Romans vs Aztecs at the height of each of their prospective empires.

>>3100905
The Jews

Romans and if you disagree, 1v1 me in AoE2. Give me your steam, faggot.

>>3100905
Rome of course

>>3100905
>Stone age vs Iron age

>>3100905
You have

>1 city's worth of warriors with glass swords and no armor

vs

>1 continent worth of men with steelplate, iron swords, shields and siege weapons

What do you think?

Why ask this question if you are not going to define the battlefield?

>>3100950
Hol up hol up hol up they got blow darts and poison from frogs too

>>3100997
Fairly sure those are the brazilian natives.

>>3100905
>bronze age vs iron age
>central Mexico vs the entire Mediterranean + Western Europe

>>3101005
Theyre all mexicans to me

>>3100905

In all areas Rome would dominate. Even if you don't let them use their cavalry, their armor and weapons would make mincemeat of the Aztecs, and their military doctrines, tactics, logistics and overall strategy are all far more advanced. The only area the Aztecs could match Rome is in the fitness and bravery of their soldiers, but even here they merely match Rome, they don't have an advantage.

How can you ask that question wihout giving any specific details?

>Where do the battles take place?
If it's in Aztec territory then they can easily win but if it's in Roman territory then the Romans will definitely prevail

>How many men would fight
1000? 10000? 100000?

>What are the victory conditions?
Does ones side have to annihilate the other completely? Or is routing them enough to claim victory?

>>3101045
This. Even without considering the difference in weaponry, Rome got to where it did by enforcing calculated discipline in its troops that absolutely steamrolled anyone who didn't do the same.

>>3101055
Aztec territory is literally 1 city. The romans can just find it, fuck it up, and leave, and they've won.

>>3100905
Egyptians

File: 1-Aztec_Empire_Map.png (98KB, 408x359px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 408x359px

>>3101074
>Aztec territory is literally 1 city
Wonderful knowledge of history there, pal

>>3101089
Territory under their subjucation. Those are the same people who helped the Spaniards AGAINST the Mexicalis.

>>3101045
The Romans would lose in the rainforest.

>>3100912
The AngloAmericans and Jews won in the end.

>>3101026
Wont do much as the romans will lit the fire to these jungle barbarians.

>>3100997
Do you get all of your knowlege from that time period from Apocalypto?

File: 0940204457f7a535e926bf14dd0ffa79.jpg (452KB, 848x447px) Image search: [Google]

452KB, 848x447px

romans might win in the battle field but they could never take tenochtitlan

also after a while of fighting, aztecs would adapt to iron and horses like rome did during the punic war and then romans are fucked

File: mussolini.png (139KB, 627x596px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 627x596px

>>3100905
i made a terrible meme, can you guys rate it?

>>3102956
i like it
great starter meme would rate 3.5/5 for my kids

>>3100921
They were Bronze Age tier

>>3100913
>Romans
>Aoe2
Nice try

File: Territorial_Organization_of_the_Aztec_Empire_1519.png (3MB, 3613x2265px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3613x2265px

Assuming neutral territory and even opportunity to form logistical networks, the romans. The technology advantage is too much, the mesoamericans,a s far as we know, didn't even have any siege weaponry aside from siege towers and didn't have horses, too

As far as actual invasion's, I would say the defenders win in both cases (IE, romans landing in the new world, or the aztecs landing in europe), due to the advantage having in place logistics and larger armies and knowing the terrain conveys).. Also, something to consider is that mesamerican armies

>>3100950
>aztecs were only 1 city

u wot

>>3101093
That's incorrect, the ones that helped the spanish were the tlaxcallans, which is that gap in the middle of their territory.

Saying only the Mexica of Tenochtitlan count is just as dumb as saying only the romans in rome count as "the roman empire".

>>3103478
>>3100921
>>3101015
>applying metallurgical based ages to anything other then the specific groups they were invented to describe to begin with.

The americas were isolated, they didn't develop along the same trajectory. History doesn't work like the civilization tech tree. They were ahead of europe in some ways and behind in others.

>>3102573
>romans might win in the battle field but they could never take tenochtitlan
Yes they could.Legionaires had construction knowledge.They would just build bridges and boats as Cortes did.The Aztec LARPers are deluded as fuck