3060262
Cyrus the Great.

>>3063934
Phillip was a great king and military leader but not nearly as tested and successful as his son.

>>3060262
>Name a better general.
Subutai, Khalid ibn al-Walid, Napoleon.

>>3062889
Holy shit this.
Napoleon literally reinvented warfare to what it is today, a massive clusterfuck of cheaply suited men willing to die for their countrymen.
His ability to even take on military juggernauts of the time (Russia and Prussia) with somewhat ease before Russia itself had to renovate it's military only scrapes the surface of his brilliance.

>>3063934
Basically he's the Frederick I of the ancient world.

File: Smug2.jpg (24KB, 506x556px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 506x556px

>>3061425
>Never losing a battle against Persia or Indians
V.S
>Raped and killed by horseniggers

File: pure_pottery.jpg (62KB, 960x665px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 960x665px

>>3060938

This my kinsman.

File: Timur_reconstruction03.jpg (72KB, 1115x1371px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 1115x1371px

>>3060523

Timur

File: 20170710_193501.jpg (16KB, 154x116px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 154x116px

>>3060346
>Alexander conquered Cyrus's empire. and then some
Uh, he conquered an empire that had been declining for centuries. Cyrus would have raped him.

>>3063934
Because Phillip shined more as a diplomat and administrator, his military affair where limited to conflicts with the local barbarians and the occasional skirmish against the greeks

alex fought against egyptians, eprsians, greeks, and the indus valley. he won against way more diverse armies and completely alien nlandscapes

>>3064710
>Herodotus please go

File: main-qimg-07b1f136998ad02f280a6a199bf8d2f7[1].png (60KB, 367x267px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 367x267px

>>3063599
This is the full extent of the empire at Genghis' death. It's big, but nothing special, especially when you consider the facts that most of the land is completely barren and undeveloped.

>>3060364
Alexander's foes were all extremely weak too. Genghis was almost always outnumbered too.

Alexander had one of the most advanced (military wise too) cultures of the time supporting him from the start. Greeks were more the more advanced people in warfare since at least the times of the Anabasis. Genghis had some glorified herdsmen and had to teach them how to make their mobility useful for something other than raids.

>>3060562
Genghis was great at empire building. The mongol empire grew stronger and stronger the generations after him. His descendants were retarded though.

>>3064833
>Genghis was almost always outnumbered too.

Completely false. After he united the tribes he always outnumbered his enemies.

>>3063666
>Egypt

When did he btfo it? Egypt was part of the persian empire and they just welcomed Alexander the second he claimed to be Zeus-Ammon. Did he even fight any meaningful battle.

You could at least have said Phoenicia who actually tried to put up a fight. But it still part of the persian empire, like everything Alexander ever conquered. Probably even the indian regions at some point.

>>3064827
The peoples he defeated to get those lands were not undeveloped at all, though.

>>3064840
Yeah, I'm fucking sure that the shah of chorasmia and the fucking chinese were unable to raise more troops than some steppe hick warlord.

>>3064884
Genghis's greatest ally wasn't his troop numbers, but rather his intelligence network and the ability to utilize them.

He would often seek allies against larger enemies. Against the Jins, he would court the Song. Against he shahs, the local regional enemies.

He had learned this lesson himself when he was younger. He himself was being employed by the Jin to curb other stronger nomadic tribes who had gotten too strong So he knew how to call on effective allies.

David IV of Georgia

>>3064903
He was still seriously outnumbered in almost all the battles he or his generals fought.

>>3064930
Not all. Against lesser groups of people, his generals took conservative amounts of troops. Like the campaigns across E.Europe. Subutai divided his 100K troop and had each of them face different countries. One group of ~20K faced ~70K, another group of ~30K faced about 70K, etc.

He already knew from engagement that these soldiers were easily shaken and without any serious discipline. The cavalry knights being completely retarded and working purely on "honor" was easy play for him as it meant he could effectively cut off the regular infantry and ambush the cavalry.

His fights againts the Jin were of greatly disciplined and much more powerful group of people which required him to recruit allies to outnumber the Jin.

It all depended on who he fought. Typically with foresight/knowledge of enemy's leadership/army capabilities, he/his generals could make rough estimates on how much force would be needed.

>>3064946
Please show me an actual battle (not a siege, someone like Genghis would avoid to siege if outnumbered) where Genghis outnumbered the Jin.

Even better, show me several. All battles against the Jin i've seen show him being outnumbered.

>>3064884
>The peoples he defeated to get those lands were not undeveloped at all, though.
Doesn't really matter. The land was. The Chinese were divided so they were not the strongest. And as for the Kwarazmian Empire, they were strong, but nothing special.

>Yeah, I'm fucking sure that the shah of chorasmia and the fucking chinese were unable to raise more troops than some steppe hick warlord.
As I said, the Chinese were divided. He wasn't really outnumbered most of the time.

>>3064956
>believing Chinese sources about their armies of 5 million

kek.

>>3064710
Battle of the Persian Gates is pretty embarrassing and his legacy lasted barely 10 years and not a second the moment he died afterwards.

>>3064956
Jin are an established empire. They are on the defense. Mongols are nomadic empire without an established empire, so they are on the offense.

Its quite bit jarring when you ask for Jin to get out of their defensive structure where food/soldiers/weapons/safety are plenty and go out in the open to face mongols who have no need for castles/civilian defense/home defense/etc.

>>3064976
Do you even read history? There's plenty examples of established empires on the defense setting out to fight the attacker (established or not) out in the field, with different degrees of success. If this is the most optimal thing to do or not is irrelevant. What's relevant is that fortress garrison's cannot be compared to a besieging army if you're gonna compare numbers.

>>3064984
Theres only few reasons why defenders would give up the defense structure of their forts.

1) Opportunity
2) In defense of another
3) Stupidity
4) Defense is weak

>>3064989
I'll quote again
>If this is the most optimal thing to do or not is irrelevant.

When it did happen, regardless of reason, who had more numbers? It wasn't the mongols.

>>3060562
Yi Sun-sin was a general under a king who hated his guts. He wasn't trying to build an empire. He was just trying to win the Imjin war in spite of Seonjo trying to fuck him over

File: IMG_7488.jpg (208KB, 1200x1523px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 1200x1523px

>>3060262

>>3064766
To be fair. The Achaemenid dynasty was rebounding under Atraxerxes III, its last effective and energetic ruler. The problem is Atraxerxes III was murdered by Bagoas. The same Persian ruler had been savy enough both politically and militarily to constantly check and counter Philip's ambitions for Greece and Persia and keep him contained from getting too powerful over the rest of the Greek world. When Atraxerxes was killed, the last decent Persian ruler who could've stood up to Alexander's invasion was lost.

>>3060262
Moltke the Elder

File: 1497956744660.jpg (255KB, 1425x833px) Image search: [Google]

255KB, 1425x833px

>Hannibal

>>3066589
Moltke was a meme