Who would win if 3,000-4,000 =British red coats armed with martini

>>34533983
To the first question: I have no idea, but I'd still argue that the nigerians would win, if only for the fact that only one of them has the same kind of firepower as a good bunch of martinis.
And to the second, the answer is obvious: the spear to the Martini. I don't think this one needs explaining.

>>34533983
>Hundreds of Brits sat on top of the hill
>VOLLEY FIRE
>Martini Henry shots rain down and kill several Nigerians
>DE MAN IS SHOOTING AT US, MAN, GET DE RPG
>Nigerian runs up with RPG-7 and fires it up at the hill, accidentally getting another Nigerian behind him with backblast
>RPG hit sends 20 Brits rolling down the hill and turns several into red mist.
Fund it

>>34533983

1 vs 1 spear to martini
1 vs 5 martini to AKM

Brits would win. Just blockade food and water, nigs revert to cannibalism and kill each other.

I think that it'd depend on what tactics the Red Coats would use. If they just charge like they're zulus, I think they'd be gunned down in the open like morons.

If they are using reasonable tactics (read: not running at them) and they are aware of what they're dealing with, then I think the Red Coats would stand a chance, but they'd take significant casualties even in victory.

If we're saying it's a literal reversal of Rorke's Drift, IIRC, their was little cover around on an advance. The Red Coats could be in serious trouble mounting a direct rush, and the Nigerians would have little trouble obliterating them if they survived the first couple of volleys.

But, more likely, as >>34534075 said, the red coats would just dig in and wait.

>>34533983

sub-70 IQ zulus aren't likely to achieve many feats of marksmanship or strategy. Being one of the best in africa isn't saying a lot, even less when the dindus don't even have the number advantage that they have relied upon many times previously in history.

All it takes is some good aim and denial of supplies from the brits. With the way sieges tend to work, it can't be guaranteed the redcoats would even fire at all. Such a tactic has been part of England's history before gunpowder.

File: IT IS DE WITE MON.jpg (371KB, 750x450px) Image search: [Google]

371KB, 750x450px

>>34533983
Spear to martini henry is objectively a larger jump, as you have to not only develop black power, metallurgy, modern manufacturing, then all the logistically support to supply them to troops

Now you have to consider the Nigerian army are trained by the brits, that the Nigerians have to go boom boom boom brap brap brap on training exercises as they can't afford ammo,

You also have to consider that your average nigerian soldier doesn't have NVG's, and the brits tran for night ops without NVGS.
Your average nigerian soldier makes pennies on the pound, and would be likely to drop there rifles and go over to the brits for better pay.


Lastly the british infantryman is an expert in bayonet fighting, and the average nigerian soldier probably doesn't want to fight if he doesn't have to, especially if he can be captured well fed, and return home and have pay owed to him

This is how it goes:
> EH MAGWUWU IT IS DE AWFUL DARK OUT DERE
> MAGWUGU KNOWS THIS MUGADZA
and before you know it you have thousands of British in a shoot and charge as soon as they get to the perimeter, i'm guessing 15, 20 minutes at most.

>>34533983
The Brits.
They're niggers with 70 average iqs.
Doesn't matter what equipment they have, the Brits would always win.

File: Chimp Out.png (151KB, 1054x690px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 1054x690px

>>34534669
Brits are pretty nigger-y too.

>>34534755
pretty par for the course with any siege, civilians are gonna get raped when the defence falls

3500 Brits would just surround the place shoot at it here and there and let the people inside starve.

But even without that. Outnumbering defenders 25 to 1 they would win.

When you only have 140 people killing and injuring just a few dozen people would seriously weaken defenses